Note: Please do not reply to this email as replies will not be reviewed. If you have a question or comment, click here.
Current as of Oct. 1, 2020, at 7:00 a.m.
COVID-19 Testing Sites in Florida
  • Drive-Thru Testing sites available are listed by county. Each walk up site can test up to 200 individuals per day. Access the list here.

Safe. Smart. Step-by-Step.

Florida’s Reemployment Assistance Dashboard: View DEO Dashboard Here.

Florida Department of Health COVID Dashboard: Access dashboard here.

Graphs, Charts, and Real-time Tracking of COVID-19

Data Sources

Data Sources on Social Media

Other Resources
Current Statistics

  • Fatality rate in Florida - 2.1%
  • Covid fatality rate in FL by age group:
  • 15-24 years old - .03%
  • 25-34 years old - .07%
  • 35-44 years old - .23%
  • 45-54 years old - .54%
  • 55-64 years old - 1.7%
  • 65-74 years old - 5.7%
  • 75 and up - 17.7%
  • Seasonal influenza mortality rate in the US (2017 CDC) 18-49 yo - .02%

  • Median age of new Covid cases - 41 years old
  • Emergency department visits w/ COVID-like illness - 15% decrease
  • ICU beds available in Florida - 22%
  • Hospital beds available in Florida - 24%

Vaccine Tracking

Last updated: September 29, 2020 10:14 AM PST

213
vaccines are in development.

35
are now in clinical testing.

Since we reviewed the key knowables and predictables about Covid-19 in April, new points have emerged. Sewage studies and patient samples seem to show the virus was circulating in Europe and South America before an outbreak was officially recognized in Wuhan.

Lockdowns might or might not have been important contributors to suppressing eruptions that overwhelmed hospitals in the Chinese city, in New York, in Northern Italy. These episodes are not well understood. The hospitals themselves may have been a progenitor of local spikes. The mandatory closing of local businesses is hard to disentangle from the steps people were already taking to protect themselves.

Anybody—an individual, an entire country—can avoid communicable disease by avoiding contact with any carrier. This was an obvious starting point and yet has not proved useful or practicable information for many people and most countries. As Bloomberg News recently acknowledged in puzzling over why Italy is not currently experiencing a resurgence, experts remain stumped by “doubts over what exactly is effective.”

Lockdowns at least are universally understood, even by the media, not to be a solution to the virus. Governments need strategies for coping while still having an economy, so people can eat and sustain themselves and receive services. Something else to get realistic about: Large classes of people, like the young, are at relatively low risk. By the laws of human nature, they will start behaving as if the disease is not a serious threat to them personally.

Countries that apparently suppressed Covid with strong measures to keep people apart now are experiencing outbreaks once people no longer find it tolerable or acceptable to be kept apart.

Epidemiologists, to reconcile a desire to have both minimal spread and an economy, pushed aggressive testing, tracing and confining as the magic pill. It has not been terribly successful in most places, maybe from a lack of trying, maybe because elected officials realize voters are not up for having their lives disrupted because an app or an informant says they might have been exposed.

The progress of the disease in country after country seems idiosyncratic and perhaps less responsive to policy overtures than modelers and planners hoped.

Infection rates are rising again in many places while hospitalizations and deaths less so. Unquestionably improved methods of treating (and not mistreating) Covid patients play a role. Many who were extremely susceptible may already have been taken from us. New evidence hints that some in the population have natural resistance for genetic reasons or because of previous exposure to related coronaviruses.

Donald Trump is pilloried for saying it, but the observed prevalence of infection is necessarily an artifact of testing. Supersensitive PCR tests may be identifying widely dispersed viral particles in people who were never infected or who long since got over their infections. We don’t know: This may mean more people have been infected and acquired immunity than we realize, or fewer are infected now than we think because of an oversensitive test.

Warnings about a flu-coronavirus double whammy in the fall and winter are serious and yet may be hard to suss out even in retrospect. There’s a reason nobody you know died of flu but you know several who died of Covid. Most who die of either have multiple serious health conditions but on few death certificates does it say flu. It may say cancer or heart disease, or organ failure, or nonspecific acute respiratory distress. Whereas even some people who died of gunshot wounds, drug overdoses and motorcycle accidents have been categorized as Covid victims in the U.S.

A key question perhaps can’t be mentioned yet in polite company: When will Americans start treating Covid like the flu—i.e., go about their lives dimly conscious or oblivious to a mild risk that nevertheless kills some, including children, on a regular basis?

It will likely happen willy-nilly, not because somebody rings a bell. Treatments, natural immunity from previous infection, plus the gradual rolling out of a vaccine, plus a permanent adoption by a part of the population of new, more cautious ways of living—all these may inspire a habit among us of forgetting about Covid as long it’s not overwhelming hospitals.

One last point. China is a mystery. Its authoritarian crackdowns on visible outbreaks make the news, but it’s hard to believe the disease isn’t circulating among a billion-plus people if only because it’s already endemic in the rest of the world. Now the country is reportedly giving hundreds of thousands of its people an untested vaccine—which is difficult to explain as a research priority or a public-health priority unless the infection is sufficiently present to allow detection of whether the vaccine is actually effective.

Consumers, whose spending drives the state economy, showed more optimism about future economic conditions and whether now is a good time to buy a big-ticket item, according to the University of Florida’s Consumer Sentiment Index for September released on Tuesday.

The index had declined the previous two months, with consumers in August expressing a level of pessimism about their financial situations that hit a 6½-year low.

The Florida results track with U.S. consumer confidence, which rebounded more quickly in September than most economists had expected but also remained far from levels that were the norm before the pandemic struck.

In Florida, the consumer sentiment index surged 6.3 points to 85.1 in September. Four of the five components that comprise the state measure rose over the month, while one declined.

“September’s reading shows the largest increase in consumer sentiment since it bottomed out in April,” said Hector H. Sandoval, director of the Economic Analysis Program at UF’s Bureau of Economic and Business Research. “Nonetheless, the index has only recovered to about half of the levels observed before the economic downturn due to the pandemic.”

Floridians’ perceptions about current economic conditions were mixed.

Their opinions on personal financial situations now compared with a year ago declined slightly, but those feelings were split across gender, with men reporting less favorable views.

However, perceptions as to whether now is a good time to buy a major household item such as furniture or a car posted a sizable increase, with that opinion shared by all Floridians across sociodemographic groups but especially stronger among women, those age 60 and older, and those with an annual income above $50,000.

Views of future economic conditions improved across all groups.

Expectations of personal financial situations a year from now increased, while the outlook for U.S. economic conditions over the next year showed the biggest increase in the latest reading. Expectations of U.S. economic conditions over the next five years also improved.

“The gain in September’s confidence came mostly from consumers’ future expectations about the national economy,” Sandoval said.

“Overall, Floridians are more optimistic and are anticipating greater economic prospects in the medium and long-run.”

On Friday, Gov. Ron DeSantis lifted coronavirus restrictions on restaurants across Florida as he pushed the state into Phase 3 of reopening. He said any local government limits affecting restaurants and other businesses would have to be justified to his administration.
The order also allows theme parks to go to full capacity from their current 50% limits, and lifts any restrictions on gatherings, although the state is still recommending that people avoid crowded spaces.

The labor market in the Sarasota-Manatee region and statewide continues to recover. The August jobless rate fell to 6.3% in Sarasota-Manatee, down from a revised 9.5% in July but higher than the 3.4% posted one year ago. Florida’s rate of 7.4% was down from 11.4% the prior month but also much higher than the year-ago 3.0%.

“With most of the tourism industry still far from prepandemic levels, economic activity in Florida is expected to increase in the short-term as the state moves into Phase 3 of reopening, lifting all restrictions on restaurants and businesses,” Sandoval said. “Although it is not uncommon to see an impact on consumer sentiment from the presidential election, looking ahead we expect consumer confidence to continue increasing as restrictions on businesses are lifted.”

Nationally, the Conference Board reported Tuesday that its consumer confidence index rose sharply to a reading of 101.8, up from 86.3 in August, largely due to a more favorable view on current business and labor market conditions.

“Consumers also expressed greater optimism about their short-term financial prospects, which may help keep spending from slowing further in the months ahead,” said Lynn Franco, senior indicators director at the Conference Board.

Consumer confidence is closely watched for signals about consumer spending, which accounts for 70% of economic activity in the U.S. And the country is heading into a crucial economic period, the lead-up to the holiday season.

“The sheer magnitude of today’s rise tells us the consumer thinks the worst days of the recession are over,” said Chris Rupkey, chief financial economist at global financial group MUFG.


Consumer confidence spiked higher through August as Americans' expectations for economic recovery significantly improved.

The Conference Board's Consumer Confidence Index jumped to 101.8 from 86.3, marking the biggest one-month jump in 17 years. Economists expected the gauge to only modestly increase to 90 last month. The increase also follows back-to-back monthly declines linked to the summer's jump in COVID cases.

"A more favorable view of current business and labor market conditions, coupled with renewed optimism about the short-term outlook, helped spur this month's rebound in confidence," Lynn Franco, senior director of economic indicators at The Conference Board, said in a statement.

August's climb places the index just below its May level. To be sure, the index remains well below its pre-pandemic high of roughly 110.

The Conference Board's index of present situations jumped to 98.5 from 85.8 last month. The non-profit's Expectations Index — which tracks consumers' short-term outlook for the labor market, income, and business activity — rose to 104 from 86.6.

The sharp increases are likely tied to the stock market's surge to record highs through August, Ian Shepherdson, chief economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics, said in a note. The tumbling unemployment rate also lifted sentiments, he added, but those drivers faded into the fall and will likely prevent the rally from lasting.

"Given the performance of stocks in recent weeks, and the loss of momentum apparent in the near-real-time labor market data, we expect confidence to dip in October," Shepherdson said.

The lack of a near-term stimulus deal will also weigh on optimism heading into election season, the economist added. Cashflow and the pace of economic reopening are key drivers to sentiment gauges, and both have slowed as stimulus programs expire.

Some lawmakers are holding out hope for a last-minute deal. House Democrats revealed a $2.2 trillion spending proposal Monday afternoon that includes another round of relief payments, expanded unemployment benefits, and assistance for airlines. Though the measure still comes in above Republicans' spending target, it marks a step closer to compromise.

Separately, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin spoke over the phone regarding new relief funds on Tuesday. The two indicated their conversations will continue throughout the week.

Former Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg thought having vacancies on the Supreme Court was dangerous to the integrity of the Court and would cause inconsistency among federal laws.

“It’s important that the Supreme Court is able to resolve conflicts among other courts about what the federal law is,” Ginsburg said. “That’s why eight is not a good number.”

“If we’re unable to decide the question, you can have one federal law in one area of the country and the opposite federal law in another part of the country,” she explained.

In an interview with Charlie Rose on Bloomberg in October of 2016, Ginsburg expressed her desire to see a judicial nomination and confirmation to replace her former colleague, Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, so that the Court could operate at full capacity during its term.

“I would like to see the court have a full house by the time this term ends,” she said.

The Supreme Court term runs from the first Monday in October to late June or early July.

In 2019, Ginsburg reaffirmed her position that nine justices were necessary in order to execute decisions, break any tie votes, and form opinions, but not overpacking the Court in a partisan way.

“Nine seems to be a good number. It’s been that way for a long time,” Ginsburg told NPR. “I think it was a bad idea when President Franklin Roosevelt tried to pack the court.”

“If anything, it would make the court look partisan, it would be that – one side saying, ‘When we’re in power, we’re going to enlarge the number of judges, so we would have more people who would vote the way we want them to,'” she added.

Ginsburg passed away in mid-September from pancreatic cancer. While some Democrats claim that President Donald Trump should honor her reported final wish to leave her SCOTUS seat open until after the election, Trump followed his Constitutional duties and nominated federal judge Amy Coney Barrett as Ginsburg’s replacement.

Until recently, when a prominent writer like Andrew Sullivan lost his job for voicing controversial opinions, he had two options: write for the other side or fade into obscurity. But when Sullivan was fired from New York Magazine recently, he turned to Substack, a platform that lets authors publish and monetize a newsletter or sell standalone content directly to readers.

Sullivan claims that he has more than 75,000 subscribers and is making more money than he did at New York.

He’s not the first to turn to a newsletter. In May, chef Alison Roman started a Substack newsletter after leaving the New York Times under fire for criticizing two Asian women and using turmeric in a recipe without showing sufficient cultural sensitivity. Sometimes cancellation is not even necessary. Some writers, like Matt Taibbi, left Rolling Stone to write a paid newsletter because he wanted more independence.

Newsletters are just one way that writers can free themselves from institutions. Katie Herzog, former beleaguered writer at The Stranger, now devotes her time to a podcast and raises money through Patreon. Like Sullivan, she claims to be earning more than she did as a staff writer.

These experiences are part of the growing unbundled economy, an economic trend that extends beyond media. Up until fairly recently, we consumed many goods and services bundled together. Your airline ticket price included a meal and checked luggage. Your cable bill included hundreds of channels. A newspaper subscription offered content from many journalists. But changing economics and technology have made bundling less necessary and attractive—at least in the short run. A bundled service offers lots of variety for a fixed price, but you end up paying for things you don’t want. Now, when we book flights online, we can see other airlines’ prices for identical routes; an airline can appear more competitive by breaking out different services. Streaming platforms mean that we no longer must pay for cable channels we don’t watch.

And now, members of the media whom colleagues deem “problematic” don’t have to tolerate a hostile newsroom; they can send out an email newsletter or broadcast a podcast to their audience and collect money directly.

In some ways, the unbundled economy is more efficient for consumers. We pay only for the goods and services we want, and we get more choices. Journalists don’t have to tailor their writing to avoid upsetting the most sensitive members of the newsrooms, and they can talk directly to readers. While unbundling feels new, it is in some ways a throwback to a preindustrial economy, when information was shared in newsletters or handbills, and small-scale artisans made customized goods or offered services on demand.

Long term, though, there could be problems. Paying for podcasts and newsletters from all your favorite writers will get expensive. People will need to make choices; they’ll probably pay only for writers they already know and like—and only a few, the most popular, will be able to earn a good living. Most high-profile writers developed their following off the credibility of institutions for which they once worked. If the economy fully unbundles, it’s unclear where the new pipeline of talent will come from, where future on-the-job training will occur, and who will pay for it.

One way forward could be bundled newsletters and podcasts, where subscribers pay for content from several sources. This may prove attractive for writers with a decent-size following but not large enough to generate a stable income on Patreon or Substack.

Substack is currently seen as a trend, but it’s one that represents an important economic shift, where investing in an institution is seen as less valuable than being a superstar in one’s field. These changes largely reflect changes in technology and a more polarized world. But they could ultimately lead to less skilled and more partisan journalists operating in echo-chambered media silos.

The media market changes faster than other industries facing the same economic trends. The move to Substack, and unbundling in media more generally, may be the canary in the coalmine telling us what’s in store for the rest of the economy. If so, it’s a mixed bag.