6 ms·

This whole clusterfuck of states vs. the federal government on vaccination requirements is a big clog in the pipes and a bunch of unnecessary headache. Realist

This 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 ago
I'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 ago
  I 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 ago
    A 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 ago
      Blame 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 ago
        Both 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 ago
        The 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 ago
        Author 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 ago
    Just send them back. Or bill them an extra out-of-state premium.
    - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      Hospitals 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 ago
  That's really how the US is intended to work.
  - over_bridge 5y ago
    Does 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 ago
      It'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 ago
  Lol. 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

tharne 5y ago

I'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 ago
I 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 ago
  A 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 ago
    Blame 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 ago
      Both 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 ago
        The 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 ago
        Author 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 ago
  Just send them back. Or bill them an extra out-of-state premium.
  - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
    Hospitals 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 ago
That's really how the US is intended to work.
- over_bridge 5y ago
  Does 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 ago
    It'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 ago
Lol. 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