Everyday Erinyes #215

 Posted by at 8:07 am  Politics
May 162020
 

Experts in autocracies have pointed out that it is, unfortunately, easy to slip into normalizing the tyrant, hence it is important to hang on to outrage. These incidents which seem to call for the efforts of the Greek Furies (Erinyes) to come and deal with them will, I hope, help with that. As a reminder, though no one really knows how many there were supposed to be, the three names we have are Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone. These roughly translate as “unceasing,” “grudging,” and “vengeful destruction.”

I have another project which i am not going to be able to finish this week, but when I found this, I thought it was a great opportunity to reinforce a point I have been trying to make for years now. People talk constantly about the American justice system, how it works, how to reform it, when in fact there is no such thing. No single thing. Besides the Federal government, there fifty states, and, oh yeah, 7 territories (some of which are uninhabited), but any or all of which have or could have theoir own systems. I sometimes nod to counties and cities – but I would never have guessed that in the United States, we have more than 90,000 governments, had not Professor Swindell researched it – through the Census Bureau, no less – and cited it here (another reason the Census is so very important.) When one wants to talk about reforming justice system(s), this is a number to be reckoned with.

But it’s also pertinent to everyday, and not-so-everyday occurrences, such as pandemics. And I hope this article will give each of us, in our own separate circumstances, better insight into just who is in charge here.
================================================================

Who’s in charge of lifting lockdowns?

When is the right time to wave the green flag? Yellow Dog Productions/Getty Images

David Swindell, Arizona State University

In a nation with more than 90,000 governments, responses to the coronavirus pandemic have highlighted the challenges posed by the United States’ system of federalism, where significant power rests with states and local governments. Wisconsin’s Supreme Court just overturned their governor’s order for residents to stay at home – and then several cities and counties imposed their own restrictions, very similar to the governor’s rules.

So who’s running the show?

I am a scholar of how different levels of government interact and work together to deliver public services, and my answer is: It depends.

At the national level, President Donald Trump has both told the 50 states to fend for themselves, and also claimed to have the authority to force states to “reopen.”

In the absence of nationwide coordination and leadership, governors have made their own decisions about how to contain the spread of the virus. Their decisions apply only to their own states, making the country a patchwork of varying efforts.

And as state governments start to lift their lockdown restrictions to varying degrees, the patchwork gets even more complicated. Then factor in the powers and responsibilities of more than 3,000 counties, nearly 20,000 municipalities and almost 13,000 public school districts around the country, and it becomes clear that the answer to “Who’s in charge?” is not so simple.

Who actually has the power to make binding decisions mostly depends on two factors. First, there’s what’s being decided: Is it about public health, police, hospitals, schools, barbershops or other businesses? Second: It depends on the state.

All 50 states, and lots more local governments within each of them, have voices in how the country reopens after the coronavirus lockdown. Vectorios2016/Getty Images

Local control

Historically, the U.S. has divided responsibilities for different services and functions across levels of government, so they could be tailored to regional preferences where possible.

For instance, jails are run locally or by counties; businesses get municipal and state licenses. Similarly, animal control laws, zoning and pothole repairs are typically handled by local governments, not at state or federal levels. States typically regulate businesses and industries, oversee welfare programs and manage major highways.

The national government handles things where widespread coordination and standards are important, like national defense, Social Security, space exploration and trade between states.

Before the Great Depression, state and national government duties were more clearly differentiated. But since the 1930s, this system has evolved, and the distinctions between which levels do what have blurred and blended.

For instance, states are in charge of public K-12 schools and public universities, but the federal government ensures school districts comply with rules about equal access for all students, and provides grants to support needy children and university research.

Likewise, state governments build and maintain the interstate highways, but the federal government pays many of the costs.

Today, this mixing of responsibilities has made difficult a nationally coordinated response to a pandemic whose effects are mostly local. State and local officials have tried to respond as best as possible, but they do not have the information or buying power of the federal government.

The federal government may claim to be able to shut down the economy, but the truth is that states are the ones responsible for regulating the businesses that operate within their boundaries. So the federal government can’t order states to close down or reopen their businesses.

On the other hand, the president or Congress can decide to give more money to states that go along with federal requests, and potentially cut funding to states that don’t.

States depend on federal money for a wide range of programs related to criminal justice, education and highways, so this type of influence can be very effective.

State highway departments do the construction, but much of the money comes from the federal government. AP Photo/Carlos Osorio

Which state?

The second important element comes from another aspect of American federalism: The Constitution ensures that states not only retain powers beyond the federal government’s; they are also very independent from each other. Each state can develop its own policies and systems for delivering the services its residents need.

That means there could be 50 different approaches to combating a pandemic that does not stop at state boundaries. And therefore, the state with the most lax standards may be the one setting the protection level for the whole nation. For instance, the state of Arizona is rapidly relaxing its stay-at-home rules, even allowing restaurant customers to dine inside. Hair salons and theaters are also reopening. Neighboring California is remaining mostly closed, though people can travel freely across the state lines.

As if that weren’t muddy enough, each state relates differently to its local governments. Constitutionally speaking, there are only two levels of government in the U.S.: the national level and the states. Courts and lawmakers have determined that local governments are extensions of states, with varying levels of independence.

In most states, local governments must seek permission from their state legislature before making new regulations, like governing drone flights, or creating a new tax, such as on short-term home rentals. Other states take a different approach and allow municipal governments to take on whatever responsibilities are not expressly reserved to the state government by that state’s constitution.

All this means that responses to the pandemic vary not just from state to state, but also within states.

The way these overlapping authorities play out is relatively easy to see when looking at how school districts, one of several types of local governments, responded to the coronavirus outbreak. In most states, local districts acted on their own. In general, it took a week or two before state departments of education ordered statewide school closures, which affected those local districts that hadn’t already shut their doors.

It took as much as three weeks for states to issue general orders or recommendations for residents to shelter in place – though in some states those instructions never came, even though all the nation’s schools were closed.

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp greets President Donald Trump in early March. AP Photo/Alex Brandon

A patchwork of rules

As states begin to reopen, similarly confusing processes are happening in reverse.

While many state governments have now begun to loosen restrictions, some communities within those states have wanted to keep their local shelter-in-place orders in effect because they remain concerned about public health. In Georgia, local efforts to maintain restrictions have been overruled by the governor’s office. The Texas Republican governor has relaxed the statewide rules and explicitly said his reopen orders override any local restrictions.

Utah never established a shelter-in-place order and relied only on recommendations. Urban communities in the state set their own restrictions, and the legislature responded with efforts to limit the ability of local governments to put such measures in place.

Colorado is taking a different approach as the state relaxes its restrictions by explicitly allowing local governments to determine if they want their restrictions to differ from the state standard.

This diversity of precautions and actions can also be seen as one of the strengths of federalism, because it allows the public to see how different responses may affect how quickly the virus spreads. The local and state decisions are creating experimental laboratories for finding different ways to move back into a fully operational economy.

And that’s why your barbershop is still closed while the one in the next town or next state over is already open again.

[Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter.]The Conversation

David Swindell, Associate Professor of Public Affairs, Arizona State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

=>================================================================
Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone, it’s a sad thing to be a Democrat in a state with a Republican governor who is willing to let the whole state die rather than displease Trump*. But it’s almost equally sad to be a Democrat in a state with a Democratic Governor (who has brains), yet live in a Republican-dominated county which thinks it knows best. At least my county knows enough to apply for a waiver before re-opening every restaurant – but I guess I won’t be eating out for many, many months (not that I did much – but I did like knowing it was an option.) And heaven help our high school graduates.

The Furies and I will be back.

Share
May 142020
 

The world is dealing with an unprecedented health crisis caused by a new virus. With new insights in the way COVID19 spreads, in the way the virus behaves and in the way to deal with the pandemic every day, it is now more important than ever to safeguard the information we share is accurate and fact-based. We have to inoculate ourselves against the fake news and misinformation that infect our newsfeeds and timelines at this crucial moment by fact-checking.

For the duration of the pandemic, I will try to give you an overview of the main issues in CoronaCheck, an Australian email newsletter with the latest from around the world concerning the coronavirus.*


THOSE ANTI-VAXXERS AGAIN

Australia’s professional Rugby’s preparations to get back to business was somewhat hampered by the refusal of two Queensland NRL players refusing to have a flu shot, mandated by the Queensland Government, for which they were stood down.

In response to the mandate, Shanelle Cartwright, the wife of one of the players, took to Instagram to say the edict had entered “scary territory”. “Especially considering the flu shot has been proven to increase the incidence of corona viruses by 36%,” she posted on Instagram.

However, fact-checkers at factcheck.org and Lead Stories, as well as scientists at Health Feedback, have found there to be no evidence that the flu jab increases a person’s risk of being diagnosed with COVID-19. The “question of whether the flu vaccine causes an increased risk of coronavirus infection requires more scientific studies to answer” (Health Feedback).

As Health Feedback found, the claim seems to rely on a January 2020 study which showed individuals who received the flu vaccine had a higher chance of contracting the seasonal coronaviruses that lead to the common cold. But these viruses are not the same as the novel coronavirus, which causes COVID-19. And the study itself states that “vaccinated personnel did not have significant odds of respiratory illnesses”.

A second study was also used to support the claim but looked only at children. It suggested an increased risk of non-influenza viruses among kids who were vaccinated but it doesn’t mention an increased risk for seasonal coronavirus infection, according to Sheena Sullivan, an associate professor at Melbourne’s Doherty Institute.

Update: Both players are now allowed to play again; one player because he took the jab – as two other protesters did before him – the other because he showed an allergic reaction to a previous flu jab.

 

MY MASK IS KILLING ME

Image source: Facebook

Recently face-mask wearers may have been alarmed by a Facebook post or news article claiming that face masks could cause hypercapnia or hypoxia if worn for too long.

One viral post presents the apparent symptoms of hypercapnia, which is a form of respiratory failure involving a build-up of carbon dioxide in the bloodstream, and states “it can be caused by rebreathing your own exhaled CO2 by wearing a mask continually”.

Reuters found this claim to be partly false, citing the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as saying that while CO2 could build up in a face mask over time, it would likely be tolerable and result in a headache, rather than the more severe symptoms of hypercapnia shown in the Facebook post.

Meanwhile, fact-checkers at Snopes have debunked a Nigerian newspaper column by “Dr Dennis A Castro B” which claimed the prolonged use of face masks could lead to hypoxia with symptoms of discomfort and the “loss of reflexes and conscious thought”.

“Ultimately, the impact of a mask on its wearer depends on the wearer’s health, any pre-existing respiratory illnesses, the type of mask, and the length of time the person wears it,” Snopes found. “In most instances, the effects of prolonged cloth mask usage are small.”

 

COVID APP

Image source: Facebook

Australia, like many other countries around the world, has developed a telephone app to trace COVID-19 infection. Prime Minister Scott Morrison has said that while he wants 40 per cent of Australians to download the government’s COVIDSafe phone app he will not make it compulsory.

But a Facebook post shared more than 34,000 times claims that while the Federal Government may not make downloading the app mandatory, private businesses could pressure individuals to install the app on their phone, on post giving examples such as a supermarket refusing entry if an individual hasn’t got the app on their phone.

The post points to a privacy impact assessment carried out by a law firm on behalf of the government which did acknowledge concerns that individuals could in some circumstances be pressured to download the app.

But fact-checkers at AAP found that those concerns were directly addressed by the Biosecurity (Human Biosecurity Emergency) (Human Coronavirus with Pandemic Potential) (Emergency Requirements—Public Health Contact Information) Determination 2020, which prohibits a person from requiring another person to download the app. It also prohibits someone from refusing a person entry to premises or from refusing to enter into an employment contract, if they haven’t downloaded the app.

Not complying with the Biosecurity determination may be a criminal offence, punishable by a maximum of five years in prison.

While Australia has this safeguard built-in with the Biosecurity determination, other countries seeking to implement similar apps may have other safeguards in place.

 

COVID PATENT

Image source: Facebook

Fact-checkers at Reuters have debunked a claim, made in a video viewed more than 2.6 million times, that patents for the novel coronavirus have existed since 2006 and were “perfected” in November 2019.

However, the two patents, presented as “proof” that pharmaceutical companies have known about and concealed the novel coronavirus for years, are for SARS, which is caused by SARS-CoV-1, rather than COVID-19, which is caused by SARS-CoV-2.

The fact-checkers also note “[Its] application for the patent was neither hidden nor part of a conspiracy as it was for a different virus strain entirely.”

 

DOCTOR ON THE LOOSE

Image source: Facebook

Dr Buttar, a healthcare professional who keeps himself occupied by spreading misinformation, is featured in the item above about the existence of apparent patents for the novel coronavirus, but he’s also been fact-checked for a claim he made regarding flu vaccines.

“The studies clearly show that if you’ve had a flu shot you’re going to test positive for COVID-19,” Dr Buttar said in an interview posted to Facebook.

Fact-checkers at Reuters and AFP have found that claim to be incorrect. As one US expert, John Sanders, of Wake Forest Baptist Health, told AFP Fact Check: “I’m happy to say this is unsubstantiated rubbish.”

It turned out that of the studies cited by Dr Buttar as “proof” of his claim was conducted on cats in 1984 — 35 years before COVID-19 was identified and became a pandemic. The second study cited by Dr Buttar was published seven years before the outbreak of COVID-19.

 

FROM WASHINGTON, D.C.

Jimmy Kimmel has “apologised” on Twitter after wrongly suggesting US Vice-President Mike Pence had offered to carry empty boxes to the door of a healthcare centre as part of a delivery of personal protective equipment.

A clip aired by Late night television host Kimmel on May 7 appeared to show Mr Pence suggesting he carry empty boxes “for the camera” after he had helped carry a couple of full boxes.

“Mike Pence pretending to carry a big box of PPEs into a hospital is the perfect metaphor for who he is and what he’s doing: a big box of nothing, delivering another box of nothing,” Kimmel said during the program.

But as fact-checkers at the Washington Post, Snopes, Lead Stories, USA Today and PolitiFact found, the clip had been edited. It showed that Mr Pence suggested he could carry the empty boxes “for the camera” after carrying in some full ones but the door of the van closed and Pence didn’t carry any of the empty boxes left in the van.

The fact checks prompted Kimmel to delete the clip from Twitter and issue an apology of sorts. “It would appear that [Mr Pence] was joking about carrying empty boxes for a staged publicity stunt,” Kimmel tweeted. “The full video reveals that he was carrying full boxes for a staged publicity stunt. My apologies. I know how dearly this administration values truth.”

The picture in Kimmel’s Tweet shows a van with a large number of apparently empty boxes left after the full ones were taken out. So this filming of Pence, without a face-mask, delivering PPE material was certainly designed as a publicity stunt based on a few full boxes instead of a whole van filled with material.

 

Things that don’t cure and/or prevent COVID-19

#23: Drinking sugarless black tea at dawn

“Tea cannot protect one from infection with COVID-19.” – Dr Moses Masika, a virologist at the University of Nairobi, as quoted by Africa Check

 

*The facts in this article are derived from the Australian RMIT ABC Fact Check newsletters which in turn draw on their own resources and those of their colleagues within the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN), of which RMIT ABC Fact Check is a member.

Share
May 132020
 

Yesterday a panel of experts testified about COVID-19, aka Trump* virus in the Senate.  They demonstrated that criminal Fuhrer Trump and the Republican Reich have been lying.  They are so full of Trump* shit that their eyes have turned orange.

0513TrumpVirusHearing

Two of the federal government’s top health officials painted a grim picture of the months ahead on Tuesday, warning a Senate panel that the coronavirus pandemic was far from contained, just a day after President Trump declared that “we have met the moment and we have prevailed.”

The officials — Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, and Dr. Robert R. Redfield, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — predicted dire consequences if the nation reopened its economy too soon, noting that the United States still lacked critical testing capacity and the ability to trace the contacts of those infected.

“If we do not respond in an adequate way when the fall comes, given that it is without a doubt that there will be infections that will be in the community, then we run the risk of having a resurgence,” said Dr. Fauci, the longtime director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who is at the forefront of efforts to find a coronavirus vaccine.

If states reopen their economies too soon, he warned, “there is a real risk that you will trigger an outbreak that you may not be able to control,” which could result not only in “some suffering and death that could be avoided, but could even set you back on the road to trying to get economic recovery.”… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <NY Times>

Here’s some coverage of the Senate and more.

Fauci Clashes In Tense Moment At Senate Hearing

Criminal Fuhrer Trump* fears that keeping the economy shuttered will cost him any possibility to steal the White House again. How many people will he murder in the process? How many will be children?

Robert Reich has Republican motives down cold.

Robert Reich: The Real Reason Trump Wants to Reopen the Economy


The Reich on the left Robert Reich is right. The Reich on the right, the Republican Reich cares for money and power. They consider killing YOU part of their plan!

RESIST!!

Share
May 132020
 

It’s another tired day here in the CatBox.  It’s a WWWendy day.  I’m ready to go back to bed.  Happy Hump Day to all.

Jig Zone Puzzle:

Today’s took me 3:23 (average 5:02).  To do it, click here.  How did you do?

Cartoon:

Trump* Virus Update:

05113TrumpVirusMap

Cases: 1,411,018
Deaths: 83,558
Recovered: 298,641

Short Takes:

From The New Yorker: Former President Barack Obama said on Monday that he is unconcerned about Donald Trump accusing him of “the greatest crime in American history” because Attorney General Bill Barr does not prosecute criminals.

“At first, when I heard that he was accusing me of being the worst criminal ever, I have to admit I was a little rattled,” Obama said. “But then I remembered Barr’s don’t-prosecute-crimes policy, and I was pretty chill about it.”

Obama said that he was unsure what crime Trump was accusing him of committing, “but I’m pretty sure I never lied to the F.B.I. or anything as serious as that—so I’m good.”

Andy, I fear Obama may be screwing the pooch on this one. When Barrf refuses to prosecute criminals, if applies only to the Republican Reich. Barrf prosecutes innocent Democrats with glee!  RESIST!!

From YouTube (MSNBC Channel): Democrats’ Focus On Essential Workers In Draft Of New Relief Bill

Even though it doesn’t matter, I had the privilege to vote for Liz in Oregon’s primary last week. I hope Biden utilizes her plans. and policies!  RESIST!!

From YouTube (a blast from the past): CSN&Y – Carry on 1969

Ah… the memories!  RESIST!!

Vote Blue No Matter Who Top to Bottom!!

Share

A Historic Decision

 Posted by at 10:51 am  Politics
May 122020
 

The nation’s highest court is divided into two segments.  SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) has four Justices: John Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonja Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan.  SCROTUS (Republican anti-Constitutional VD) has five Injustices.  John “no stare decisis” Roberts, Pervert Teabag Thomas, Samuel “Scalia Jr.” Alito, Neil “they stole my seat from Merrick Garland” Whoresuch, and Brett Pervert KavaNazi.  They have a historic decision to make about whether criminal Fuhrer Trump* may continue to hide records of his financial crimes.

0512Supreme-Court

It seems that every 23 years, or about once in a generation, the Supreme Court considers whether presidents must abide by the rules that govern other citizens. In 1974, it unanimously required President Richard M. Nixon to turn over tapes of conversations in the Oval Office. Twenty-three years later, in 1997, it unanimously required President Bill Clinton to respond to a sexual harassment suit.

On Tuesday, almost exactly 23 years after the ruling in the Clinton case, the court will confront an equally significant showdown, this one over President Trump’s efforts to block demands from two House committees and New York prosecutors for his tax returns and other financial information.

The earlier cases were argued in the courtroom, with only those attending able to hear them live. Tuesday’s arguments will be heard by telephone because of the coronavirus pandemic, and the public will be able to listen in…

Inserted from <NY Times>

If you wish to listen in, here is the live broadcast.

Listen Live: Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments In Trump Financial Records Cases


Rachel Maddow interviewed David Enrich.  Like the majority of Court watchers, he thinks Trump* does not stand a chance.

Significant Financial Secrets At Stake For Trump In SCOTUS Case

I fear that David Enrich may well be wrong. As obviously open and shut the case against criminal Fuhrer Trump* is, the Nazi Injustices of SCROTUS (Republican anti-Constitutional VD) may all goose-step with their beloved Fuhrer.

RESIST!!

Share