The appeal to the State Supreme Court may have accomplished, at least temporarily, what Governor Brown needs.
I was referring to the cap and trade laws that were proposed. Now is not the time for them.
As for the people in Oregon, they will act in their own best interest regardless of whether a law expires. Those who are most vulnerable will shelter in place and wear masks out in public long after the rules are relaxed. Others who are not at physical risk will do what they can do avoid financial ruin. So yes, it’s not a binary situation.
Of course you latched onto that, because it suits your narrative. As the article mentioned, there were over 100 other items of legislation that were scrapped because Republicans spit the dummy. It is the citizens of Oregon who were losers for that.
Wearing a mask does not protect the wearer. It protects others who are sharing air with the wearer. People who don’t wear a mask are basically advertising to those around them they couldn’t care less whether his/her fellow citizens catch COVID-19.
I think you’ll soon understand this fact within, oh, two to three weeks.
You actually believe this. And so do a lot of other people. The problem is that you and they are absolutely and fundamentally wrong. There are people who simply do not think they are at risk, nor that they are spreading the disease.
That would be a pretty broad reading. What has happened that would make it “impossible” to locate members of the legislature or otherwise make it “impossible” for them to attend?
If the word used was “difficult” or “impractical” or “improvident” then I could see that argument, but “impossible” is pretty strong medicine.
No doubt it’s a stretch. My point isn’t that it would be likely to succeed, but I certainly think there are people who would be willing to attempt that stretch.
having industry throttled with cap and trade during an emergency is a massively bad idea. It’s not even debatable. All they had to do was remove it from the vote.
if it’s an N-95 mask it protects both unless it’s an n-95 with a valve in it.
Yes, I actually believe that people who are at risk know who they are and can continue to shelter in place and use N-95 msks until the virus runs it’s course.
You on the other hand don’t appear to have an end-game of any kind. This virus is going to be around a long time. It’s been 9 weeks and the country can’t afford whatever fantasy is playing out in your head. We have the numbers down and we’re going back to work in a controlled manner. If there are outbreaks in certain areas then those areas can be addressed and not the whole country.
Incorrect. The Governor will simply proceed with unilateral Executive action on climate concerns. They’ve stopped nothing except legislation that would have served many more Oregonians than just those opposed to cap and trade.
You be sure to let me know when those become widely available to the public at large.
uh huh. The governor is going to screw industry in the the middle of a financial crisis. Sounds like a plan.
You can buy them right now on the internet. Haven’t checked local stores.
It seems to me to be a pretty reasonable enactment for emergency powers. The Gov gets to call an emergency for 30 days. That’s plenty of time for the legislature to come back and have the people’s representatives decide whether to extend it. If it is truly impossible to meet (say a nuclear war) then that is waived.
If some members of the legislature are refusing to attend, then the sergeant at arms can compel their attendance. If they flee to another state and extradition warrants are in the works, then it is now “impossible” to find them in the prescribed statutory time I would concede.
Frankly, I think that is much better than allowing one person to keep a perpetual state of emergency active.
For example? In theory that sounds nice, but it just isn’t going to happen if the Republicans decide not to show up.
To follow up, what in these laws in Oregon or any other state prevents a governor from saying that there is a “state of emergency” because of a drug epidemic or a drunk driving epidemic or (to get even more political) a gun epidemic or abortion epidemic?
It seems like if you get the right whore experts to testi-lie in court you can justify any of these things.
The power is pretty clear. Go to their house and arrest them and drag them to the floor of the legislature. If there is no political will to do that, then that doesn’t create an impossibility.
Two points:
-
EVERYBODY is at risk. Some are at greater risk, some at lesser, but nobody is at zero risk.
-
People have an unfortunate tendency to believe that bad stuff happens to other people, especially the wrong sort of other people. There are still plenty of Americans who think that God will protect them, or that this is a disease only of crowded cities, or that only “urban” people (that’s code for poor and non-white) are at risk, or that this whole pandemic is a fake crisis, or any number of other misguided beliefs. Until the disease hits squarely in their community or their family, they won’t believe they are at risk, and they won’t take precautions for themselves or for the people around them.
The internet is awash in counterfeit N95 masks or masks of dubious quality; most known-reliable sources I’m familiar with are out-of-stock indefinitely. Locally, the only place I know that has them in stock is a medical supply that is selling them at $10/each, which makes them prohibitively costly if they cannot be reused (and home sterilization methods can be shaky: alcohols sprays seriously degrade filter efficiency, e.g.). Even hospitals and other medical facilities are still experiencing intermittent shortages and difficulties, so no, they’re not readily available yet to most ordinary people.
So? That applies to every disease. The vast majority survive this virus.
this is a racist rant and serves no purpose other than to feed a bigoted mindset.
People have patiently waited over 2 months to maintain control of medical assets. This has been attained and they need to go back to work. It’s not an option.
Nothing is out of stock indefinitely and your cite is from a newspaper that in noway validates the on-going supply chain. The US military has contracted 39 million n-95 masks domestically over the next 3 months and we’re importing another 166 million.
You’re entitled to your opinion, of course. Everyone has one. But that’s all you’ve expressed.
In fact, the majority of citizens in Oregon support climate change action. Again, this is not a binary choice as you seem inclined to use in your posts. There are ways to address climate change concerns without “screwing industry,” as you put it. But we’re not discussing climate change remediation strategies in this thread.
Unless you brought enough for the whole class, meaning every citizen in the United States who may be exposed to the breath of another citizen, as well as enough for those citizens to change those masks as often as necessary, this is an irrelevant and meaningless point.
You do not get to decide who lives and who dies. This is a public health emergency. The Governor is tasked with protecting the welfare of Oregon citizens – all Oregon citizens – both their health and their economic well being. Health comes first. She’s already working to reopen industries that can be reopened safely. ‘Safely’ means no large gatherings of people indoors. Like in churches. She’s doing her job, and the Oregon legislature should be ashamed if they are not willing to assist her. Ill informed, cow county circuit court judges who are agenda-driven and not cognizant of the science of pandemics should also be ashamed. Their ignorance endangers us all.
I suspect Governor Brown has already accomplished her goal of buying more time to do what must be done. You act like she is sitting on her hands. She’s not, and your failure to recognize that is telling.
Personally, I have no problem with people gathering in their churches during a public health emergency that requires physical distancing, provided they are willing to stay in those churches and foresake public interaction for the entirety of a quarantine period.
No, it was a rant about racism. Its purpose was to point out a bigoted mindset.
…who happen to be Facebook friends with the pastor leading the suit against the state. I guess we just have to trust there’s no bias.
Didn’t know that, but not surprised. A scummy bit of icing on the rotten, stinking cake.