Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Trump Releases Plan for ‘Opening Up America Again’
President Trump spoke with governors on a conference call Thursday and released a plan to re-open the economy after a month of shutdowns. Titled “Opening Up America Again” (PDF link here), the document guides state and local officials on the loosening of restrictions on businesses and citizens with a phased approach.
Before a state or county begins to open, the White House recommends meeting the following criteria:
- Downward trajectory of influenza-like illnesses reported within a 14-day period and a downward trajectory of COVID-like syndromic cases reported within a 14-day period.
- Downward trajectory of documented cases within a 14-day period, or a downward trajectory of positive tests as a percent of total tests within a 14-day period (flat or increasing volume of tests).
- Ability of hospitals to treat all patients without crisis care, and have a robust testing program in place for
at-risk healthcare workers, including emerging antibody testing.
It’s up to local leaders to tailor the measures to the facts on the ground (i.e., crowded city vs. rural county). It is the state’s responsibility to ensure testing, monitor hospital capacity, and provide specific plans to protect health and safety.
Re-opening the economy calls for a three-stage phased approach based on the latest data and on a state-by-state (or county-by-county) basis. For all phases, individuals must continue to practice good hygiene and, if they feel sick, stay home. Employers are asked to implement policies for sanitation, testing, and social distancing, and not to allow symptomatic people to physically return to the office.
Phase One
- All vulnerable individuals should continue to shelter in place.
- When in public, individuals should maximize physical distance from others.
- Avoid socializing in groups of more than 10 people.
- Minimize non-essential travel.
- Employers should continue to encourage telework whenever possible and have staff return to work in phases.
- Elective surgeries can resume.
- Gyms can re-open with strict physical distancing and sanitation protocols.
- Large venues (restaurants, theaters, sports venues, places of worship, etc.) can re-open with strict physical distancing and sanitation protocols.
Phase Two (for regions with no evidence of a rebound)
- All vulnerable individuals should continue to shelter in place.
- When in public, individuals should maximize physical distance from others.
- Avoid socializing in groups of more than 50 people.
- Non-essential travel is allowed.
- Employers should continue to encourage telework whenever possible.
- Elective surgeries can resume.
- Schools and organized youth activities can re-open.
- Bars can re-open with diminished occupancy.
- Large venues (restaurants, theaters, sports venues, places of worship, etc.) can operate with moderate physical distancing and sanitation protocols.
Phase Three (for regions with no evidence of a rebound)
- All vulnerable individuals can resume public interactions but continue physical distancing.
- Visits to senior care facilities and hospitals can resume.
- Employers can resume normal operations.
- Bars can operate with increased occupancy.
- Large venues (restaurants, theaters, sports venues, places of worship, etc.) can operate with limited physical distancing protocols.
No timelines are included in the proposal since the phases will vary by region and the decisions of governors and other local officials.
Published in Economics, Healthcare
And I think states will be tipping toward open like dominoes falling, over the next three weeks. Let’s wait and see.
Watch and learn, young Padawan. Watch and learn.
Shouldn’t we be calling them the Axis states? Or maybe, The Axis of Overeach, or the Emperials…anything but the Alliance, it’s an insult the Mon Mothma.
We don’t need no stinkin’ phases. Go on national TV and say, “Go back to work.” We’ll figure the rest out ourselves . . .
Under the Constitution the power to regulate interstate commerce is with Congress not the President. He can’t reopen the economy just as he could not shut it down. He is limited to shutting or opening the interstate highway system and domestic air travel.
You Americans always seem to forget there are other countries on the planet besides you. When Canada and Mexico is back up and running and a Alliance governor is trying to deny that its safe, how long does that bozo have before the populace turns.
The big business’s that back the Democrats want to get back to making money. Media lives on advertising dollars. They cant cheerlead the shutdown, if they are all out of business.
We know other countries exist…. they just don’t matter.
This has probably already occurred to everyone else, but I had to have a friend point it out to me. I guess I’m just too much of a Trump skeptic to have seen it.
By mistakenly claiming that he had the authority to re-open the country, what the President did (unwittingly, I firmly believe) is prompt the press to loudly proclaim that no, he does not have that authority — and, in doing so, make it clear to everyone that the shutdown will persist until the governors fix it. In other words, if you don’t like the shutdown and its effects, blame your governor, because this isn’t something that the President can fix.
This has the virtues of being true, politically advantageous, and contrary to the narrative the left would like everyone to believe. So it’s nice that the press feels compelled to say it.
I like your point, Hank.
I’m not convinced that Trump was wrong about his authority. I’m not convinced that he was right, either. It turns out to be a complicated question.
If there were a federal statute giving the President authority over interstate commerce in an epidemic, then he would clearly have the authority, and it would trump any contrary state or local action, as a result of the Supremacy Clause. (Pun intended.)
I see even in President Trump’s phase description what strikes me as succumbing to an irrational fear of the consequences of the virus. The discussion still seems to be premised on the idea that every person who comes into contact with the virus in any way will contract the worst version of the disease and die a horrible death. Although that’s the view promoted by the media (an industry bolstered by the appearance of crisis), but I sure don’t see it in the data or in the part of the world around me. I just see around me a lot of suffering imposed on people in fear of a disease that doesn’t appear to be coming, at least not with the ferocity the media and government officials are telling us.
If any conservative would prefer that the president have near-dictatorial powers and could overrule governors on anything, keep in mind that there is such a thing as presidential term limits. Even if he wins re-election, Donald Trump will once again be a private citizen by February of 2025. We could have a Democratic president in just nine months. Do you really want a President Biden to have the total authority that President Trump claimed a few days ago?
I don’t want a president with dictatorial powers. And I do think that federalism principles constrain President Trump. @unsk brought up the Interstate Commerce Clause in his plea in a comment to a different post for President Trump to act and not let his businesses and employees be destroyed by a mendacious governor who might see advantage in extending the crisis longer to hurt the President’s re-election chances regardless of the risk to his/her citizens. Mark Levin had some interesting comments on Sean Hannity’s show the other day: A president can take action against a governor if he can cite a particular statute Congress has passed regulating interstate commerce with which that governor is interfering. So I am trying to find out what statute(s) that might be. I have also thought that if a governor extended a lockdown (interference with individual liberty and property) beyond a reasonable emergency, the Department of Justice could bring an action for violation of civil rights. Both of these actions would not be exercise of dictatorial powers; it would be taking recourse to the courts to contest the propriety of a governor’s actions with respect to interstate commerce and/or civil rights.
I’m not a Constitutional scholar by any means, but it seems a stretch to me to think that the writers of the Constitution included the Interstate Commerce Clause so that the federal government could stop quarantines within states. Several governors may be pushing quaratines further than they need to, but that is a state – not a federal – issue in my opinion. I don’t want the federal government bossing states around unless those states are truly violating the U.S. Constitution. Democrats will one day be in charge of the Executive branch again, so if one is concerned for limited government we ought to be very careful about giving the federal government more authority over the states than it already has.