“The court unanimously ruled that a person’s right to vote cannot be contingent upon their ability to pay,” said Julie Ebenstein, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project in a press release. “This law is a modern-day poll tax. This ruling recognizes the gravity of elected officials trying to circumvent Amendment 4 to create roadblocks to voting based on wealth.”

“This is a great win for voting rights!” added Myrna Perez, director of the Voting Rights and Elections program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law. “The Eleventh Circuit told the state of Florida what the rest of America already knows. You can’t condition the right to vote on a person’s wealth.”

“I’m in contact with them and basically I’ve said, ‘are you guys recommending this?’ The task force has not recommended that to me,” he said. “If they do, obviously that would be something that would carry a lot of weight with me.”

Dear Dr. Deborah Birx and Dr. Anthony Fauci,

If you are reading this, you are now entering your third month as members of President Donald Trump’s coronavirus task force. As you attempt to infuse presidential decision-making with medical and scientific knowledge, those of us who have experienced successful hostage resolution [The author oversaw an FBI squad that responded to kidnappings of Americans throughout Latin America and ran another squad that addressed kidnappings in northern California] are seeing some uncanny comparisons to siege scenarios. In order for all of us to survive the next month and beyond, you’ll both need to understand how similar your predicament is to a hostage standoff, and how you can employ kidnap and ransom negotiation techniques to overcome the challenges of your figurative captivity. Since you just bought us all another month of smart social distancing, there are already signs that you are applying some of these proven methods even if you don’t fully grasp them as such. But this can go south quickly, and we’re counting on you to get it right.

These techniques won’t work as well if the hostage-taker becomes aware of them, but based on available intelligence about your captor, he won’t likely read this. First, successful hostage negotiators must understand the kidnapper’s motivation. In most kidnappings, the captor wants money, but publicity, political demands, and yes, even ego, can drive ransom demands. This means that you both retain your value if you can remain alive; in your case that means not being kicked off the task force. Since the president has kept you in place thus far, he seems to understand that he needs you around, even if he’s growing weary of your incessant talk of science and epidemiological modeling. This mutually dependent dynamic gives you the leverage and influence needed to shape outcomes. You control what the president wants: public adulation, credit for mitigating a deadly virus, and the appearance that he understands complex medical concepts. You must delicately and subtly message the president that if he harms the hostages (you and us), he won’t get what he wants. This can be fraught with peril.

Kidnappers can quickly come to regret taking hostages because, quite honestly, their care and feeding becomes almost unbearable. That’s when some hostages find themselves dumped alongside a road or come to an even worse fate. So, you must avoid upsetting the president to the point that he neutralizes you. You’ve already had success in convincing the president to back off the indefensible assertion that the nation can return to normal on Easter Sunday. Dr. Fauci, your minimizing of Trump’s nonsensical notion as simply “aspirational” was masterful in that it helped him to save face and to view you as less of a threat. Bravo. Similarly, Dr. Birx’s praise of the president as “attentive to the scientific literature and the details and the data” may have stroked the president’s planet-sized ego to buy you some time.

Second, hostage negotiators must prepare for the abductor’s initial ransom call. Maybe that’s already happened. Maybe that first demand was to reopen the economy by Easter. If so, you handled it well. But more demands are coming. In fact, expect to see that first demand repeated. That’s why successful negotiators select a primary communicator to engage the captor. Two physicians coming at the president at once won’t work. The communicator must present a previously agreed upon message but maintain limited authority. In other words, let’s say you select Dr. Birx (the president seems to view her as less of a threat). Dr. Birx should already secretly know what Dr. Fauci’s position on things is, but when negotiating with the president, should always say, “Let me make sure we have Dr. Fauci’s opinion,” or, “I’ll have to get back to you after I consult the team.” This allows for the negotiator to establish a requirement for what hostage negotiators call a reasonable delay. In life or death hostage crises, reasonable delays can make the difference between the abductor doing something rash and emotional, or doing the right thing.

Third, a real hostage communicator is never a debater but more of an influencer and persuader. Hostage communicators maintain some control by scheduling set times to speak with the abductor. This also allows them to develop their objectives and rehearse responses with their larger team. Hostage negotiators work from a quiet, tucked away negotiation operations center. They plot out anticipated demands and scripted responses on white boards around the room. They have a plan even when the captor doesn’t. Got it? Drs. Fauci and Birx, we need you to have a plan. Our survival may depend on your survival. In a sense, we’re all being held hostage, and you are negotiating for our safe release. Hostages sometimes develop Stockholm syndrome when they start identifying with their captor and his causes as a survival mechanism. Don’t let that happen to you. Don’t let that happen to us.

"I don't want to take some college student's ventilator, I don't want to take some young mother with four children's ventilator, I don't want to take a 70-year-old person's ventilator who maybe has a disabled child that they're still caring for. Age doesn't always have to be a factor with this," she said.

"Common sense tells me our medical professionals are going to have to make some very hard decisions choosing who gets the ventilators and who does not," Freyer said. "Why not help our warriors that are on the front line do their job just a little bit easier?"