WEBVTT - GOP Urban Deserts and Ghost Kitchens 0:00:01.280 --> 0:00:05.119 You're listening to the Bloomberg Opinion podcast count Us Saturdays 0:00:05.120 --> 0:00:08.280 at one and seven pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com, 0:00:08.320 --> 0:00:11.479 the iHeartRadio app, and the Bloomberg Business App, or listen 0:00:11.520 --> 0:00:13.640 on demand wherever you get your podcasts. 0:00:15.680 --> 0:00:19.520 Welcome to Bloomberg Opinion. I'm Maybe Morris. This week we 0:00:19.560 --> 0:00:23.200 look at the potential of making birth control pills available 0:00:23.280 --> 0:00:28.720 without a prescription, the future of ghost kitchens might just disappear. 0:00:29.400 --> 0:00:33.360 And we'll look at conservation, climate change and how communities 0:00:33.520 --> 0:00:38.120 are finding solutions. We begin, though, with political strategies. I'm 0:00:38.200 --> 0:00:41.640 Rondy Santis, and I'm running for president to lead our 0:00:41.760 --> 0:00:47.400 great American comeback. Florida Governor Ronda Santis has officially announced 0:00:47.400 --> 0:00:50.560 his candidacy for president, but we are going to look 0:00:50.840 --> 0:00:54.480 not on a national scale, but at a more local level. 0:00:54.840 --> 0:00:57.760 Because even in Florida, where the governor has announced his 0:00:57.880 --> 0:01:02.160 Republican run for the White House against GOP favorite Donald Trump, 0:01:02.480 --> 0:01:06.840 Republicans lost the mayoral race in Jacksonville in northern Florida. 0:01:07.319 --> 0:01:10.800 The GOP also lost the mayoral race in Colorado Springs, 0:01:10.880 --> 0:01:15.319 another traditional Republican stronghold. So now only two out of 0:01:15.400 --> 0:01:19.320 thirty two of the largest US cities will have Republican mayors. 0:01:20.040 --> 0:01:23.560 Have Republicans just given up on local politics in favor 0:01:23.600 --> 0:01:28.080 of the national stage. Bloomberg opinion columnist Jonathan Bernstein covers 0:01:28.120 --> 0:01:31.600 politics and policy, and he joins me, Now, Jonathan, what 0:01:31.680 --> 0:01:34.040 was your first thought when you saw that Republicans lost 0:01:34.080 --> 0:01:38.080 the mayoral races in Colorado and in Florida, areas that 0:01:38.120 --> 0:01:39.759 are traditionally pretty deep red. 0:01:40.280 --> 0:01:43.000 Yeah, you know, it's sort of there's a couple things 0:01:43.080 --> 0:01:44.640 you can say. One of them, which is just a 0:01:45.000 --> 0:01:49.480 sort of right now, is that despite Joe Biden's low 0:01:49.520 --> 0:01:53.400 approval ratings, Democrats are doing very well in elections and 0:01:53.480 --> 0:01:56.800 that's sort of continuing into special elections and these off 0:01:56.880 --> 0:01:59.800 year elections this year. But there's also a longer term 0:01:59.800 --> 0:02:03.760 story about this, which has to do with that Republicans 0:02:04.280 --> 0:02:07.040 have given up on being competitive in cities, and they've 0:02:07.040 --> 0:02:09.520 gone up on caring about cities and the people and 0:02:10.200 --> 0:02:14.840 issues and interests that are urban. And it's it's sort 0:02:14.840 --> 0:02:22.120 of astonishing that Republicans now, after losing these two only 0:02:22.160 --> 0:02:25.120 two of the large two of the thirty two largest 0:02:25.200 --> 0:02:29.639 United States cities, only fourteen of the seventy largest will 0:02:29.680 --> 0:02:30.880 have Republican mayors. 0:02:31.200 --> 0:02:34.240 That is astonishing those numbers in particular. Now, is it 0:02:34.280 --> 0:02:38.480 because urban areas simply aren't as important to the national 0:02:38.480 --> 0:02:40.119 political conversation anymore? 0:02:40.880 --> 0:02:44.520 Exactly? You know, there's a lot of stories about how 0:02:45.960 --> 0:02:49.640 Republicans used you know, the thing about this that people 0:02:49.720 --> 0:02:51.440 might not know is that if you go back to 0:02:51.720 --> 0:02:53.840 the middle of the twentieth century, there were a lot 0:02:53.840 --> 0:02:57.240 of Republican cities. Los Angeles was a Republican city, Detroit 0:02:57.360 --> 0:02:59.919 was a Republican city, you know, in the nineteen four 0:03:00.400 --> 0:03:04.480 in nineteen fifties. There's a complex, complicated story of how 0:03:04.520 --> 0:03:08.400 Democrats took the lead in cities. But there's also a 0:03:09.200 --> 0:03:13.640 institutional and rules based reason why Republicans felt have been 0:03:13.680 --> 0:03:15.960 willing to just give up on this, and it has 0:03:16.000 --> 0:03:19.440 to do with the electoral college. At one point in 0:03:19.560 --> 0:03:24.200 the middle of the twentieth century, the big cities were 0:03:24.639 --> 0:03:28.560 crucial to the electoral college, and states such as New 0:03:28.680 --> 0:03:33.359 York and Illinois were big swing states and so you 0:03:33.480 --> 0:03:38.320 had to compete there. That's changed a lot over the years, 0:03:38.440 --> 0:03:43.280 and now in the last election, only two top ten 0:03:43.400 --> 0:03:50.920 cities were in swing states, only Philadelphia and Phoenix. So 0:03:52.320 --> 0:03:55.200 you can sort of not compete in the cities and 0:03:55.360 --> 0:03:57.840 still be competitive for presidential elections. 0:03:58.960 --> 0:04:03.000 Republicans are doing this, though, but not Democrats. Can Republicans 0:04:03.080 --> 0:04:06.800 afford to ignorge cities where Democrats are focusing. 0:04:07.000 --> 0:04:09.760 At some point there may be some tipic point where 0:04:09.760 --> 0:04:14.040 it actually costs them. But so that For example, in Texas, 0:04:15.160 --> 0:04:21.039 where Republicans used to hold or be competitive for mayor 0:04:21.120 --> 0:04:24.479 seats in the big cities, now all the big cities 0:04:24.520 --> 0:04:30.839 have Democratic mayors. That's part of why Texas could eventually 0:04:30.920 --> 0:04:34.600 become a much more competitive state. Because Republicans don't have 0:04:34.720 --> 0:04:36.520 anything to say to people who live in cities. They 0:04:36.520 --> 0:04:39.320 don't have any policies, they don't have anything really that 0:04:39.520 --> 0:04:44.480 you know, Republicans increasingly caring about rural areas, which are 0:04:44.720 --> 0:04:48.680 over emphasized in presidential elections and are really over emphasized, 0:04:49.120 --> 0:04:54.400 over rewarded in US Senate elections, just don't have, you know, 0:04:54.560 --> 0:04:58.359 is there an urban policy that Republicans have not? Really? 0:04:59.320 --> 0:05:01.880 Now, let's talk little bit more about the electoral college, 0:05:01.960 --> 0:05:04.840 because I grew up a political junkie, and that was 0:05:04.960 --> 0:05:07.800 where you won the delegates. That's where you won the 0:05:08.040 --> 0:05:11.840 electoral colleges in the cities that's how it used to work. 0:05:12.000 --> 0:05:14.719 What is the X factor? What changed? 0:05:15.480 --> 0:05:17.800 You know, a lot of it. There's a whole bunch 0:05:17.839 --> 0:05:21.120 of different pieces to it. One is that there are 0:05:21.240 --> 0:05:23.240 just are fewer swing states than there used to be. 0:05:23.480 --> 0:05:28.000 And as far as I know, and some political scientists 0:05:28.040 --> 0:05:29.360 have look at this, and I don't think they've ever 0:05:29.600 --> 0:05:34.440 concluded anything except that it's sort of coincidence. It just 0:05:34.600 --> 0:05:37.120 happens that there was a period of time where a 0:05:37.160 --> 0:05:40.280 whole bunch of states were very closely contested and now 0:05:40.920 --> 0:05:42.640 less so. And there were times in the past, you know, 0:05:42.800 --> 0:05:45.679 we had a period of time where the entire South 0:05:45.880 --> 0:05:48.520 was not competitive in presidential elections. So if you go 0:05:48.640 --> 0:05:50.359 back sort of one hundred and fifty years, there were 0:05:50.960 --> 0:05:54.680 very few states there were competitive, and then the course 0:05:54.720 --> 0:05:56.680 of the twentieth century we wound up having a whole 0:05:56.720 --> 0:05:59.760 bunch of competitive states, including a whole bunch of big 0:06:00.040 --> 0:06:04.440 competitive states. And the electoral college tends to reward states 0:06:04.800 --> 0:06:09.239 in numbers. Let me sort of go back in basic numbers. 0:06:09.880 --> 0:06:14.000 People will say, well, the electoral college rewards small states 0:06:14.160 --> 0:06:17.680 because the formula for the electoral college is the number 0:06:17.680 --> 0:06:19.360 of House seats and the number of Senate seats you have, 0:06:19.640 --> 0:06:22.320 so that you know, if you have ten House districts, 0:06:22.680 --> 0:06:25.800 you get twelve electoral votes for your ten House seats 0:06:25.839 --> 0:06:31.920 plus two senators. And because the Senate is each state 0:06:32.000 --> 0:06:34.440 has the same weight, so the Wyoming has the same 0:06:34.520 --> 0:06:40.400 two senators that California has, that over rewards Wyoming. But 0:06:41.279 --> 0:06:45.640 in fact, you notice very very few presidential candidates campaigning 0:06:45.680 --> 0:06:48.760 in Wyoming because it has three electoral votes and who cares. 0:06:49.720 --> 0:06:53.600 And even a fairly close electoral college state like say 0:06:53.680 --> 0:06:57.240 New Hampshire or Maine, that's a small state, you don't 0:06:57.279 --> 0:07:00.719 get a whole lot of attention from presidential candidates because 0:07:00.720 --> 0:07:03.680 the states that really are advantaged by their ears through 0:07:03.720 --> 0:07:08.320 college are big, close states. So you know, Florida and 0:07:08.440 --> 0:07:13.080 Ohio in relatively recent elections got a huge amount of attention. 0:07:13.880 --> 0:07:21.160 Now that those are a little less competitive, you know, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, Minnesota, 0:07:21.240 --> 0:07:25.520 all pretty big states are the ones that get the attention. 0:07:25.600 --> 0:07:29.200 But it happens that, you know, with the exception of Philadelphia, 0:07:29.760 --> 0:07:33.120 most of those don't have big cities in them, and 0:07:33.480 --> 0:07:36.320 that seems to be sort of just coincidence of how 0:07:36.400 --> 0:07:40.440 the votes happen to stack up. It's not like by 0:07:40.520 --> 0:07:44.760 design or you know, a deliberate attempt by anybody to 0:07:44.920 --> 0:07:47.280 make it turn out that way, But it just happens 0:07:47.360 --> 0:07:49.480 that we don't have a whole lot of big cities 0:07:50.120 --> 0:07:52.480 in the competitive states. 0:07:52.760 --> 0:07:57.240 I'm curious about the concept of tribalism entrenched electorate. You know, 0:07:57.440 --> 0:07:59.640 if people are on a side, that is the side 0:07:59.680 --> 0:08:01.800 they are on, you are not going to change their mind. 0:08:02.080 --> 0:08:04.600 Is this a factor to some. 0:08:04.720 --> 0:08:11.680 Extent, Yes, we have. We do have more partisan voting 0:08:12.240 --> 0:08:16.200 these days than there was fifty sixty years ago, and 0:08:16.400 --> 0:08:18.240 so it means that, you know, if you have a 0:08:18.280 --> 0:08:21.760 group that's votes strongly for one party, it doesn't really 0:08:21.840 --> 0:08:25.360 pay the other party to bother with that group because 0:08:25.360 --> 0:08:28.440 they're so strongly entrance. That's always sort of been part 0:08:28.520 --> 0:08:32.079 of how politics works anyway. It's a little stronger now, 0:08:32.240 --> 0:08:37.880 so there's less split ticket voting. Part of what happened 0:08:38.000 --> 0:08:41.160 in these cities recently and the mayor elections could be 0:08:41.240 --> 0:08:45.480 a reaction to national trends. Whereas at one point, you know, 0:08:46.160 --> 0:08:48.439 people who are upset with Donald Trump vote for the 0:08:48.520 --> 0:08:51.839 Democrat from mayor. That didn't use to be true nearly 0:08:51.920 --> 0:08:52.560 to that extent. 0:08:53.080 --> 0:08:55.840 Where is this headed what are the consequences that are 0:08:55.880 --> 0:08:56.640 going to come from this? 0:08:57.400 --> 0:08:59.760 Well, I think that it's you know, it has had 0:08:59.840 --> 0:09:08.199 the consequences that Republicans do not have. Republicans don't have 0:09:09.040 --> 0:09:13.520 policies that appeal to broad to the broad country. They 0:09:13.679 --> 0:09:16.920 have increasingly talked only to themselves and tried to rally 0:09:17.400 --> 0:09:21.160 their own supporters. I think to some extent, partisan polarization 0:09:21.280 --> 0:09:24.439 makes that true for both parties. But the particulars of 0:09:24.520 --> 0:09:27.600 the electoral college and what gets rewarded and what doesn't 0:09:27.760 --> 0:09:31.080 make it even easier for Republicans to feel that, well, 0:09:31.640 --> 0:09:34.360 we're not going to win cities anyway, so let's give 0:09:34.480 --> 0:09:37.480 up on well, let's give up on Black Americans because 0:09:37.520 --> 0:09:40.400 they live in cities, so we don't need them. 0:09:40.880 --> 0:09:43.920 It just seems like that would create more tribalism, more entrenched, 0:09:44.040 --> 0:09:47.200 not open. The big tent concept seems to be gone. 0:09:47.920 --> 0:09:54.400 Exactly that it tends to reinforce the already the tendency 0:09:54.520 --> 0:09:57.520 to begin with for partisanship, and it just reinforces it. 0:09:57.600 --> 0:10:03.720 And especially again especially for Republicans, because Democrats, because rural 0:10:03.840 --> 0:10:06.880 voters are so over valued in the Senate, Democrats can't 0:10:06.960 --> 0:10:10.000 just say, yeah, we were doing badly among rural voters. 0:10:10.280 --> 0:10:13.040 Forget about it. You know, we'll just lose them. And 0:10:13.520 --> 0:10:17.240 you know, you hear that in the rhetoric both parties use. 0:10:17.440 --> 0:10:21.920 You never get Democrats or never is too strong. Always 0:10:22.200 --> 0:10:26.440 you rarely get Democrats who would, you know, bash rural 0:10:26.480 --> 0:10:30.760 areas in general or bash rural states. And it's not 0:10:31.000 --> 0:10:35.640 uncommon at all for Republicans to just criticize you know, 0:10:35.720 --> 0:10:39.199 New York City or big Cities, or California or you know, 0:10:39.280 --> 0:10:41.920 other states that they have no chance in because the 0:10:42.000 --> 0:10:45.240 way that electoral Senate and centives work, Democrats are not 0:10:45.360 --> 0:10:48.480 willing to totally give up on rural voters in the 0:10:48.520 --> 0:10:51.080 way that Republicans have given up on urban voters. 0:10:51.120 --> 0:10:55.079 Bloomberg Opinion colonist Jonathan Bernstein covers politics and policy, and 0:10:55.200 --> 0:10:58.120 coming up, we'll look at the debate over one birth 0:10:58.200 --> 0:11:01.320 control pill and whether it might soon be sold over 0:11:01.440 --> 0:11:05.080 the counter without a prescription. You're listening to Bloomberg Opinion. 0:11:11.880 --> 0:11:15.719 You're listening to the Bloomberg Opinion Podcast. Catch us Saturdays 0:11:15.720 --> 0:11:18.679 at one and seven pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com, 0:11:18.960 --> 0:11:22.080 the iHeartRadio app, and the Bloomberg Business App, or listen 0:11:22.160 --> 0:11:26.840 on demand wherever you get your podcasts, you're. 0:11:26.760 --> 0:11:30.320 Listening to Bloomberg Opinion. I'm Amy Morris. In South Carolina, 0:11:30.400 --> 0:11:34.200 senators passed a bill banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy. 0:11:34.320 --> 0:11:36.839 The governor says he'll sign it, but women in the 0:11:36.920 --> 0:11:40.600 South Carolina Senate have spoken out against it across party lines, 0:11:40.920 --> 0:11:43.320 including Independent Senator Mia McLeod. 0:11:43.520 --> 0:11:48.559 It's so disheartening to think that forty one men in 0:11:48.720 --> 0:11:53.000 this body can make decisions for women and girls that 0:11:53.080 --> 0:11:56.920 will impact women and girls across our state for generations 0:11:57.000 --> 0:11:57.280 to come. 0:11:57.400 --> 0:12:00.480 And it's not just South Carolina. More states are considering 0:12:00.600 --> 0:12:05.439 similar bands. Meanwhile, access to contraception can be harder than necessary, 0:12:05.760 --> 0:12:08.480 But now a panel of independent advisors to the Food 0:12:08.480 --> 0:12:12.400 and Drug Administration have unanimously voted in favor of approving 0:12:12.559 --> 0:12:15.920 over the counter availability for a birth control pill called 0:12:16.040 --> 0:12:18.760 O pill. The panel has made its recommendation and now 0:12:18.800 --> 0:12:20.959 it's up to the FDA. We get more now with 0:12:21.080 --> 0:12:25.560 Lisa Jarvis, a Bloomberg Opinion columnist who covers biotech, healthcare, 0:12:25.679 --> 0:12:29.680 and the pharmaceutical industry. Okay, Lisa, how would this work? 0:12:29.760 --> 0:12:32.640 And over the counter birth control pill? Would you need 0:12:32.720 --> 0:12:34.679 a physical exam. Would you need to be under a 0:12:34.760 --> 0:12:36.080 doctor's care? How does this work? 0:12:36.520 --> 0:12:36.679 Yeah? 0:12:36.760 --> 0:12:39.679 I think the idea is that we have decades of 0:12:39.760 --> 0:12:43.680 safety data on birth control, and in particular this type 0:12:43.679 --> 0:12:46.599 of birth control, which is a progestin only pill. And 0:12:47.320 --> 0:12:50.760 you know, most women might get a cursory twenty minute 0:12:50.840 --> 0:12:53.079 visit with a doctor and they have a prescription that's 0:12:53.120 --> 0:12:56.360 refilled without follow up visits, and it's perfectly safe to 0:12:56.480 --> 0:13:00.120 do that without the doctor's visit. It would lower a 0:13:00.160 --> 0:13:02.800 lot of barriers to access and so and we have 0:13:02.880 --> 0:13:04.679 a lot of experience with it to know that it 0:13:04.720 --> 0:13:05.439 would be safe. 0:13:05.760 --> 0:13:07.640 Why has it taken us so long to get here? 0:13:08.120 --> 0:13:10.760 Oh my goodness. In nineteen ninety three there was an 0:13:10.920 --> 0:13:14.640 editorial and a major medical journal asking for over the 0:13:14.720 --> 0:13:16.800 counter birth control. I mean, I think there's just a 0:13:16.840 --> 0:13:22.400 lot of hesitancy, probably for political reasons, but you know, 0:13:22.600 --> 0:13:25.120 we're really at a place where the urgency is there. 0:13:25.600 --> 0:13:30.600 Women have fewer options for how they addressed an unwanted pregnancy, 0:13:31.000 --> 0:13:33.959 and so the stakes are really high, and so I 0:13:34.040 --> 0:13:36.400 think there's been a lot of pressure. The FDA has 0:13:36.480 --> 0:13:39.880 punted this. It was supposed to be reviewed back in November, 0:13:40.280 --> 0:13:44.280 and so now here we are and advisors unanimously. It 0:13:44.400 --> 0:13:47.320 was to me very interesting to hear their comments said 0:13:47.520 --> 0:13:48.559 this needs to happen. 0:13:48.920 --> 0:13:51.400 What were some of their comments, you know, some. 0:13:51.520 --> 0:13:54.240 Of the criticisms of the data that was presented in 0:13:54.400 --> 0:13:57.719 the two days that advisors meant to talk about this 0:13:58.240 --> 0:14:01.080 from the FDA were around what their women could adhere 0:14:01.559 --> 0:14:04.520 to taking the pill, which the directions are very simple, 0:14:04.679 --> 0:14:08.199 take one pill at the same time every day. We 0:14:08.400 --> 0:14:10.600 know that in the real world adherence you know, when 0:14:10.640 --> 0:14:12.880 you get it prescribed by a doctor, isn't great. And 0:14:13.000 --> 0:14:15.079 we know that in the trial that they ran to 0:14:15.160 --> 0:14:17.240 show that people could do this, the reason that they 0:14:17.360 --> 0:14:20.200 didn't adhere was largely because they couldn't get back to 0:14:20.280 --> 0:14:23.640 a clinical trial site to get their pills renewed. So, 0:14:24.040 --> 0:14:25.880 you know, kind of gets at the heart of the problem. 0:14:26.160 --> 0:14:28.680 If you could go to your corner CBS and fill 0:14:28.800 --> 0:14:31.400 in that gap, you would really be in a lot 0:14:31.520 --> 0:14:32.080 better place. 0:14:32.680 --> 0:14:36.560 So is that the strongest pushback that this might be facing. 0:14:37.000 --> 0:14:39.840 The one argument that would be louder than the others, 0:14:40.120 --> 0:14:42.080 or would have more traction than the others, is that 0:14:42.480 --> 0:14:45.840 consistency and being able to do this on a regular 0:14:45.960 --> 0:14:49.120 basis for the patient, for the woman, she may not 0:14:49.160 --> 0:14:50.080 be able to pull that off. 0:14:50.560 --> 0:14:53.240 It's one of three arguments that got the most attention 0:14:53.440 --> 0:14:55.480 during the two day meeting. The other one was around 0:14:55.600 --> 0:14:58.400 whether women could correctly decide if the pill was appropriate 0:14:58.480 --> 0:15:02.880 for and safe for them. There's just what, well, really, 0:15:02.920 --> 0:15:05.760 there's just one group that would have a risk of 0:15:05.800 --> 0:15:08.160 this particular kind of pill, and that is women who 0:15:08.200 --> 0:15:10.960 have a history of breast cancer. It would be contraindicated. 0:15:11.120 --> 0:15:15.160 It could help your potentially help the cancer come back. 0:15:16.000 --> 0:15:18.760 But you know, the thing is, there was very good 0:15:18.840 --> 0:15:21.720 data I thought presented on that because you know, most 0:15:21.800 --> 0:15:25.520 women who undergo breast cancer treatment are above the age 0:15:25.560 --> 0:15:27.960 where they would be then bearing children. The ones who 0:15:28.000 --> 0:15:31.680 aren't typically get an IUD. Beyond that, if you're like 0:15:31.840 --> 0:15:34.600 in a situation where you might be in the small 0:15:34.640 --> 0:15:37.680 percentage of people who'd be interested in hormonal birth control pills, 0:15:37.960 --> 0:15:41.000 there's a very clear label on the box that says 0:15:41.360 --> 0:15:43.880 do not take if you have a history of breast cancer. 0:15:44.200 --> 0:15:49.360 So I think, you know, overwhelmingly the gynecologists who were 0:15:50.240 --> 0:15:54.880 reviewing this for FDA said, you know, most of those 0:15:54.960 --> 0:15:57.240 women are seeing their doctors on a regular basis and 0:15:57.320 --> 0:15:59.640 will be told do not do this, you know, and 0:15:59.760 --> 0:16:02.800 so the public health benefit really outweighs the very small 0:16:02.920 --> 0:16:04.360 risk of someone making that mistake. 0:16:04.920 --> 0:16:07.800 I have to say as a breast cancer survivor my oncologist, 0:16:07.920 --> 0:16:11.400 like the third thing she said after explaining treatment was oh, 0:16:11.680 --> 0:16:15.040 and birth control pills are in your past. This will 0:16:15.160 --> 0:16:17.840 not happen for you, though you'll never take those again. 0:16:17.960 --> 0:16:19.320 She could not have been more clear. 0:16:19.680 --> 0:16:21.600 Thank you for saying that, because I think that point 0:16:21.760 --> 0:16:25.120 was not sufficiently appreciated in the meeting, even though people 0:16:25.160 --> 0:16:27.560 were saying it. It kind of you know, people the 0:16:28.000 --> 0:16:31.000 oncologists who were presenting kept saying over and over again, 0:16:31.160 --> 0:16:33.280 this is the thing we talked to patients about. They're 0:16:33.680 --> 0:16:36.200 under regular care anyways, and we will repeat it to 0:16:36.280 --> 0:16:36.760 them so. 0:16:37.000 --> 0:16:39.440 They watch you like a hawk. Lisa, something that you 0:16:39.560 --> 0:16:41.840 had said that caught my ear was, you know, the 0:16:41.960 --> 0:16:45.680 question of would women know enough about their own bodies 0:16:45.800 --> 0:16:47.920 or about their own health care to be able to 0:16:48.040 --> 0:16:51.720 make the decision to buy this pill on their own 0:16:51.840 --> 0:16:55.880 without a doctor's prescription. Now, as a woman, my first 0:16:55.960 --> 0:16:58.560 response is you know, to burst into flame and side, 0:16:58.560 --> 0:17:01.080 who do you think you are? But you know, because 0:17:01.160 --> 0:17:04.480 women do actually are sentient beings and do have in 0:17:04.640 --> 0:17:08.200 mind of their own However, did you get that sense 0:17:08.280 --> 0:17:10.520 when you were listening to these arguments made? Were they 0:17:10.640 --> 0:17:13.560 they weren't being insulting, they were being concerned? Like, what 0:17:13.800 --> 0:17:15.000 was the sense in the room? 0:17:15.880 --> 0:17:16.080 Yeah? 0:17:16.160 --> 0:17:19.560 I mean, I think most of the concern was around 0:17:19.640 --> 0:17:23.200 adolescents and teens, you know, in excess or people who 0:17:23.280 --> 0:17:25.960 have low literacy, and whether they would understand how to 0:17:26.080 --> 0:17:28.919 appropriately read the directions on the box. And the concern 0:17:29.080 --> 0:17:31.159 was less that it would pose a danger, but that 0:17:31.280 --> 0:17:33.280 if you didn't take it appropriately you were still at 0:17:33.359 --> 0:17:36.880 risk of a pregnancy, or that teens in particular might 0:17:37.000 --> 0:17:42.760 confuse this with Plan B, you know, and not use 0:17:42.800 --> 0:17:45.800 it correctly. I think the trials showed they enrolled a 0:17:45.880 --> 0:17:47.960 lot of people in those groups and showed that they 0:17:48.040 --> 0:17:50.520 did a good job and probably about the same as 0:17:50.520 --> 0:17:52.639 they do when they're under a doctor's care. And we 0:17:52.760 --> 0:17:54.600 know a lot of teams take birth control for a 0:17:54.720 --> 0:17:58.440 variety of reasons, not just to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, 0:17:58.520 --> 0:18:01.440 but to deal with act near you know, other you know, 0:18:01.600 --> 0:18:03.360 kind of reproductive health issues. 0:18:03.520 --> 0:18:07.200 So how would an over the counter availability for a 0:18:07.240 --> 0:18:10.359 birth control pill change the landscape. I mean, how earth 0:18:10.440 --> 0:18:11.240 shattering would that be. 0:18:12.240 --> 0:18:13.959 I think it would be a big deal. I mean, 0:18:14.840 --> 0:18:17.200 part of the most compelling testimony I thought in the 0:18:17.240 --> 0:18:22.119 two days was from college age women who talked about 0:18:22.320 --> 0:18:24.639 you know, I'm very educated, but when I moved to 0:18:24.720 --> 0:18:26.960 a new state for college, I had trouble getting my 0:18:27.000 --> 0:18:30.520 birth control because you have to find a new doctor. 0:18:30.840 --> 0:18:34.159 You can't just transfer a prescription. You might not have 0:18:34.280 --> 0:18:37.879 a ride to a provider to get that prescription. I 0:18:37.960 --> 0:18:40.359 think there's just a lot of barriers for a lot 0:18:40.440 --> 0:18:42.680 of women, whether you're in an urban setting or a 0:18:42.800 --> 0:18:45.439 rural setting, and it would just lower those Is. 0:18:45.480 --> 0:18:48.200 This a clap back to the rollback of abortion access? 0:18:48.359 --> 0:18:49.720 Is that what's spurring this on? 0:18:50.240 --> 0:18:53.080 I mean, it had been in the works before that. 0:18:53.359 --> 0:18:55.800 I think there's a new urgency around it, for sure. 0:18:56.040 --> 0:18:58.280 I mean, certainly the stakes have never been higher. And 0:18:58.600 --> 0:19:00.400 by the way, even if you live in a state 0:19:00.400 --> 0:19:04.240 where you have access to abortion, pregnancy itself is a 0:19:04.359 --> 0:19:07.399 risky proposition these days that I've written in the you 0:19:07.480 --> 0:19:11.520 know recently about the rise of maternal mortality rates. So really, 0:19:11.560 --> 0:19:15.400 we want to have women empowered to make good choices 0:19:15.600 --> 0:19:18.480 about their reproductive health. And this gives them one more 0:19:19.640 --> 0:19:23.240 but of course especially important in those states where they 0:19:23.359 --> 0:19:25.440 no longer have abortion access. 0:19:26.160 --> 0:19:30.320 When the FDA receives a recommendation from an independent panel 0:19:30.640 --> 0:19:34.000 like this one, does it usually take a long time 0:19:34.160 --> 0:19:36.560 to be able to come to a decision, to put 0:19:36.600 --> 0:19:39.280 it to a vote, and then get the drug to market. 0:19:39.640 --> 0:19:41.840 The FDA usually has a date by which they have 0:19:41.960 --> 0:19:45.760 to make this decision. In this case, it's unclear how 0:19:45.840 --> 0:19:48.000 long it will take, and they don't, by the way, 0:19:48.080 --> 0:19:50.359 have to follow the advice of their advisors, which was 0:19:50.400 --> 0:19:53.040 why I wrote this column sort of saying you should 0:19:53.240 --> 0:19:55.920 follow their advice. They typically do, but we have many 0:19:55.960 --> 0:19:59.280 instances of times when they haven't, especially in areas where 0:19:59.280 --> 0:20:04.200 it's some controversy or political controversy. And in particular, the 0:20:04.359 --> 0:20:07.280 FDA has been to me overly cautious on things around 0:20:07.320 --> 0:20:09.639 women's health. We know that they've put a lot of 0:20:09.680 --> 0:20:13.280 restrictions on medication abortion, for example, despite safety data. So 0:20:14.040 --> 0:20:17.160 you know, hopefully this is available by next year, I hope. 0:20:18.840 --> 0:20:22.960 Lisa Jarvis is a Bloomberg opinion columnist covering biotech, healthcare, 0:20:23.119 --> 0:20:25.960 and the pharmaceutical industry. Now coming up, we're going to 0:20:26.000 --> 0:20:28.960 take a look at ghost kitchens, how they came to be, 0:20:29.520 --> 0:20:32.960 and why they're disappearing. This is Bloomberg. 0:20:41.680 --> 0:20:45.480 You're listening to the Bloomberg Opinion podcast. Catch us Saturdays 0:20:45.520 --> 0:20:48.440 at one and seven pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com, 0:20:48.720 --> 0:20:51.840 the iHeartRadio app and the Bloomberg Business App, or listen 0:20:51.920 --> 0:20:54.040 on demand wherever you get your podcasts. 0:20:56.359 --> 0:21:01.200 This is Bloomberg Opinion. I maybe Morris zoom meetings, hand sanitizer, 0:21:01.400 --> 0:21:06.239 flexible workdays, QR codes. These are pandemic habits a lot 0:21:06.320 --> 0:21:09.480 of us have embraced. Even in this post pandemic era. 0:21:10.119 --> 0:21:14.200 These habits have staying power, but not so much for 0:21:14.440 --> 0:21:18.800 ghost kitchens. Those are restaurants that only offer delivery. Let's 0:21:18.840 --> 0:21:23.119 learn more with Bloomberg Opinion columnist Laticia Miranda. She covers 0:21:23.200 --> 0:21:26.360 consumer goods and the retail industry and joins me, now, 0:21:26.680 --> 0:21:30.160 could you explain what a ghost kitchen is and how 0:21:30.240 --> 0:21:30.879 that came about? 0:21:31.680 --> 0:21:36.520 Yeah? So, ghost kitchens also known as virtual or cloud kitchens, 0:21:37.400 --> 0:21:45.800 They are a group of kitchens that are built in warehouses. 0:21:46.320 --> 0:21:49.800 Usually there's some kind of a company like cloud kitchens 0:21:50.840 --> 0:21:54.880 that owns the warehouse and then invites or sells kind 0:21:54.920 --> 0:21:58.119 of a bunch of kitchen stations to different restaurants so 0:21:58.240 --> 0:22:02.000 they can cook their own food. And then from a 0:22:02.080 --> 0:22:05.879 consumer perspective, you'd probably interact with the ghost kitchen when 0:22:05.920 --> 0:22:10.119 you're you're ordering on Uber Eats or grub Hub, and 0:22:10.600 --> 0:22:14.920 you know you order from Jane or Joe's sandwiches, it 0:22:15.000 --> 0:22:17.800 could come out of one of these ghost kitchens or 0:22:17.880 --> 0:22:20.600 virtual kitchens, which is just sort of a kitchen station 0:22:20.760 --> 0:22:21.760 along with other ones. 0:22:22.440 --> 0:22:25.119 And what I learned when I was reading your column 0:22:25.160 --> 0:22:28.119 on the Bloomberg terminal is I always assumed these ghost 0:22:28.240 --> 0:22:32.280 kitchens were just sort of mom and pop independent restaurants, 0:22:32.440 --> 0:22:35.320 you know, just different individual places that are really trying 0:22:35.359 --> 0:22:38.040 to survive during the pandemic, so they created this sort 0:22:38.080 --> 0:22:40.919 of ghost kitchen where you order online and then it's delivered. 0:22:41.480 --> 0:22:44.320 I didn't realize that these could also be national chains 0:22:44.400 --> 0:22:48.400 like Wendy's jumping on this trend and it becoming such 0:22:48.520 --> 0:22:51.240 an enormous part of our and I hate to put 0:22:51.280 --> 0:22:53.760 it this way, but a part of our pandemic experience. 0:22:54.320 --> 0:22:58.960 Yes, a struggling kind of restaurants. Fast food chains jumped 0:22:59.040 --> 0:23:02.480 onto this trend, and because it's typically a lower cost 0:23:02.640 --> 0:23:07.840 way to deliver food. And it also what some restaurants 0:23:07.880 --> 0:23:12.320 started to do was they started to sell under different names. So, 0:23:12.760 --> 0:23:17.440 for example, Chuck E Cheese kind of came under some 0:23:17.600 --> 0:23:22.359 scrutiny for doing this where they had UH they were 0:23:22.720 --> 0:23:26.920 running a ghost kitchen called past Qualis that some people thought, 0:23:27.280 --> 0:23:31.320