Posted on by

I completely support this measure in Minneapolis Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. -- Galatians 6:7

Representative Ilhan Omar Mynett (D-MN) and state Attorney General Keith bin Ellison (D-MN) have endorsed a November ballot initiative that would abolish the Minneapolis Police Department and replace it with a new Department of Public Safety.

The initiative would remove language in the city charter that requires Minneapolis to keep a police department with a minimum number of officers based on population.

The city would then create a new agency responsible for ‘integrating’ public safety functions ‘into a comprehensive public health approach to safety.’ The new agency could have police ‘if necessary to fulfill the responsibilities of the department.’

Mrs Mynett argued, in an OpEd in the Star Tribune:

Charter change on Minneapolis public safety is needed

The amendment on November’s ballot lets citizens choose a more humane system.

By Ilhan Omar | August 31, 2021 | 11:41 AM CDT

Minnesota and the entire world watched in horror last May as George Floyd, a resident of my congressional district, had his life taken from him by the very officers who had sworn an oath to protect him. One of those officers is now in prison. But as Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said at the time, that verdict represented accountability, not justice, because justice implies restoration. “Now,” he told us, “the cause of justice is in our hands.”

What many don’t know is that the murder of George Floyd was not a one-off event. I remember witnessing my first police shooting as a teenager, where the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) put nearly 38 bullets into the body of a mentally ill man who was just released from an institution, didn’t speak a word of English, couldn’t respond to commands and was not of any imminent threat. Many of us, particularly people of color, have witnessed those kinds of killings in front of civilians far too often.

The truth is the current system hasn’t been serving our city for a long time. Right now, we expect the MPD to respond to all types of emergencies, from mental health crises, to domestic abuse, sexual abuse, and simple noise complaints and traffic stops. But the department simply is not equipped to deal with all these issues, which can lead to escalating tensions and even violence at the hands of police.

One of the biggest impediments to change is the Minneapolis Police Federation. Led by far-right Donald Trump supporter Bob Kroll until recently, the union routinely shields bad cops from any discipline. A recent Reuters investigation found that 9 out of 10 accusations of misconduct resulted in no punishment or intervention aimed at changing the officers’ behavior. The union also openly championed violent “warrior-style policing,” which treats any interactions with civilians like a war zone. These were the very tactics used against protesters in the wake of Floyd’s murder.

It looks to me like Minneapolis has become a war zone: with 61 homicides through the end of August, there have been two more murders in the city than at the same time last year, and last year saw a real spike due to the death of George Floyd. Robberies are up, 1,245 to 1,156, as are aggravated assaults, 1,975 to 2,030.

So, what would Mrs Mynett and Mr bin Ellison do about these killings, these crimes? Why, they’d send a social worker, or a crisis intervenor, or have some other #woke reaction. Of course, the number of reported crimes would actually decrease, because the people of the city would throw up their hands and say, “What’s the use?”

But murders would increase, because murder is a crime of evidence, not a crime of reporting: unless a killer has planned very well, it’s very difficult to dispose of a body, 100 to 300 lb of blood and tissue and bone, something which will start to stink in relatively short order. Bodies almost always get discovered.

Still, if that’s what the idiots good people in Minneapolis want, I say, let them have it, let them show us what an absolutely brilliant idea it is. After all, I don’t live there, so why would I care when they reap what they sow?

Posted on by

University of Cincinnati Medical Center, already 11% understaffed, could lose 30% of its nurses due to #VaccineMandates

Sometimes trending stories have multiplied so much that continuing to add links to older ones clutters them up, as it was with my earlier story about mask and vaccine mandates causing people to either quit or get fired from jobs which already have a shortage of people. We aren’t taking about hamburger flippers at McDonald’s, where replacements can be trained in a day — assuming those replacements do something really radical like show up for work — but school bus drivers, who have to have commercial driver’s licenses with a school bus or passenger endorsement, and certified nursing assistants (CNAs), who take several weeks to train, and who must pass a criminal background check, or registered nurses (RNs), who require at least a two year, Associates degree, or four year baccalaureate degree, before passing their boards.

But the hits keep on coming, and even the credentialed media have begun to tell the truth. From the Cincinnati Enquirer:[1]Hat tip to William Teach for the story.

    COVID-19: Union says 30% of UC Medical Center nurses could quit over vaccine mandate

    Terry DeMio | September 1, 2021 | 2:33 PM EDT

    Pushback against area hospital systems’ mandates for employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 continues with the latest coming from more than 100 nurses who say they’d quit before complying.

    A number of UC Medical Center nurses, responding to a union survey, indicated they would leave their jobs if the hospital system’s vaccine mandate is finalized.

    The Ohio Nurses Association survey was conducted immediately after UC Health and other area hospital systems announced they would mandate the COVID-19 vaccine for their employees. The survey, done Aug. 5-12, was made public Wednesday. Results show that 136 of 456 nurses who responded – balked at the mandate. The medical center has more than 1,500 nurses.

    The survey underscores the ongoing controversy over the region’s health systems requiring vaccinations, which at one point landed all six of them in local courts. A recruiter with St. Elizabeth Healthcare, another of the six health systems, recently told The Enquirer that the vaccine mandate had led some nurses to quit.

    “This places the medical center in a very difficult position, and it places the nurses in a very difficult position,” said Dominic Mendiola, labor representative for the nurses association. He said that UCMC has been at capacity on and off since July, and currently, 187 nursing positions are posted.

There’s a good deal more at the original, but the math is simple: if the University of Cincinnati Medical Center has 1,500 nurses[2]The article did not give the exact size of the nursing staff, so I have used the minimum, 1,500, in all of my calculations., and 187 open positions, that means UCMC is slightly over 11% understaffed. Add another 136 who say that they would quit if a vaccine mandate was put in place, and that brings UCMC to 19.15% understaffed.

But there’s more. If only 456 out of 1,500 nurses responded, a 30.4% response rate, that means we do not know what the percentage of vaccine resistant nurses is overall, but statistics allows us to assume, with a margin of error, that the sample is representative of the whole. If it is representative of the whole, and the 29.82% resistant rate is true throughout the entire staff, UCMC could lose 447 nurses, for a 37.58% job vacancy rate.

Of course, the hospital has medical care staff other than just doctors and nurses: there will be CNAs, respiratory therapists, X-ray technicians, pharmacy techs, custodians, lab techs, food service workers, etc, but the Enquirer story covered only RNs.

Now, I suspect that the 1,044 nurses who did not respond to the survey did not respond primarily because they didn’t really care, and the vaccine resistance level among them would be much smaller, but UC Health decided to piss off a lot of the staff:

    UC Health spokeswoman Amanda Nageleisen said that she doesn’t have data on employee vaccination rates. But she added: “We are proud of the thousands of our nurses, physicians and other employees who have been fully vaccinated.

    “The science supports their decision, and we applaud their willingness to step forward and advance the safety of our patients, staff and community,” Nageleisen said. “These survey results do not reflect the views of the majority of our 10,000 employees, including our 2,600 nurses across the UC Health system.”

Way to tell the staff who aren’t vaccinated that you are not proud of them and their work. Yeah, that’s going to make them happy with their jobs. Maybe, just maybe, it isn’t the smartest thing to do, when you are an already understaffed company, to show disrespect for, and try to run off, the people you do have.

Nurses are not stupid people. People can, do, and have washed out or flunked out of nursing school. People who have been graduated from nursing schools can, do, and have failed their boards. They can see when their employers are showing disrespect for them, they can see that they do have job opportunities, plenty of job opportunities with other employers. And the nurses who get vaccinated grudgingly, unwillingly, just to keep their jobs, are going to become poorer employees, because they will be angry with their employers.

This push for vaccine mandates will not end well.

References

References
↑1 Hat tip to William Teach for the story.
↑2 The article did not give the exact size of the nursing staff, so I have used the minimum, 1,500, in all of my calculations.
Posted on by

The #MaskMandates and #VaccineMandates are causing more problems than they would ever solve.

We have previously noted, many times, that people all over the country are resisting vaccine and mask mandates, and that these have, and will continue to have, the effect of creating a serious shortage of citical workers. From Newsweek:

1 in 8 Nurses Say They Haven’t Been Vaccinated and Don’t Plan to

By Katherine Fung | August 31, 2021 | 5:06 PM EDT

As the nation continues its efforts to ramp up vaccination rates, figures seem to lag not only among the public but also in hospitals, where one in eight nurses say they have not been vaccinated and aren’t planning on doing so.

A survey conducted between July 8 and 29 by the American Nurses Association (ANA) and American Nurses Foundation (ANF) found that among nearly 5,000 nurses, a quarter said they didn’t trust the vaccines or were unsure about the safety and effectiveness of the shots.

Of those who don’t intend on getting vaccinated, the main concerns included lack of information about long-term effects and vaccine safety, as well as mistrust in the information surrounding the vaccines’ development and approval.

Although the majority of nurses, 88 percent, are vaccinated, the proportion of vaccine-hesitant staff could present a problem for hospitals if vaccine mandates are issued for all healthcare workers.

Hospitals across the country are facing severe nursing shortages—an issue that existed before the pandemic but has been exacerbated by many leaving the field over the last 16 months due to burnout from caring for COVID patients.

The Biden administration has already required that nursing home staff be vaccinated in order for long-term care facilities to receive federal Medicare and Medicaid funding—a mandate that some in the industry have warned will pose “disastrous workforce challenges.”

There’s more at the original, but the article concludes with an absolutely laughable idea. It states that hospitals mandating vaccination could solve staffing shortages by raising pay, but with the already existing shortage of nurses, luring RNs from one hospital to another with higher pay just makes other hospitals raise their pay, and it still leaves shortages of nurses, though it might redistribute the shortages. If there aren’t enough nurses period, that’s just rearranging the deck chairs.

Then we have this, from NPR:

Chicago School Bus Drivers Have Quit In Droves Over COVID Vaccine Mandate

August 31, 2021 | 4:39 PM EDT

Chicago Public Schools says 10% of their school bus drivers quit on Friday as they’re unwilling to get mandated vaccines. The district is now offering cash to parents who drive their kids to school. . . . .

Chicago public school officials apologized for the cancellation (of bus routes), but say they were forced to do it for 2,100 students. That’s because in just one day, 70 bus drivers quit. The reason – according to district officials, these drivers didn’t want to get vaccinated, and the district was mandating it. Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot backs the school district’s decision.

Much of the credentialed media reports have avoided noting why there are shortages of bus drivers, because the media know that publishing that undermines the arguments for the mandates, but there have been a few that told the truth. Note that the sources above are from Newsweek and National Public Radio, not exactly known as evil reich wing sources.

Finally, there’s this:

Mu COVID Variant, Which Scientists Fear is Resistant to Vaccines, Detected in 39 Countries

by Samantha Lock | September 1, 2021

A new coronavirus strain has been declared a variant of interest by the World Health Organization (WHO) with mutations that may be resistant to vaccines.

Mu, or B.1.621, was first identified in Colombia and cases have since been recorded in 38 other countries, predominantly in South America and Europe.

“Since its first identification in Colombia in January 2021, there have been a few sporadic reports of cases of the Mu variant, and some larger outbreaks have been reported from other countries in South America and in Europe,” a weekly epidemiological update released by WHO on August 31 read.

Over 4,500 sequences (3794 sequences of B.1.621 and 856 sequences of B.1.621.1) have been recorded in 39 countries as of August 29, the report said, citing information uploaded to the GISAID Initiative, a global science initiative that provides open-access to genomic data of influenza viruses.

Although the global prevalence of the Mu variant has declined and is “currently below 0.1 percent” the prevalence in Colombia (39 percent) and Ecuador (13 percent) has “consistently increased,” the report reads. . . . .

The variant is listed as one of five “of interest” by the WHO, including Eta, Iota, Kappa and Lambda.

Four other variants “of concern” and considered as having potential to make the pandemic worse are listed as the Alpha variant (first recorded in England and seen in 193 countries), the Beta variant (now seen in 141 countries), Gamma in 91 and Delta in 170 countries.

I wonder when they are going to run out of Greek letters for new variants. But as stories crop up about the Lambda and Mu variants being resistant to the vaccines, the arguments for a vaccine mandates fail as well.

It seems pretty obvious: we are going to have some forms of COVID with us for years and years, and destroying our freedom and our society to fight it is the worst thing we can do.

Posted on by

Jill Filipovic is just hopping mad!

It was March 3, 2016, when uber-feminist Jill Filipovic published Dear Everyone Who Said Ruth Bader Ginsburg Should Retire: You Were Wrong: The Texas abortion case before the Supreme Court is just further proof that the justice knew what she was doing. Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt was before the Supreme Court, and, in the end, Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Ginsburg, Anthony Kennedy, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan formed the five member majority which invalidated some restrictions the Lone Star State placed on abortion.

Well, Justice Kennedy retired and Justice Ginsburg departed this mortal vale, and the seat left vacant when Justice Antonin Scalia died have been filled, by Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, all appointed by President Trump.

Miss Filipovic wrote:

Ginsburg, who many pundits were calling on to retire a little over a year ago, may be the justice who offers the best chance not only of overturning the law, but of writing a coherent and fair opinion laying out a detailed standard for challenging future abortion laws.

The argument for Ginsberg’s retirement was fairly straightforward: She was old, there was a midterm election looming in which Republicans were set to potentially take control of the Senate, and it was Obama’s last chance to appoint a liberal. And what if a Republican won in 2016? And again in 2020? Ginsburg, in her 80s, could be replaced by a conservative.

Ginsburg’s refusal to retire hinged on a few points: She still had all of her mental faculties, she was good at her job, and even the pre-midterm Senate wasn’t liberal enough to appoint someone as progressive as her. Besides, she’s a Supreme Court justice — have some respect and let her make the call.

“Who do you think President Obama could appoint at this very day, given the boundaries that we have?” Ginsburg told ELLE. “If I resign any time this year, he could not successfully appoint anyone I would like to see in the court. [The Senate Democrats] took off the filibuster for lower federal court appointments, but it remains for this court. So anybody who thinks that if I step down, Obama could appoint someone like me, they’re misguided. As long as I can do the job full steam…. I think I’ll recognize when the time comes that I can’t any longer. But now I can.”

So, Justice Ginsburg was concerned not the President Obama couldn’t get a liberal through, but that even if he tried with a stealth liberal like he did with Merrick Garland, the nominee wouldn’t be liberal enough for her.

When Miss Filipovic wrote, it was becoming clear that Donald Trump was in the lead for the Republican presidential nomination, and of course he could never defeat Hillary Clinton in the general election. The seat once held by Justice Scalia would be filled by someone nominated by incoming President Clinton.

This recent case offers the court an opportunity to clarify the “undue burden” standard, or craft a new one. Before Scalia’s death, there were fears the conservative wing of the court could use this case as a vehicle to overturn Roe v. Wade and dismantle abortion rights generally. Now, there is virtually zero chance of that happening; instead, the best-case scenario is that the liberal wing of the court triumphs and publishes an opinion making it more difficult for state legislators to cut off women’s access to safe, legal abortion, protecting abortion rights for at least the next generation.

The most likely candidate to write that opinion is Justice Ginsburg. And that should be enough for a clear ruling: She was absolutely right when she ignored the mostly male peanut gallery imploring her to hang up her robe, relied on her own supreme wisdom, and refused to retire.

I’m sure that the then-Miss Filipovic never, ever thought that it would be President Trump who would nominate the replacement for Mrs Ginsburg after she went to her eternal reward.

To the right is a screen capture of the now Mrs McCormick’s angry tweets of this morning. I chose a screenshot just in case she either deletes them — which is unlikely — or blocks me from seeing them, which she might do if she sees this article. The links to the original are for the first, second and third.

What has her so bitterly angry? From CNN:

Texas 6-week abortion ban takes effect after Supreme Court inaction

By Ariane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter | Updated 2:32 AM ET | Wednesday, September 1, 2021

(CNN) A controversial Texas law that bars abortions at six weeks went into effect early Wednesday morning after the Supreme Court and a federal appeals court failed to rule on pending emergency requests brought by abortion providers.

The lack of judicial intervention means that the law — which is one of the strictest in the nation and bans abortion before many people know they are pregnant — goes into force absent further court intervention.

The law allows private citizens to bring civil suits against anyone who assists a pregnant person seeking an abortion in violation of the ban.

No other six-week ban has been allowed to go into effect — even briefly.

“What ultimately happens to this law remains to be seen,” said CNN Supreme Court analyst and University of Texas Law School professor Steve Vladeck, “but now through their inaction the justices have let the tightest abortion restriction since Roe v. Wade be enforced for at least some period of time.”

The case comes as the justices are poised in the upcoming term to rule on the constitutionality of a Mississippi law that bars abortion at 15 weeks.

There’s more at the original.

Mrs McCormick, in the last of the three tweets I listed, complained about an “authoritarian court,” which leads me to ask: at what point would she favor authoritarianism herself? In her article The Importance of Being Honest: Sometimes we have to sacrifice for public health. But don’t deny the sacrifice itself, she expresses understanding that being forced to wear a facemask, something Republicans and libertarians see as an authoritarian dictate, is a burden, is a sacrifice, but sometimes that burden must be borne. She calls “proponents of stricter anti-Covid measures,” “a group I’m generally a member of,” and says:

The impulse to downplay inconvenient outcomes of one’s own position has been in full force throughout Covid, and with the school reopening + Delta, it’s gotten even more extreme. I keep hearing, for example, that wearing a mask is no big deal and anyone who complains about masking is probably a Covid denialist reactionary. This is pretty weird, because it seems to me to be obviously, demonstrably true that wearing a mask is an inconvenience and a personal and cultural sacrifice — it means you can’t fully read other peoples’ facial expressions, it impedes basic human interactions, it makes you break out, it irritates your face, it fogs up your glasses, and I find that when I wear one I start to feel a little disoriented after a while, especially inside under bright lights. Wearing a mask sucks! But it sucks far less than giving someone else Covid, or getting Covid yourself. And so of course, in scenarios where people are not all fully vaccinated and infection rates are high, we should continue wear masks inside. I wear masks inside and I think indoor mask-wearing for essential activities should be mandatory (I also think vaccines should be mandatory for inessential activities, like dining out).

She is, by her own words, willing to force people to bear the burden of mandatory vaccinations and mandatory masking. She recognizes the burdens being put on people, but believes that not getting vaccinated and not wearing a mask is a greater danger than being burdened by doing so, even against your will.

So, apply that logic to abortion. A woman gets pregnant, and does not want to be, does not want a child.[1]It is completely legal, in every state, for a mother to take her unwanted child to a police or fire station, or hospital, and leave him there, surrendering her parental rights, with no questions … Continue reading That is a burden to her, no doubt about it. Her solution: abortion.

But abortion is a burden as well. While it’s a financial burden, though not a great one, on the woman, it also places the burden of ‘relieving’ her burden onto the unborn child. His burden? A death sentence!

So, which is the greater burden: nine months of an unwanted pregnancy, or death for the child? Because, whether Mrs McCormick will admit it or otherwise, that is the exact comparison.

We have placed even greater burdens on people in the past; the United States has had a conscription system under which, though no one has actually been drafted since the 1970s, millions of men have been drafted in the past, and hundreds of thousands of them paid the ultimate price, in World War I, in World War II, in Korea and in Vietnam.[2]Full disclosure: though I was of draft age at the tail end of the Vietnam war, I was not called up due to a high lottery number. The burden of an unwanted pregnancy is far, far less than that of a soldier bleeding out his life’s blood in the rice paddies of South Vietnam.

We do not know how many children will be saved by the Texas law, though surely some will. Some pregnant women will travel to New Mexico or Oklahoma or Louisiana to be ‘relieved’ of their burdens, though hopefully fewer than would otherwise have had abortions in Texas clinics.

How will the Supreme Court rule on the Mississippi case? It is absolutely certain that the three justices appointed by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama will vote to overturn it. The left are deathly afraid that Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett will uphold the law, at least in some form. The Chief Justice? If he is going to be in the minority with the three liberal justices, he might just vote with the majority, so that he can assign the opinion, rather than Justice Thomas, assigning it to the Justice he believes will write the most restrictive opinion . . . probably himself. But predicting Supreme Court decisions has rarely been a money-winning game.

References

References
↑1 It is completely legal, in every state, for a mother to take her unwanted child to a police or fire station, or hospital, and leave him there, surrendering her parental rights, with no questions asked. Having a child she does not want does not mean that the mother must keep the child.
↑2 Full disclosure: though I was of draft age at the tail end of the Vietnam war, I was not called up due to a high lottery number.
Posted on by

Remember: you cannot trust Democratic governors. The left say they are for democracy, right up until the will of the voters goes against them

I lived in the Keystone State for fifteen years before moving back to Kentucky for my retirement, and I can assure you that I did not vote for Governor Tom Wolf (D-PA)!

    Gov. Tom Wolf will require masks in Pa. schools, sources say

    The governor could outline the proposed requirement at a 2 p.m. news conference about coronavirus measures in schools.

    by Justine McDaniel, Erin McCarthy, Andrew Seidman, and Maddie Hanna | Tuesday, August 31, 2021 | 2:11 PM EDT

    Masks will be required in all Pennsylvania schools, Gov. Tom Wolf said Tuesday, announcing a mandate days after the Republican-led legislature rejected his call to pass one via legislation.

    Aiming to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in schools, the order issued by the Department of Health requires face coverings indoors in all K-12 schools, both public and private, and licensed child care centers beginning next Tuesday.

    The mandate is a reversal for the Wolf administration, which had previously said it would leave decisions about how to reopen up to individual districts. In announcing the decision in a statement, the governor cited misinformation about mask-wearing that he said was “pressuring and intimidating school districts to reject mask policies.”

    It comes as many are already back in session, some with masks required and some without, and the rest are poised to start within days. Certain districts have already spent months battling over the mask question, which has stirred heated conflict among some parents.

There’s more at the original. But the issue is pretty simple: the people have rejected the mask mandates, but the Governor wants it, and he is going to use every means at his disposal to overrule the will of the public.

In May, Pennsylvania voters approved two constitutional amendments:

    The first proposed constitutional amendment will make it so that the state’s General Assembly could terminate or extend a disaster declaration at any time without approval from the governor. The Pennsylvania Constitution will have to be amended so that the disaster declaration power will be shared by the governor and the General Assembly.

    Previously, only the governor could declare the end of a disaster. According to state law, the General Assembly has the option to pass a resolution that would terminate the declaration, but the governor can still veto. If the assembly could gather support with a two-thirds majority, they could overturn the governor’s veto.

    This exact scenario played out last summer over the COVID-19 pandemic disaster declaration, when the state Supreme Court ruled that the Legislature could not overturn the governor’s declaration without his ability to then veto it.

    The second question proposed that the time limit on a disaster declaration be shortened from 90 days to 21 days unless the General Assembly votes to extend it.

As we have noted previously, Governor Wolf was very upset that local school boards, people elected by the voters, were choosing a different course than the one he favored.

    The Wolf administration implemented a school mask mandate last year without legislation, as it also did for a statewide masking requirement. But with this year’s reopening helmed by districts, Wolf said earlier this month that he would not mandate masks. The new mandate would be done under authority of the state’s disease control and prevention law, said one source.

In other words, the Governor believes he has found a legal loophole to get around what the state legislature and a majority of the voters wanted to do: restrict his executive authority to issue restrictions.

The people of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania have spoken, but that doesn’t matter to petty dictators like Tom Wolf.

And in the Bluegrass State, Governor Andy Beshear (D-KY) hopes to impose some restrictions himself, though the decision of the state Supreme Court requires that he work with the General Assembly this time:

    Beshear plans to call special law-making session soon to fight COVID-19

    By Jack Brammer | August 30, 2021 | 6:05 PM EDT

    Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear said Monday his goal is to call state lawmakers into a special session as soon as legislative leaders and he reach “a general consensus” on what steps to take to fight the raging coronavirus pandemic.

    He said it needs to happen soon but did not mention a specific date. Only the governor can call a special law-making session and set its agenda

    The Democratic governor and Republican legislative leaders are in negotiations over what actions should be taken to fight COVID-19, which Beshear said continues to hit the state “harder and harder.” He said a record 2,198 Kentuckians are now in the hospital with the virus, with a record 615 in intensive care units and a record 384 on ventilators. . . . .

    Asked about a rumor that he plans to call a special session to begin next week, Beshear said a session is needed to keep in effect the state of emergency for the pandemic he declared in March 2020.

    He said he will be pushing “for some other things.”

    He noted that schools that are shutting down now because of the virus need more flexibility on having non-traditional instruction days when students can do online work from home.

    The state education commissioner now can waive up to 10 so-called NTI days to count towards student attendance days in the school districts’ calendars.

    “I’m going to seek all the tools I can,” said Beshear. “I’m not going to hold off on calling a special session if I don’t get all of them.”

Some things actually make sense, such as allowing an exception to the NTI limit. Since the regular session of the legislature is just three months away, a special session could authorize some gubernatorial actions for up to 120 days, and then the regular session would take them up if the Governor wanted to continue them.

But one action the legislature will never approve is the odious mask mandate. If there was any one thing that the Governor forced last year that pushed the voters toward the tremendous surge for the GOP, it was the hated mask mandate. The Governor has already said that he would impose it again, if he could.

Technically, he could again . . . for thirty days. If he does, I will not comply, and I would guess that a bunch of other Kentuckians wouldn’t either.

Nevertheless, there’s a danger. As we have previously noted, despite being ordered to do so by the state Supreme Court, Phillip Shepherd, the Governor’s toady judge has not yet lifted him injunctions, and has ordered the Governor and Attorney General to present their arguments to him, on September 7th, on the Governor’s lawsuit seeking to have several of the restrictions placed on him by the General Assembly declared unconstitutional. The state Supreme Court left him very little room to do so, but Judge Shepherd makes up things as he goes along, and appears to be inclined, personally, to take Mr Beshear’s side on everything.

It really doesn’t matter whether you think mask or vaccine mandates are a wise idea; what ought to matter is that the voters have rejected politicians who have tried to impose authoritarian restrictions and regulations on a free people.

Posted on by

Steps in Choosing a Social Security Disability Attorney

When choosing a social security disability law firm Orlando-based, there are a few factors to look into. Social security disability attorneys belong to a distinct classification of law. The professionals assist customers with both physical and physiological disabilities. In most cases, such people are suited for specific jobs where it is challenging to apply for the undesired conditions. In some scenarios, a claim may prove fatal for an individual, leading to the individual being considered disabled for any purpose of social security. Below are ways to select a social security disability lawyer:

Select the proper lawyer

To be comfortable and satisfied with the lawyer, you need a serious and confident professional lawyer for your representation in the courtroom. The attorney of your choice must be experienced and reputed in the sector. The lawyer must be reliable and efficient to display evidence of succeeding in cases similar to your type.

Find information on the case procedure

The first step towards completing a successful social security matter is dependent on how you file the case. The main reason for engaging a lawyer is to get help and guidance on filing a social security issue. The professionals understand how to go about social security disability claimants and the rules and regulations to organize the case appropriately. Consider a lawyer who is authentic and well organized.

In handling your claim, the social disability attorney should be sympathetic and patient in the best way to help the claimants from each element. Special people are provided with a chance to demand a particular sum of money as alimony from the government or authorities to cater for daily expenses, as the individual cannot earn money for daily expenditures. In this case, you need to search for a professional and experienced social security disability attorney for you or your loved one in need of a lawyer’s services.

Posted on by

It’s a good thing that the government doesn’t have all of your health records! The left wishes that was different

It’s no surprise at all that the left and the statists would want the government to have your health records!

    Fractured record keeping leaves Philly hospitals unsure which patients are vaccinated

    A patchwork of vaccination record keeping has left hospitals with no easy way to be precise about which of their patients have received inoculations against COVID-19.

    by Jason Laughlin | Tuesday, August 31, 2021

    More than nine months into the effort to vaccinate Americans against COVID-19, the patchwork nature of vaccination records is keeping Philadelphia hospitals from getting clarity on whether patients have had the shot.

    “This is what everybody’s craving for,” said John Zurlo, division director of infectious disease at Thomas Jefferson University. “You’d hope we can get really accurate information about that and right now we really don’t get accurate information.”

    Temple University Hospital and Einstein Medical Center also reported having trouble obtaining accurate records this year, though coordination with the Philadelphia and Pennsylvania departments of health have improved the situation, hospital personnel said.

    Since vaccines were rolled out to the public earlier this year, doctors at Einstein have reported patients who are “100% sure” they were vaccinated not showing up in PhilaVax, the city database. Another record showed a patient to have gotten first doses in January and then again in April. . . . .

    Incorrect data entry may play a role in some of the record inaccuracy, said James Garrow, a spokesperson for the Philadelphia Department of Public Health. But the biggest causes of confusion are twofold: complications accessing the city’s vaccination records and the lack of a national COVID-19 vaccination database.

    “This has never been a problem in the past because there has never been such an immediate need for access to immunization records like we do for COVID vaccines,” Garrow said.

There’s more at the original, but the major point is one of which I am very glad: there is (supposedly) no national COVID-19 vaccination database.

Further down:

    Exchanging information with PhilaVax requires health-care providers to meet a federally outlined data-sharing standard. Most health-care systems meet that standard, Garrow said, but at least one large city hospital system, Jefferson, does not — though it is in the process of updating its system, hospital personnel said.

The federal government passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in 1996, and the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH) in 2009, yet the Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia still doesn’t meet “federally outlined data-sharing standard(s)”? What’s wrong with that picture?

    Fractured medical record keeping has been the subject of a decades-old policy debate. The 1996 Heath Information Portability and Accountability Act called for a national patient ID to create a central source for people’s medical records, but privacy concerns have kept a national registry from being created. Britain and Israel are among the countries that have such systems, said Tinglong Dai, professor of operations management and business analytics at the Johns Hopkins Carey Business School, which has made it easier to confirm vaccinations. The lack of a registry in the United States, he said, has become acutely problematic as people being asked for proof of vaccination have nothing but a card as documentation.

    A national registry would also ensure consistent quality, he said, rather than the patchwork of record keeping used across the country now.

    “This is definitely self-sabotaging,” Dai said. “I think there must be a significant portion of the population, including myself, who would really like to have that system so I wouldn’t have to carry around this card.”

Oh, woe is him, he has to carry around the card that he wants everybody else forced to carry! Well, I have such a card, because I was vaccinated months ago, I refuse to carry it around like some form of vaccine passport. If I go someplace, and they insist that I show them my vaccination card, whoever does so will receive a one-fingered salute; if they don’t want to let me in without showing my vaccination card, I don’t want to enter anyway, and most certainly don’t want to give them any of my money.

COVID-19 has become a hugely politicized disease, with the left trying to force the unwilling to comply, and the right sometimes trying to shame those who have chosen to be vaccinated. It might be more convenient to physicians if they had access to patients’ vaccination records, but they can always ask a patient if he has gotten the jab. It seems far more important to me that the government, at any level, not have this highly politicized information.

Posted on by

Mugshot and photo hypocrisy from the Lexington Herald-Leader

We noted on Sunday that the Lexington Herald-Leader declined to post the mugshot of Brent Dyer Kelty, a man previously convicted of “several prior felonies in Fayette County since 2010,” in their story about him being indicted for the murder of an infant. In that, the newspaper followed the McClatchy Mugshot Policy, despite the fact that Mr Kelty, even if acquitted of murder, is still a multiply convicted felon.

The McClatchy policy is due to the possibility that an accused person might not ever be convicted, and thus having his mugshot published could harm him later in life. Of course, someone’s name is far more easily searchable, and just printing the suspect’s name can have far wider implications. For instance, prospective employers who do their due diligence on an applicant, will be searching for his name, not his photo.

But it seems that the Herald-Leader has no compunctions about printing the photo of someone accused of, and convicted of, a simple misdemeanor:

    Woman who attended University of Kentucky pleads guilty in U.S. Capitol riot case

    By Beth Musgrave | August 30, 2021 | 1:21 PM EDT

    Gracyn Dawn Courtright, a University of Kentucky student, faces charges linked to the Capitol riot on Wednesday, Jan. 6, 2020. This photo was included in a criminal complaint filed against Courtright and allegedly shows her holding the “members only” sign. PHOTO VIA FBI.

    A woman from West Virginia who attended the University of Kentucky pleaded guilty Monday to charges related to entering the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6 riot.

    In federal court in Washington D.C., Gracyn Dawn Courtright pleaded guilty to a charge of entering and remaining in a restricted area, according to federal court records. She had faced more charges.

    Courtright will be sentenced Nov. 16. She could face up to six months in prison in addition to other fines and restitution.

There’s more at the original.

It might be complained that Miss Courtright is a convicted criminal now, but the Herald-Leader published the same photo on June 28th, before she was convicted of anything.

Miss Courtright is hardly the only one of the Capitol kerfufflers whose photo has been published by the Herald-Leader, even before they were convicted of anything. The newspaper had at least two articles on Lori Vinson, one of which was before she was even charged with any crimes, which featured her photos.

Both Miss Courtright and Mrs Vinson are facing maximum sentences of six months in jail; Mr Kelty is a multiply convicted felon looking at spending the rest of his miserable life in prison, but the Herald-Leader protected the photo of Mr Kelty. On March 3rd, the newspaper published a story which identified 12 Kentuckians by name, with photos of 10 of them — some difficult to identify — who were charged with crimes related to the demonstration, but at the time not convicted of anything.

The Herald-Leader also declined to publish the mugshots of two men sentenced to a year for their part in assaults during a Black Lives Matter protest in the city. Their crimes were more serious than any of the ones of which the Capitol kerfufflers were convicted.

Of course, the very liberal Herald-Leader probably sees the Capitol kerfuffle as a hideous and heinous crime, because that’s what the left do, when it was, in reality, little more than an out-of-control, disorganized frat party. The only shot fired was from a Capitol policeman, and even though a few firearms were recovered from a couple of the protesters’ vehicles, none were taken from protesters in the Capitol Building.

Posted on by

Ignoring a very, very large elephant in the room

Do reporters for The Philadelphia Inquirer read their own news paper?

Inquirer reporter Harold Brubaker, who specializes in the business side of health care and nonprofit sector, reported on the Keystone State’s attempts to revise nursing home regulations, but somehow he managed to miss the elephant in the room:

‘Insulting and dumb.’ That’s how a nursing home manager labeled criticism of Pa.’s new staffing proposal

Advocates say more staffing is desperately needed. But nursing home executives say Medicaid rates won’t support it.

by Harold Brubaker | August 28, 2021

Anne Clauss hates to imagine what her mother would have endured at a nursing home in Langhorne if she or another relative hadn’t visited daily during her stay from 2017 to 2018.

One evening Clauss found her mother at the end of a hallway facing away from her room, where she had been stuck for a few hours, another resident told her. Other times, staff — whom she called underpaid and overworked — forgot to bring her mother her meals.

Her mother died at a hospital in 2018. But that experience prompted the Levittown resident to comment in favor of a Pennsylvania Department of Health proposal to increase the homes’ minimum level of direct care to 4.1 hours daily per patient, up from the current 2.7 hours.

“I hope regulations can be updated to help our elderly live out their lives well cared for and treated respectfully,” Clauss wrote to the Independent Regulatory Review Commission, which will review the comments and eventually hold a public hearing. It’s not clear how quickly the commission will act.

Let’s tell the truth here: nursing homes are dreadful places, facilities in which to warehouse the elderly who can no longer care for themselves, but who can, and do, live on with nursing care and physical assistance. It’s a truth all of us know, but no one is willing to say out loud, because so many people fear that they will one day have to warehouse their aging parents in such a facility.[1]My family has been fortunate in that regard; such a decision was never one we faced. And I cannot imagine that any of us do not dread the thought of having to be in a nursing home themselves. I’m very thankful that I’m very healthy, but who can know what the future holds.

There’s a lot more at the original, and Mr Brubaker did a thorough job in his story, save for one thing. He noted that nursing homes have real difficulties in attracting staff, and that Medicaid payments for patients work out to roughly $8.00 an hour, which is significantly less than certified nursing assistants are paid. To provide more hours of patient care, more nursing staff would have to be hired, but there’s simply not enough money paid to nursing homes to do so. For the details, read Mr Brubaker’s original.

The effort is coming to a head during the COVID-19 pandemic in which over 13,000 people have died in Pennsylvania’s nursing homes.

This is where Mr Brubaker’s story fails. He mentions the COVID-19 panic just this once, and that’s it. But, as we previously noted, and as Mr Brubaker’s own newspaper has reported, Philadelphia’s Acting Health Commissioner, Dr Cheryl Bettigole, has mandated that all health care workers in the City of Brotherly Love must be vaccinated against COVID-19 by October 15th. Dr Bettigole has noted that more than a dozen long-term care facilities in Philadelphia have less than 50% of their staff vaccinated.

If you’re more committed to not getting the vaccine than to the safety of your patients, it’s time to do something else. Health care is not for you.

This is something that Mr Brubaker should have mentioned: not only are patients in nursing homes getting fewer hours of care than they should, Dr Bettigole and the city of Philadelphia want to fire the CNAs and RNs who refuse to get vaccinated.

Oh, they won’t put it that way — though the Commissioner came close — but that’s the result of the policy. The city obviously wants to force the reluctant to get vaccinated, and some will probably concede, but if over half the staff have resisted vaccination, in an industry which has been continually pushing for it, it has to be expected that at least some, quite probably a significant percentage of them, will continue to refuse to comply.

From an article referenced by the much nicer Dana on Patterico’s Pontifications:

As of last night, there were 102 people waiting for an ICU bed in the greater Houston area.

Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo told Begnaud that she was prepared to open a field hospital, but as of Friday morning, hospitals in the Houston area were telling her they had extra beds — but not enough nurses. Seven hundred nurses arrived last week, but it’s still not enough to meet the demand.

Of course, that article, too, failed to address the elephant in the room:

Houston hospital workers fired, resign over COVID-19 vaccine

By Jamie Stengle | June 22, 2021

DALLAS (AP) — More than 150 employees at a Houston hospital system who refused to get the COVID-19 vaccine have been fired or resigned after a judge dismissed an employee lawsuit over the vaccine requirement.

A spokesperson for Houston Methodist hospital system said 153 employees either resigned in the two-week suspension period or were terminated on Tuesday.

The case over how far health care institutions can go to protect patients and others against the coronavirus has been closely watched. It’s believed to be the first of its kind in the U.S. But it won’t be the end of the debate.

It’s not a case of some health care workers may quit, or may be fired, for refusing vaccination, but that some have already quit, some have already been fired.

I get it: the editorial position of the Inquirer is strongly in support of vaccination, and perhaps noting that the city’s vaccine mandate will actually cost the city’s nursing homes employees isn’t something a biased newspaper like the Inquirer wants to report.[2]I take publisher Elizabeth Hughes opinion piece as an admission that the Inquirer has, and will continue to have, a bias toward the left. But for an article like Mr Brubaker’s to fail to note the potential loss of nursing home employees, just as he is noting that the Commonwealth might require more, is simply poor journalism. It wasn’t just a missed point, but ignoring a very, very large elephant in the room.

References

References
↑1 My family has been fortunate in that regard; such a decision was never one we faced.
↑2 I take publisher Elizabeth Hughes opinion piece as an admission that the Inquirer has, and will continue to have, a bias toward the left.