Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The governors are responsible for the welfare of their states. However, should the states cease their authority and give to the President in times of uncertain crisis? If Trump made mandates on how we should govern, then there would be a systematic, coherent way of fighting the virus.
You do understand what it would take to amend the Constitution to do this don't you. In case you don't, it would require ratification by three-fourths (38 out of 50) of the states. It will never happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth
Have you noticed, that the only people on the ball currently, are the governors, and not the federal so-called "leadership"?
Be careful what you wish for. Very, very careful. Without the governors advocating for their citizens and medical staffers and hospitals, we would be in much deeper doo-doo than we are at the moment.
I agree. I've been impressed with all the governors who I have seen interviewed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by miquel_westano
The Constitution is fine. We need to stop changing it, and change ourselves instead. Too many things are settled in the Supreme Court these days, because everyone that doesn't get their way files suit.
Do you think 27 amendments in 231 years are too many? There have only been 15 amendments in the last 217 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant
For a scientific organization, the chief administrator should be a scientist. For a health organization, the chief administrator should be a medical professional. For a car company, the chief administrator should be an automotive engineer. For an agricultural organization, the chief administrator ought to be a farmer or an agronomist. And so forth.
Do you realize that it rarely works out that way?
Quote:
Originally Posted by miquel_westano
Trump has told people in areas not severely affected to live their lives, use caution and to not give up. We don't know if we will have full churches by Easter or not. The virus will end it's cycle at some point. All viruses do. Maybe Trump knows more than you? Maybe he is an optimist? Maybe he wants to curtail panic? Maybe he is just wrong? But none of those mean he isn't doing a good job, except in the eyes of those that just hate him beyond reason. The man was dealt a very bad hand, and he is forced to play the cards he was dealt. Even many Trump critics are now admitting he is doing as good of a job as is possible. Only the media and rabid haters continue to blast him non stop.
I think most half way intelligent people know we will not have full churches by Easter. We have enough evidence from other countries who have done more than us to restrict people's movement. I haven't seen any doors being welded shut in New York City yet.
I think most half way intelligent people know we will not have full churches by Easter. We have enough evidence from other countries who have done more than us to restrict people's movement. I haven't seen any doors being welded shut in New York City yet.
Trump's sound bites on a return to normalcy by Easter was clearly wishful thinking. He used the words "Wouldn't it be great if..." Perhaps he was trying to give a glimmer of hope in an obviously hopeless situation...like giving a pat to the guy trapped under a fallen tree and bleeding to death, "There, there. Everything will be alright."
If you've read my posts on other threads about the epidemiology/immunology of this virus, it must be clear to all the experts, but they're not vocalizing it to the general public, this crisis won't be over until we either get a vaccine out to most people (many months to a year), or it runs its course by infecting most people and "thinning out the herd."...
Given the horrendous prognosis for those so sick as to require artificial ventilation (survival rate only 10%), our current efforts aimed mainly to slow down the spread, won't change the death rate by very much in the long run...Each of us will eventually contact the bug and live or die according to our own body's defenses.
Already did WW2 martial law declared in ca given to army 100% authority
No, that did not happen. Martial law was declared in Hawaii by the territorial governor during WWII, but not in California.
FYI, "martial law" in the US is a condition in which civilian courts are suspended and replaced by military tribunals, as well as law enforcement being taken over by the military. The mere use of the military by the president or the governor to aid civilian law enforcement is not martial law.
Please enlighten us plebes as to what these emergency powers are that POTUS is choosing not to exercise
I think he could issue a national 'stay at home' order, enforced by the national guard, lasting 3-4 weeks. that would drastically reduce the spreading of the virus.
A ridiculous statement. Why would you give an administrator's job to a scientist? Would you give a politician a scientist job? They are unrelated jobs with unrelated skill sets. That's like saying the guy on the assembly line should be the CEO of a manufacturing plant. It makes zero sense.
Talking out of the rear of one's trousers is not the best habit to get into, Scientists are well equipped to administer huge programs, as is evidenced throughout the various military and industrial entities that routinely utilize scientists for research, product development, and in this case dangerous situations stemming from uncontrollable viral threats.
A ridiculous statement. Why would you give an administrator's job to a scientist? Would you give a politician a scientist job? They are unrelated jobs with unrelated skill sets. That's like saying the guy on the assembly line should be the CEO of a manufacturing plant. It makes zero sense.
Right. Why would you let Wernher von Braun run the Marshall Space Center?
The governors are responsible for the welfare of their states. However, should the states cease their authority and give to the President in times of uncertain crisis? If Trump made mandates on how we should govern, then there would be a systematic, coherent way of fighting the virus.
And if the president is a moron, then in times of crisis, a moron could overrule 50 governors of varying capabilities, some of whom might be sharper than the president.
And if the president is a wannabe dictator, then expanded powers could crush resistance.
The presidency needs fewer powers, not more. The states need more because there are 50 of them, and even if most of them become basket cases, at least some will be bastions of freedom, and you can move to those bastions of freedom.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
