5 ms·
Texas governor bans all vaccine mandates, including from private businesses
- juanani 5y agoWow, finally someone showed some balls. Had to be Texas. Never thought someone doing something sensible would receive such hatred from the Ars cesspool. Holy load of twitterbots.
- siruncledrew 5y agoThis whole clusterfuck of states vs. the federal government on vaccination requirements is a big clog in the pipes and a bunch of unnecessary headache. Realistically, at what point is the US at "terminal velocity" on vaccination?
- tharne 5y agoI'm starting to think pushing more decisions to the state level is the only way to cool things off in the U.S. Rather than having these life or death battles for control of the federal government, letting people eventually self-sort into states that align with their values may be a more workable path forward. It's not perfect, but it's better than what's going on now and what the current situation could eventually escalate to.
- seanmcdirmid 5y agoI don't know. Panhandle Idahoans clogging Eastern Washington hospitals because they tended against vaccination still makes it our problem. As long as people can move freely across state borders, a national policy would be more effective than a state by state one.
- rsj_hn 5y agoA national vaccine mandate requires enabling legislation, not executive orders. Yes, congressional law trumps state law but executive orders do not. This view that Biden can issue an executive order and break lease agreements or union contracts, or local state regulations all across the country is really dangerous. We do not have a king, but it seems a lot of people really want the president to legislate via decree as long as they agree with the decree. That is a very dangerous belief.
- seanmcdirmid 5y agoBlame Article Two of the Constitution for giving presidents such power. Also most rules on work place safety have been done via executive agency, not via congressional legislation.
- rsj_hn 5y agoBoth of these statements are false, but since you provided no rationale or examples, you'll have to wait until this executive order is thrown out like the one banning evictions. Trying to tie vaccine mandates to workplace safety is a howler (https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/572149-bidens-wildly-unconstitutional-vaccine-mandate https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/572149-bidens-wildly-u...) but we will need to wait for the courts to toss this.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago> Both of these statements are false, but since you provided no rationale or examples So you claim without rationale or examples. > you'll have to wait until this executive order is thrown out like the one banning evictions. The eviction ban had nothing to do with workplace safety. It doesn't come under the executive's power to manage federal contracts and workplace safety via OSHA. In fact, it is much more grounded as an executive order than most of the other executive orders dealt out in the past 8 years.
- rsj_hn 5y agoThe executive order is for all employers that employ more than 100 workers, not federal contracts. But even federal contracts can't be amended by executive decree once they are signed. But if you are so certain that the EO is constutional all you will need to do is wait.
- davidf18 5y agoAuthor of that cited article is with the very conservative Heartland Institute. Protecting vaccinated patients from being infected through vaccine breakthrough by unvaccinated patients is clearly a health and safety rule which is under OSHA. Unvaccinated employees because they are much more likely to become infected, and infectious for longer periods of time than vaccinated employees, present a biohazard risk to vaccinated employees. The Heartland author article did not even mention health and safety and biohazards.
- 908B64B197 5y agoJust send them back. Or bill them an extra out-of-state premium.
- seanmcdirmid 5y agoHospitals are not run or funded by the state, so that wouldn't make sense. Northern Idaho and Western Montana have long relied on hospitals in more urban Spokane. But times like these show a huge disconnect between public health policy (to keep space in ICUs open), and states that rely on ICU capacity in other states and so aren't worried about conserving it.
- TimedToasts 5y agoThat's really how the US is intended to work.
- over_bridge 5y agoDoes it work though? It's crazy to see a president elected and still be utterly powerless to implement their agenda since they're blocked at senate and state level
- dham 5y agoIt's supposed to be hard for stuff to get passed. It's designed that way. As much as people look down on the founding fathers now, they were actually pretty smart.
- dham 5y agoLol. I mean that was the whole point of the states. Then the federal government gained too much power. Why the federal government has policies that affect Florida the same as North Dakota is asinine
- blip54321 5y agoRegulating private businesses like this feels anti-Texas. Governing by executive fiat also feels anti-Texas. I'm not sure what's going on in Texas, but I miss the small government, freedom-loving Texas.
- lotsofpulp 5y agoAssuming Texas was a small government, freedom loving state, one would think they would be one of the first to roll out legal marijuana. Or allow purchasing liquor at grocery stores. Or not require students to recite the pledge of allegiance. Or the Texas pledge of allegiance.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago> Or not require students to recite the pledge of allegiance. Or the Texas pledge of allegiance. Note that they can't require the pledge. But Texas is unique in requiring an explicit parent opt out rather than letting students decide for themselves, which I doubt this will pass constitutional muster when finally tested (well, with a future court that isn't overwhelmingly conservative).
- blip54321 5y agoI have to agree with most of those, with two exceptions: - Marijuana isn't really on the same axis. It only becomes the same axis once you allow _all_ drugs -- cocaine, opium, etc. Once you ban one drug, government has control over which drugs are legal or illegal. - You don't need to align 100% to be an outlier in a given direction. Zoning, gun ownership, freedom-of-speech, and a hundred other issues collectively make up this particular ideological axis. No one will align 100%. The point, though, is that small-government freedom-loving is a core part of the Texas identity. It's what Texas is about. It's strange to see it this far distorted. Mandating masks or vaccines by state control? That's not Texas culture. Preventing businesses from making such mandates for their employees? That's also not Texas culture.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago>- Marijuana isn't really on the same axis. It only becomes the same axis once you allow _all_ drugs -- cocaine, opium, etc. Once you ban one drug, government has control over which drugs are legal or illegal. It is on the same axis that alcohol is on. Actually, marijuana is far safer and less problematic for society. There is no logical reason to allow all drugs if you allow marijuana. It is pretty evident that different drugs pose different risks to society, and marijuana is pretty far down the list. I would even rank sugar and saturated fats as more dangerous to society. >- You don't need to align 100% to be an outlier in a given direction. Zoning, gun ownership, freedom-of-speech, and a hundred other issues collectively make up this particular ideological axis. No one will align 100%. That was my point. Some people like to think of Texas (and Republican states in general) as having more freedoms and having a "small" government, yet reality shows they lack many freedoms for things that have no effect on others, such as marijuana and abortion. In reality, they are no more free than any other place, and I would argue less free for many people in their day to day lives. Another one that just came to mind is Texas bans gambling.
- help_quanted 5y agoAnother thing in common with the Taliban Greg Abbot has going for him.