Home

Do you think Trump should have a national policy on covid19?
1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> In the News -> Politics


View latest: 24h 48h 72h


Poll

Do you think Trump should have a national policy on covid19?
Yes
 55%  [ 79 ]
No
 14%  [ 21 ]
Its up to the governors of each state to decide how to deal with it
 29%  [ 42 ]
Total Votes : 142


monkeymamma




 
 
 
 

Post  Tue, Jul 21 2020, 4:07 pm
Covid19 is affecting different states differently. For example, New York has 32,598 deaths while North Dakota has 94 deaths. New York is highly populated while other states are more spread out with people living in more rural areas so people are less likely to come into contact with each other. And New York has a busy railroad and public bus system that dont exist in other states. Do you think that Trump should have a national policy on Covid19 given that every state is affected differently and governors have made it clear that its their job to deal with coronavirus? Explain your answer in the comments.

https://ncov2019.live/data
Back to top

GetReal




 
 
 
 

Post  Tue, Jul 21 2020, 4:12 pm
No. It makes more sense to let the hotspots keep popping up in different areas and let people travel freely within the US so this drags out for as long as possible. And also for trump to leave it to the governors and then tweet undermining their policies. /s
Back to top

Jeanette




 
 
 
 

Post  Tue, Jul 21 2020, 4:13 pm
I think people really misunderstand what having a national policy means.

Just like states have county-by-county reopening plans that consider conditions in each individual district, the federal government can do the same on a nationwide level. And state governors still have he power to tweak the plans according to their needs. The federal government can make resources and money available to states that are struggling. There should be clear, consistent messaging coming from he top.

The problem is Trump simply being incapable of staying on message or focusing long enough to implement a coherent strategy. Pence would be doing a far better job. In fact that’s what all the governors are saying, it’s useless to talk to Trump but they can get what they need through Pence.

Maybe you’ll argue now that this is the way it’s meant to be, with the president tweeting or whatever and he VP getting the job done. Hey at least there’s someone in that administration who’s somewhat competent...
Back to top

SisterSix




 
 
 
 

Post  Tue, Jul 21 2020, 9:14 pm
We have a national policy regarding sealing our borders, for example. There’s many different kinds of “national policies.”
Back to top

monkeymamma




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 11:07 am
Jeanette wrote:
I think people really misunderstand what having a national policy means.

Just like states have county-by-county reopening plans that consider conditions in each individual district, the federal government can do the same on a nationwide level. And state governors still have he power to tweak the plans according to their needs. The federal government can make resources and money available to states that are struggling. There should be clear, consistent messaging coming from he top.

The problem is Trump simply being incapable of staying on message or focusing long enough to implement a coherent strategy. Pence would be doing a far better job. In fact that’s what all the governors are saying, it’s useless to talk to Trump but they can get what they need through Pence.

Maybe you’ll argue now that this is the way it’s meant to be, with the president tweeting or whatever and he VP getting the job done. Hey at least there’s someone in that administration who’s somewhat competent...

Seems like you are saying that its up to the governor of each state to decide how to deal with coronavirus and request assistance as needed which is also in line with the National Emergency Trump signed-- https://www.whitehouse.gov/pre.....reak/ Dont you think that the federal govt is sending resources to states that request it? Like NY requested ventilators and additional hospitals which the feds sent so not sure why you think the feds wouldnt help each state as needed (and plenty of states wouldnt need assistance since they have low level of cases as explained in the op and you can see the statistics of each state here- https://ncov2019.live/data ).

That said, NY spent 52 million dollars on a hospital that was not utilized so do you think the feds should waste money on states that dont even use the resources given to them? https://thehill.com/homenews/s.....vwUFE
Back to top

Cheiny




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 11:13 am
Jeanette wrote:


The problem is Trump simply being incapable of staying on message or focusing long enough to implement a coherent strategy. ...


You can save a lot of time expressing your views in all your posts by simply putting the period after the word “Trump.”
Back to top

southernbubby




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 11:20 am
There are no federal restrictions on interstate travel so this is how it spreads from one location to another.
Back to top

monkeymamma




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 11:23 am
southernbubby wrote:
There are no federal restrictions on interstate travel so this is how it spreads from one location to another.

It looks like interstate travel is a right and not something the federal govt can restrict-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.....s_law
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 11:30 am
Of course there should be a national policy on the pandemic.

States should not have been forced to bid against one another for medical supplies.

There should be uniform rules regarding how and when certain things open, based upon the best medical information available at the time as well as local conditions and parameters. Its nonsensical to have things open in one state, closed in a bordering one. And nonsensical to have people traveling from high to low incidence states without quarantine, spreading contagion. (At the same time, of course, its nonsensical for the federal government to threaten to withdraw funds if schools don't open in person in the absence of any federal policy regarding social distancing, testing, number of kids per class, etc.)

We will only get this thing under control with a national policy. Otherwise, it will conintue to jump from place to place.
Back to top

southernbubby




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 11:31 am
monkeymamma wrote:
It looks like interstate travel is a right and not something the federal govt can restrict-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.....s_law


So are federal funds for schools a right? I would not want to be a teacher who is forced to work while the virus is rampant in the district not Trump and Betsy have threatened those districts with lack of funding.
Back to top

keym




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 11:38 am
It's interesting. Murphy is getting a lot of comments, many negative and some positive for refusing to open region by region, county by county. He's using an all or nothing approach in NJ.
And while I see the benefits, it also ends up feeling quite random. Not region X can open daycamps if the say hospitalization is under A%, but rather on July 6 NJ will open camps.

Though in general, I'm curious OP, if you feel the same way in all areas across the board.
You feel that federal government should dictate Schools can open under these restrictions when the sick rate is under 5%, restaurants and bars when the sick rate is under 3% (whatever).
But do you feel that the federal government should also tell the states "if you have a crime rate over N%, you must interfere, if you have a vaccination rate under 92%, you must interfere, if you have a traffic accident rate, or public school failure rate, or abused or neglected child rate or whatever.
Do you feel the federal government should be insisting on specific criteria that they can override the local governments?

Because I don't. I think that's federal overreach.
But I do think the federal government should be able to restrict travel between state to state and region to region and they should.
And they should be available to step in with equipment if they're requested to.

But I don't think the federal government should be able to either mandate closing or opening public schools, businesses, public transport, parks that's the governor and state legislation.
Back to top

southernbubby




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 11:42 am
keym wrote:
It's interesting. Murphy is getting a lot of comments, many negative and some positive for refusing to open region by region, county by county. He's using an all or nothing approach in NJ.
And while I see the benefits, it also ends up feeling quite random. Not region X can open daycamps if the say hospitalization is under A%, but rather on July 6 NJ will open camps.

Though in general, I'm curious OP, if you feel the same way in all areas across the board.
You feel that federal government should dictate Schools can open under these restrictions when the sick rate is under 5%, restaurants and bars when the sick rate is under 3% (whatever).
But do you feel that the federal government should also tell the states "if you have a crime rate over N%, you must interfere, if you have a vaccination rate under 92%, you must interfere, if you have a traffic accident rate, or public school failure rate, or abused or neglected child rate or whatever.
Do you feel the federal government should be insisting on specific criteria that they can override the local governments?

Because I don't. I think that's federal overreach.
But I do think the federal government should be able to restrict travel between state to state and region to region and they should.
And they should be available to step in with equipment if they're requested to.

But I don't think the federal government should be able to either mandate closing or opening public schools, businesses, public transport, parks that's the governor and state legislation.


If a district has to close for a few weeks while the infection rate is high, why should they lose federal funding? Should teachers put their lives at risk?
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 11:43 am
monkeymamma wrote:
It looks like interstate travel is a right and not something the federal govt can restrict-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.....s_law


That's not true. See, eg, https://www.law.georgetown.edu.....mits/
Back to top

keym




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 11:47 am
southernbubby wrote:
If a district has to close for a few weeks while the infection rate is high, why should they lose federal funding? Should teachers put their lives at risk?


I agree. I don't think federal government should be dictating opening or closing schools or funding (except specific items like transportation costs to be used only for transporting).

I think federal government should be dictating interregional travel. But I don't know how feasible it is. Delaware numbers are up, but not New Jersey. Indiana is up, but not Illinois.
Back to top

southernbubby




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 11:48 am
Also, when people don't like the restrictions in their county or state, they go somewhere more fun and then they come back with the virus to their own areas or if they are in a hotspot, they don't mind bringing the virus elsewhere.
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 12:16 pm
keym wrote:
I agree. I don't think federal government should be dictating opening or closing schools or funding (except specific items like transportation costs to be used only for transporting).

I think federal government should be dictating interregional travel. But I don't know how feasible it is. Delaware numbers are up, but not New Jersey. Indiana is up, but not Illinois.


The federal government has long used funding to dictate educational policy, among other things. For education, that's what Title I is. The reason that all states adopted a minimum drinking age of 21 is that its a requirement to receive federal highway funds.

You're free to oppose that, of course.
Back to top

keym




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 12:27 pm
SixOfWands wrote:
The federal government has long used funding to dictate educational policy, among other things. For education, that's what Title I is. The reason that all states adopted a minimum drinking age of 21 is that its a requirement to receive federal highway funds.

You're free to oppose that, of course.


I thought we were discussing what SHOULD happen as opposed to what DOES happen. Very Happy Very Happy
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 12:45 pm
keym wrote:
I thought we were discussing what SHOULD happen as opposed to what DOES happen. Very Happy Very Happy


Probably.

But I suspect that there are a lot of people who don't understand that federal dollars are used to control policy.
Back to top

PinkFridge




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 12:55 pm
monkeymamma wrote:
It looks like interstate travel is a right and not something the federal govt can restrict-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.....s_law


But they can request quarantining from different states, as NY just did. I last read that there are 31 states on the list. (What happens if you drive from a safe state through one of the 31 to get to NY?)
Back to top

shmosmom




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Jul 22 2020, 12:59 pm
I don't like giving Trump per se more power, but having the federal govt make the regulations for a pandemic make a lot lot more sense to me than having every place do it's own rules. Right now, it's been traveling from one place to the next with no end, and many of the decisions have been more political than about protecting our health. If it would be more federally regulated, we would be a united states, hopefully better contained and deal with it. We'd have the resources pooled and divided as needed by the federal govt. This is a problem that's effecting the whole country, we should be dealing with it together.
Back to top
1, 2  Next Recent Topics

Page 1 of 2 View latest: 24h 48h 72h


Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> In the News -> Politics

Related Topics Replies Last Post
For some reason the media think Cuomo is doing a great job
by amother
26 Today at 11:10 am View last post
An honest question for Trump voters 131 Today at 9:58 am View last post
Proof: FBI spied on Trump, Comey lied
by Cheiny
0 Yesterday at 11:12 am View last post
Trump the Troll -- A Good Thing? 37 Yesterday at 12:11 am View last post
Trump is Registering more new voters in key states than Dems
by Cheiny
1 Tue, Aug 04 2020, 8:01 pm View last post
by Fox

Jump to: