Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE ***
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Posted in:
* Bloomberg…
An Illinois appellate court dismissed Governor J.B. Pritzker’s appeal of a lower court’s ruling against his mask mandate in schools, calling the request “moot” after a legislative committee suspended the requirement’s renewal.
On Thursday, the Illinois Fourth District Appellate Court rejected the appeal, noting that the state’s department of public health on Feb. 14 had renewed the emergency rules, originally enacted in September 2021, but that a legislative committee had then suspended that renewal this week.
“Thus, none of the rules found by the circuit court to be null and void are currently in effect,” the court wrote in its ruling on Thursday. “Accordingly, for the following reasons, we dismiss defendant’s appeal because the expiration of the emergency rules renders this appeal moot.”
* From the decision…
While the public is rightfully interested in the propriety of the circuit court’s determination that the emergency rules are “null and void,” such circumstances do not automatically make the issue one of a public nature as defined by the public-interest exception. Further, given the changing nature of the COVID-19 pandemic—which affects the State defendants’ response to the pandemic—and JCAR’s decision on February 15, 2022, it is not clear these same rules would likely be reinstated. As a result, we do not find the public-interest exception applies in this case.
Man, the three House Democrats on JCAR really put the state’s position in a bad spot when they voted to suspend that emergency rule.
* And what about the governor’s executive orders? Pritzker believes they are still in effect for schools that are not part of the case, but nobody really knows for sure. From Justice Holder White’s dissent…
As it stands, the majority’s decision leaves open the question of whether the circuit court properly enjoined the enforcement of the executive orders.
…Adding… Jesse Sullivan…
Gubernatorial candidate Jesse Sullivan issued the following statement:
“This governor will stop at nothing to ensure he alone controls the lives of our schoolchildren. More than 500 Illinois school districts were already ignoring his hollow threats. Now, the appellate court has sided with parents in striking down Pritzker’s mandate. The governor has proven he only cares to listen to the most extreme ideologues within the Chicago Teachers Union and Washington D.C. As governor, I promise to put parents’ voices first.”
…Adding… CPS…
Chicago Public Schools (CPS) stands by our proven COVID-19 safety mitigation measures and is pleased the Appellate Court has confirmed that the Temporary Restraining Order does not prohibit school districts from independently requiring masks, vaccinations for staff, and requiring individuals who have tested positive or have been exposed to COVID-19 to learn/work from home. Our schools will continue to enforce these policies, including mandated universal masking.These safety measures are what have allowed us to provide our students with the in-person learning environment they need throughout this school year. We will continue to follow these protocols until such time as our public health partners advise us that restrictions can be safely lifted.
We are encouraged to see COVID-19 cases dropping, and we remain optimistic about what this will mean for our school communities in the future. Our top priority remains the safety and stability of CPS students, staff, and families.
Background
• February 4, a downstate court issued a legal decision regarding Governor Pritzker’s requirements for COVID-19 safety measures in schools. This decision was immediately appealed by the Illinois Attorney General. Today the appellate court upheld local control, clarifying the TRO does not prohibit school districts from implementing their own safety policies and protocols with the following language:
“We note the language of the TRO in no way restrains school districts from acting independently from the executive orders or the IDPH in creating provisions addressing COVID-19. Thus, it does not appear the school districts are temporarily restrained from acting by the court’s TRO.”
…Adding… IFT…
Illinois Federation of Teachers (IFT) President Dan Montgomery issued this statement following the 4th District Appellate Court’s ruling on the motion for a stay.
“The Illinois 4th District Appellate Court’s decision released late last night makes one thing clear: school districts are free to implement their own safety measures around COVID-19. And they should. Since the beginning of this pandemic, we have insisted that proper mitigations are in place to protect students, teachers and staff, and their families. This was to reduce sickness and death and to keep schools open for in-person learning as much as possible. Today’s appellate court ruling does nothing to change that calculus.
“We continue to insist that school districts statewide abide by existing collective bargaining agreements that are in place to promote health and safety in schools and to follow our laws around safe schools and workplaces. As cases continue to decline, discussions about removing these mitigations must be based on good public health decisions. Medical science tells us that vaccinations, masking, and proper ventilation have been the best ways to maintain health in schools. Schools have been able to remain open because of the implementation and enforcement of these mitigation strategies designed to protect everyone in school communities, including their families.”
…Adding… IEA…
The following is attributable to Illinois Education Association (IEA) President Kathi Griffin regarding the 4th District Appellate Court ruling on the State of Illinois’ appeal of Judge Grischow’s Feb. 4, 2022, Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) in the Sangamon County COVID school litigation:
“We appreciate the clarity brought forth in the Fourth District Appellate Court’s decision last night dismissing defendants’ appeal of the temporary restraining order (TRO) finding that the expiration and non-renewal of Illinois Department of Public Health and Illinois State Board of Education emergency orders regulating COVID mitigations in schools made their arguments moot. There has been much confusion over what Circuit Court Judge Raylene Grischow’s original ruling even meant. It appeared to apply only to those districts named in the original court cases, which would be about 150. But according to school administrators, there are at least 500 mask-recommended districts now in Illinois.
“Students crave consistency. But, Judge Grischow’s Feb. 4 decision to enter a TRO in the case sent schools into chaos.
“A bright spot in the decision clarifies for which parties the TRO applies. The appellate court affirmatively stated that ‘the language of the TRO in no way restrains school districts from acting independently from the executive orders or the IDPH in creating provisions addressing COVID-19.’
“These past few weeks have been tumultuous in schools around the state. They have been described by some as the worst time in our teachers’ and education employees’ careers. They’re getting angry emails, having to comfort scared students and are working to help calm other students who are dealing with the trauma that this pandemic has caused. Schools are supposed to be students’ safe haven. That’s not what we’ve been seeing at many of our schools recently. We know school board meetings have been canceled and schools have shut down because of threats and protests. This has to stop.
“Mitigation efforts are not political. They are put in place to keep students and school staff from getting sick, or from bringing home COVID-19 to loved ones who may be susceptible.
“As the weather gets warmer and as hospitalizations continue to decline, we are hopeful that school districts will adhere to their duty to bargain in good faith with local associations over health and safety issues, including mitigation efforts, and remind all that any existing collective bargaining agreements or memoranda of understanding around these issues remain intact.
“We need people to remember we are all in this together – parents, community members, educators and our students. There is a light at the end of this long, dark tunnel. We need to come together to find thoughtful solutions to bring some calm back to our schools, which will provide a better environment for our teachers and staff to provide students the important learning and emotional support that they need.”
…Adding… Irvin campaign…
Gubernatorial candidate and Aurora Mayor Richard Irvin released the following statement following the Appellate Court’s dismissal of Governor Pritzker’s appeal to reinstate the statewide mask mandate for schools:
”The court’s decision is a win for parents and schools across our state who have been victims of Pritzker’s unilateral control over the last two years. This is just the first step in restoring parents’ rights and getting local communities back to the table when it comes to the decision-making process.”
Earlier this week, bipartisan legislators in Springfield voted unanimously to block the Governor’s emergency powers to mandate masks in schools. Parents and communities across the state have been outspoken critics of Pritzker’s attempts to keep kids masked after announcing that the indoor mask mandate would end for everyone else.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 6:40 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE ***
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Hmmmm…interesting..
Comment by Blago’s Hare Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 6:45 am
jcar looks to the court for guidance, court looks at jcar for guidance. Blind leading the blind
Comment by Rabid Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 6:47 am
This ruling could have bern avoided if the GA wouldn’t have been completely spineless during COVID-19. The Devore crazies will be taking another victory lap today and the next spike of cases is going to be brutal.
Comment by Jason Bourne Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 6:53 am
I’m pro mask and pro vaccine, but admit the GA’s continued passing the buck to the Gov on this issue along with others contained in the EOs has shown a complete lack of leadership.
The have simply decided they want nothing to do with taking any heat for regulations or restrictions. Once again we see the Illinois General Assembly is not made up of a lot of profiles in courage.
And when a GOP gov. takes office in the future, whenever that may be, I don’t want to hear one Democrat complain that a GOV decides to governor through EOs and go around the legislative branch.
Lessons have, and will continue to be learned the hard way by many.
Comment by Give Me A Break Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 6:54 am
Well this plays right into DeVore and the Anti-Mask Groups Agenda. He use this as his first step to taking down the tyrant Governor and stopping the tyranny in the State. Campaign slogan #1.
Comment by Club J Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 6:54 am
= And what about the governor’s executive orders? Pritzker believes they are still in effect for schools that are not part of the case, but nobody really knows=
So mask optional will be the norm in most schools by Feb 28
Comment by Donnie Elgin Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 6:56 am
When bills are introduced they go through the process. Assigned to committee, voted on etc…. Anybody that reads Rich’s stuff knows this. Why is JCAR different? How can that committee just approve a rule and then it’s basically as powerful as a statute that went through an entirely different process? I have always thought that with the right set of facts and a plaintiff willing to do it JCAR might not withstand judicial scrutiny. Or as Mayor Daley once said “ we all get scrutened” sometime.
Comment by Galway Bay Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 6:57 am
== And when a GOP gov. takes office in the future, whenever that may be, I don’t want to hear one Democrat complain that a GOV decides to governor through EOs and go around the legislative branch.==
I’ll complain about whatever I think is wrong, thanks, but if you’re worried about the hypocrisy, the GOP Governor ought not to govern that way in the first place.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 6:57 am
People are learning about JCAR. If you have ever worked in a state agency or gov’s office, you know too well the JCAR process is pretty much another chase for the legislative branch to “check” the executive branch.
At times, the JCAR rule making process is complicated and takes more time than lawmaking.
Comment by Give Me A Break Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:01 am
Jcar exists to keep the general assembly in the money game. Gives powerful industries another bite at apple if things don’t go their way in a rule making. Can’t stand jcar
Comment by Yodel Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:01 am
Kuame should, as was said yesterday, be waiting to file the appeal the the ILSC, when the office opens.
As for the legislature not wanting to have anything to do with making the tough decisions regarding covid…noted. I think they ought to be more worried about the sentiments of the majority of their voters wanting representatives that actually protect them and theirs from the covid-spreaders out their who foolishly abandon masking and vaccinations who won’t be voting for them anyway.
Comment by PublicServant Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:02 am
First the unintended consequences of the purposeful inaction of the GA during the pandemic…
… now 3 House Dems (is if me or is it *always* 3 House Dems hurting things?) put into play the idea the unintended consequences of helping DeVore, Proft, Jacobson, “Wirepoints” and the folks clamoring for a legal leg to stand on.
What are the outs now?
A monumentally harder vote than 20 months ago to change the laws governing EOs or the way IDPH can have mandates?
Whew.
Governors own… the unintended consequences of the inaction then “reaction” of legislative prerogative to be “engaged”
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:03 am
===equally brutal in states with mask requirements.==
Actual statistics disagree.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:04 am
@Galway Bay
There is a legit argument that JCAR has some separation of powers issues, but it’s important to remember that it is concerned with administrative rules, not statutes. That’s why the process is different.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:05 am
== equally brutal in states with mask requirements==
It was not equal. States and schools with mask requirements did far better.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:06 am
All this appeal did was accelerate by a few weeks what was already going to happen. Obviously it looks like a defeat for Pritzker, but if he comes out, accepts the appeal, and just says that all this did was push up the timeline a few weeks, he can dismiss the impact of the decision.
Comment by Chicagonk Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:07 am
Tyranny by the minority.
Comment by JS Mill Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:08 am
Odd ruling considering JCAR tried to pass the buck and then the court based their whole decision on that.
I guess it’s a win for Devore against the state but local districts still have the power to mandate masks. His clients whose kids have to wear masks again aren’t going to feel like it’s a win. New lawsuit or does the current one continue (even though it’s “moot”)?
Does JCAR have the option to reconsider their vote?
Can the governor just issue a new executive order (whether doing that is a good idea is another question)?
If there’s a new order does it need JCAR approval to take effect, or how does that work?
People thought a ruling on the appeal would clarify things, seems like we have just the opposite. The response from the governor should be interesting.
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:09 am
Oh-dub, like I said yesterday time to move on.
Comment by Citizen Kane Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:10 am
===he can dismiss the impact of the decision.===
Very, very doubtful.
Each of the 5 GOP candidates, Proft and Jacobson on the radio to their “groups”, DeVore was already on local Chicago television hitting on the idea of the “loss”
June is 4 months away, November is 8+ months away, we’ll have to see the longer term issue, but the victory laps (needlessly to the detriment) begin.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:11 am
===Please share===
“Asked and Answered” at the last press conference by the governor. Undisputed.
Rich I think had a post on it. Report back.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:12 am
===So mask optional will be the norm in most schools by Feb 28=== it already is the norm. The last stat I saw was ~600/852 school districts are mask optional. The genie is out of the bottle.
Comment by Citizen Kane Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:13 am
There is support in Illinois for a mask mandate in schools. Illinois isn’t Florida. The GOP doesn’t control the legislative branch of state government (far from it). There’s nothing preventing a law .
Comment by Steve Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:15 am
=“Asked and Answered” at the last press conference by the governor. Undisputed=
He only talked about State mask mandates. We’re talking about school mask mandates. Try to keep up.
Comment by GoBullzz Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:16 am
Is this the end?
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:16 am
-Now, the appellate court has sided with parents in striking down Pritzker’s mandate.-
Based on that statement, it seems Mr. Sullivan knows about as much about the law as he does about, well, everything else. Maybe ask an actual lawyer what the court did before bloviating about it.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:17 am
= = =How can that committee just approve a rule and then it’s basically as powerful as a statute that went through an entirely different process?= = = Likewise how can a governor continue to issue EO’s for 2 years that are basically as powerful as statute. At least with JCAR there is separation of powers.
Comment by Citizen Kane Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:19 am
==There’s nothing preventing a law.==
According to this decision, there’s nothing preventing districts from requiring masks. The question is how many will do so. Sure looks like CPS will, and now they can even require for students who were clients in this lawsuit.
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:20 am
== All this appeal did was accelerate by a few weeks what was already going to happen. Obviously it looks like a defeat for Pritzker, but if he comes out, accepts the appeal, and just says that all this did was push up the timeline a few weeks, he can dismiss the impact of the decision.==
This is probably true for Pritzker’s fate in November, but that may not be the biggest concern for parents worried about their children’s health.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:22 am
We were so close to having restrictions be lifted in an orderly way. But whether it’s student walkouts, Eastern Bloc antics, or JCAR and the courts refusing to do anything, Illinois has failed the “Marshmallow Test” this week.
Comment by Not a Superstar Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:23 am
- GoBullzz -
You’re back again I see.
The governor did. The questions to the governor also discussed the statistics to masked Illinois doing better than surrounding states.
Google is your friend.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:23 am
This is just an awful way to govern. The appellate court should have immediately stayed the circuit court decision pending appeal. Declining to do that set off the dominos that resulted in this absolute mess.
Then the Governor somehow failed to effectively whip the JCAR vote. I’m honestly skeptical of the JCAR structure in general; at the federal level, the CRA requires a vote of the full Congress to overturn executive branch rule-making. Instead, we have a final-say committee where the super-minority is massively overrepresented. Regardless, the Governor needed to see this problem coming and make sure the JCAR Dems understood that they were jeopardizing the appeal.
The end result is a popularly elected governor and a popularly elected legislative majority that can’t implement the policy they purportedly favor and have no opportunity to appeal that decision past the Sangamon County Circuit Court. Whatever your position on the mask issue, this is just not how democracy should work.
Comment by vern Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:24 am
Best path forward now is to give the kids/staff who still want to mask high quality ones.
Comment by Walt Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:28 am
Courts often take the easiest action on controversial issues.
They ducked …
Comment by RNUG Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:31 am
House Democrats, over just a couple of days, have managed to convey the following message: “We are very concerned about keeping ourselves safe from Covid in our own workspace. Teachers and students? Meh, we’ll see what happens.”
Comment by Southern Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:34 am
==At least with JCAR there is separation of powers. ==
Well…it’s complicated. There’s a serious argument that JCAR actually obscures the separation of powers, in that it takes actions usually reserved for the executive branch (rule making) and puts them back under legislative review. OTOH, it’s long been recognized that legislatures can delegate legislative functions to the executive branch, but that they don’t *have* to delegate everything.
==The end result is a popularly elected governor and a popularly elected legislative majority that can’t implement the policy they purportedly favor ==
I mean, they absolutely can. They always could’ve passed a law. But the GA always wanted Pritzker to go alone on this, for good reasons and bad reasons, and here we are.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:35 am
How long before someone in a DUI case tries to use the judges line of reasoning that because someone can’t waive their due process rights, that a traffic stop involving a breathalyzer is considered a quarantine, and a medical test can’t be done without a prior court order.
…And then wins.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:36 am
==Courts often take the easiest action on controversial issues.==
This is the best analysis so far. JCAR gave the 4th Circuit an out, and they took it.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:37 am
This is pretty bad decision. The Democrats in the committee should have insisted on not voting on this issue until the appellate court decided. The Democratic legislators in the committee who voted against the mandate & present have hurt some school districts (teachers, staff, & students) & made it seem that the right wing has some power in the legislature.
Comment by Chris in ChiTown Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:38 am
Did the appeals court take a stand on the due process aspect either way? They mentioned it but the fact that they clearly said that districts can create their own mask mandate makes it seem like they’re throwing out at least that part of the TRO.
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:40 am
==How long before==
Probably awhile. You can always refuse a breathalyzer.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:40 am
==Did the appeals court take a stand on the due process aspect either way?==
Not in a binding way. Their position is that the case is mooted by the JCAR actions, so anything they said about due process is dicta.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:42 am
===Well…it’s complicated=== it’s really not actually. The fact that a bicameral, bipartisan legislative committee gets to review a rule created by an Executive Branch agency is a textbook example of separation of powers. For those just discovering the JCAR, I can see how they find it a unique creature - but folks, it’s been this way for a long time.
Comment by Citizen Kane Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:43 am
==The Democrats in the committee should have insisted on not voting on this issue until the appellate court decided. ==
That’s essentially what they did. The hang up is that the IDPH rule, I believe, had a set end date, so there was no option of preserving the rule past that date. JCAR had to either extend it or not.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:44 am
===it’s been this way for a long time===
That’s true, going back to Thompson. But I do not believe it’s ever been truly tested in the courts.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:44 am
No Dems on JCAR voted for the governor’s position. None. Sadly, it wasn’t because they don’t care about safety… I believe they do. They also care about pleasing the business community that wants masks to be long gone, irrespective of safety concerns. Could not be more frustrated by this… and with Dem GA leadership that surrendered this to special interests, handing this victory to the GOP anti-max fringe.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:51 am
Anti-mask fringe (spell check)
Comment by Lincoln Lad Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:52 am
=== a bicameral, bipartisan legislative committee gets to review a rule created by an Executive Branch agency is a textbook example of separation of powers. ===
I gotta disagree with this just because of the structure of JCAR. Most legislative committees can’t take final action, they can only send things to the full GA. And the “bipartisan” structure kind of eliminates the point of it being a legislative branch structure because voters can affect the composition of the committee. If there were only 3 Republican senators and 3 Republican house members, they’d all be on JCAR. The legislature has the power to change that, so it’s kind of a filibuster-like situation where House Dems could reclaim the power to govern but choose not to for weird inside baseball reasons. Compared to the federal Congressional Review Act, this is one of the rare situations where Congress has a more logical governing structure than the ILGA
Comment by vern Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:52 am
***voters cannot affect the structure of the committee* apologies for the very vital typo
Comment by vern Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:53 am
From personal experience, you spend session working on bills that impact your state agency, hours pouring through the details of how a new or changed law should work, you compromise, make changes to address issues outlined by others and finally have a product that passes both chambers.
Then, you turn the rule making process over to your agency attorneys who go through the same steps with JCAR, many of those JCAR members who have already voted on the bill and now the process starts again.
Call it check or whatever you want, in my worthless opinion JCAR is redundant and not needed. Lawmakers have months of session to weigh in on bills. And few, if any, understand the complexity of state agency operations or how those agencies implement policy.
Comment by Give Me A Break Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:54 am
Not sure which is worse: the “fear” parents have to send their masked & vaccinated kids to a school that is mask optional or the “fear” parents have to vaccinate their kids. People need to move risk into perspective.
Comment by ElginAlum Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:55 am
Sullivan tuning in today? He hates politics. Must be having a slow day.
Comment by Kathryn Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:56 am
==it’s really not actually==
Oh, well, OK then, is that all it takes? Then it *double* really is, *double* actually, times infinity, no take backs.
==The fact that a bicameral, bipartisan==
Separation of powers has nothing to do with partisanship.
==gets to review a rule created by an Executive Branch agency is a textbook example==
…of the legislative branch taking a bit more power for itself. That may or many not be a good thing. It may or may not be something you want to see happen. For most of us, it’ll depend on what they do with that power. But the legislative branch claiming more power for itself is not necessarily “Separation of powers”, it might just be consolidating power in the legislative branch. It also might not be that- like I said, it’s complicated.
==I can see how they find it a unique creature==
Wait, is it “unique” or is it “textbook”?
Maybe it is, as I said, complicated.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:57 am
=== Is this the end? ===
For some people, I’m afraid it soon will be.
Comment by Narc Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:57 am
Seems like JCAR decision was made less because of opposition to the EO, and more an attempt to stay off the record and an assumption that the appellate would grant the appeal. An assumption that was wrong and had major consequences.
I would hope that the JCAR would be more careful in the future. This is a big mistake for them to learn from.
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:58 am
==No Dems on JCAR voted for the governor’s position. ==
Uh, is that true?
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 7:58 am
The JCAR vote was 9-0-2 so no votes to support the governor.
With 12 on that committee, what happens with tie votes?
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:02 am
Should another mask mandate become necessary (not that I wish such), what then? To declare that a declaration by a circuit judge that state agencies must grant “due process appeals” to any and all individuals who disagree with any regulations and policies, is technically a nightmare scenario.
Comment by H-W Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:02 am
===Uh, is that true?===
Technically, no. A present or absent vote is actually a vote with the governor. The motion to suspend needed 8 votes out of 12. Two Senate Dems voted present, one was absent. Three House Dems voted with the Republicans.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:07 am
==Most legislative committees can’t take final action, they can only send things to the full GA. ==
This is a good point, and I’ll go you one better-anyone who has worked with JCAR staff knows that they hardly function like legislative staff. They’re a real neither-fish-nor-fowl agency.
That being said, it’s still complicated complicated- is there a good reason, from a “separation of powers” stand point, that a legislature can’t delegate power to such a committee? I’m not sure. I agree with the comments that JCAR is redundant and a layer of unnecessary bureaucracy, but that’s not really “separation of powers”, and I’m predisposed to an active government, while many facets of our system- including the “separation of powers” idea in the first place- are meant to stall government action.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:08 am
Anon at 8:08 (and heartbreak) was me, your favorite Gunner.
Comment by Arnsal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:09 am
Do not agree that the Dems felt they could deflect to the appeals court… votes like this are not done without leadership input. There was a choice to not support the Gov’s position. A choice to please someone else… instead of JB.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:11 am
I am worried about the newer BA.2 subvariant to Omicron. Just now spreading rapidly in some places. A study from Japan states it may cause as serious illness as the Delta variant. I also believe the mandates have been somewhat heavy at times - but I will be wearing my mask in public for a long time.
Comment by IL Concerned Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:12 am
==votes like this are not done without leadership input==
Oh, *sure* they are.
One good heuristic for examining government actions is to actually assume there’s less coordination than you think, even if you’re already assuming very little coordination.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:15 am
==Most legislative committees can’t take final action, they can only send things to the full GA. ==
There for certain have always been questions of separation of powers and jcar overstepping those lines. However, the comparison you note is a little apples/oranges. Jcar itself is a creation of statute, not chamber procedural rule.
Comment by fs Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:18 am
If there was no leadership input on a vote of this significance, then using the term leadership is a misnomer. But there most certainly was a hand behind the curtain on this one… no doubt.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:21 am
Can someone explain why IDPH went to JCAR rather than wait for the appeal, especially without the advance support of the committee? It risked exactly this outcome (even if dubious legally): an appellate court dismissal that raises confusion about what rules apply.
Comment by Original Anon Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:22 am
this is how people who did the right thing get painted as wrong, by not following along, moving to final. now Pritzker gets painted as goofing it all up when that is not how it was for most of the time. needs closure, see Gavin Newsom.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:23 am
One thing is certain, there are some Dem JCAR members about to get some unwanted attention, attention from the press their fellow lawmakers and Gov’s staff they may not enjoy.
Comment by Give Me A Break Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:23 am
It certainly seems possible that “leadership” assumed the appeal would be granted and that the vote happened with their blessing.
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:24 am
==But there most certainly was a hand behind the curtain on this one… no doubt. ==
I have doubt.
I’m not saying it’s impossible- I certainly don’t know- but the public rationale- “these members didn’t want to take action while an appeal was pending”- is the simplest explanation, and consistent with everything I know about the GA- and human nature in general. We all love it when someone else has to make the hard calls.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:31 am
There is always gonna be a new variant. There is always going to be a spike in cases like the flu. Children are less likely to have serious cases than adults.
The CDC just lowered the standards for speech in early childhood development. Now children should know ~50 words at 30mo rather than 24 months. The CDC just lowered the bar for milestones because development is clearly hindered by something (masks).
We are one of the only countries where people think masking kids is okay. Masking kids is having irreversible consequences on development and learning, and the average parent in this state knows that. Vote accordingly.
Comment by Walther Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:32 am
Another day, another failed lawsuit…wait
Comment by TaxTheMemes Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:33 am
Velvet Frog- this was pure politics and JCAR members voted the politics of this. They are elected by the people and responded to the people and not the leaders or the governor. The system worked and JCAR members were no longer willing to simply go along. Both sides of the aisle too. They respected the judicial branch and allowed this to play out in court. The governor would have been wise not to push a rule through while the judicial was considering the appeal. The fact that legislators denied the governor is significant. It was a defeat for JB just like the appeal was. The question is whether or not he will learn from this…
Comment by Elliott Ness Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:33 am
=== This is the best analysis so far. JCAR gave the 4th Circuit an out, and they took it.===
Unlike the Governor…..
Comment by Big Tent Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:34 am
If the Governor feels his EOs are in effect, I look forward to him making the same threats against the hundreds of school districts and the thousands of school kids that are not complying just like he did when certain smaller private schools did the same thing last fall. For the sake of fairness and consistency, Im sure this Governor will do this.
Comment by Red Ranger Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:35 am
=== like the flu.===
This is a “once a century” global pandemic that has taken the lives of nearly 900,000 Americans… not the flu. No.
===We are one of the only countries where people think masking kids is okay.===
Wholly untrue, as Asia, for one example, has masked its populations for things, including children.
===average parent in this state knows that===
Polling still favors masking. A want doesn’t make it true.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:35 am
What a train wreck.
Of course, Devore, Bailey etc. will take a victory lap, but it is really about Team Pritzker dropping the ball.
As has been said many times Governors own. I suspect how the Governor handled Covid will be a big issue in the fall.
The bottom line is that some kids will be put a risk.
Hopefully our vaccination rates for our children and seniors will keep going up.
Glad to see CPS sticking to their mask policy.
Feeling like we are just not safe from Covid yet.
Comment by Back to the Future Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:36 am
There was no risk for Dems to support the rule. Polling indicates the majority still supports mask mandates in schools for the time being. Taking a stand on the side of public safety appeals to most of us, if not the most vocal of us. The vote was intended to defeat the rule… it had to be planned.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:36 am
==24 months==
Interesting spin but the CDC doesn’t recommend masks at that age, nor are they in school. How can masks be to blame for two year olds if they are not wearing them?
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:42 am
===Can someone explain why IDPH went to JCAR…=== Because Pritzker’s emergency order on school masking expired on Feb. 13 (150 days after it went into effect). So IDPH had to go to JCAR for a new emergency order. Perfect storm of timing.
Comment by Citizen Kane Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:42 am
I thought this would happen with the standing argument. See what I said about the unconscious influence of the anti-mask crazies. Great job guys
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:42 am
If only the GA could pass legislation that clearly defines the Gov’s powers in a national or statewide emergency. And then if only the courts could see their way to enforcing the intent of the legislation. It seems so simple. It is beyond frustrating when a super majority party can’t find ways to enact laws that the majority of us want to protect our health and safety.
Comment by froganon Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:46 am
==The governor would have been wise not to push a rule through while the judicial was considering the appeal.==
The rule was expiring.
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:47 am
froganon - one consequence of this may be legislation that gives the governor stronger (or at least, as you say, more clear) emergency powers. But onlly after the election, and only if Pritzker is reelected and the democrats do well statewide.
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:49 am
===As has been said many times Governors own===
Yep.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:49 am
This may have been covered and I missed it, but who were the Democrats who let JCAR overrule The Governor? I’m a grandparent, former teacher, and father of teachers. This ruling is a real letdown. That said I agree the GA should have formalized a more cohesive response to COVID
Comment by Stormsw7706 Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 8:54 am
I fault Pritzker’s advisors for filing a new emergency rule. This put JCAR in play and set the stage for the mooting.
Comment by Norseman Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:00 am
“Bill Cunnigham and Tony Munoz voted “Present,” by the way. Sen. Kimberly Lightford was not at the hearing.”
So it looks like the three democrats who voted against it were:
ANTONIO MUÑOZ
MIKE HALPIN
FRANCES ANN HURLEY
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:02 am
Consider this a deletion of my comment. I just saw the reasonable explanation for the new rule. I didn’t get that from the coverage.
Comment by Norseman Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:04 am
It expired February 13, 150 days after it was issued. If they didn’t extend it, how would it stay in effect? This has already been covered in the comments.
https://www.illinois.gov/government/executive-orders/executive-order.executive-order-number-24.2021.html
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:06 am
Two members of the Mod Caucus steering committee and one member of the Black Caucus taking some of the most important votes in the state ends in legislative horse trading should not surprise anyone.
Comment by Stalling Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:06 am
Does the legislature have the votes to pass a mask mandate? If not, will the Gov issue a new emergency order? How does it impact his other mask mandates. If kids don’t have to where a mask in school, why should adults have to wear one in Target? What are the options. Will there be an expedited appeal to the Supreme Court?
Comment by Kelly Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:10 am
Someone should ask Jesse Sullivan if he agrees with the Pope that people have a moral obligation to get vaccinated:
https://www.npr.org/2022/01/10/1071785531/on-covid-vaccinations-pope-says-health-care-is-a-moral-obligation
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:14 am
Walther, thanks for the enlightenment on why so many Asian nations, that have used masks intermittently for many years, do so poorly on international tests.
On another note, Sen. Lightford’s behavior and representation relating to CV-19 has been incredibly disappointing. From the Loretto Hospital scandal to failing to find the time to even appear for the JCAR hearing leave me hoping that I have another choice on the ballot when her term is up.
Comment by James Holderman's lost conscience Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:14 am
“The CDC just lowered the standards for speech in early childhood development. Now children should know ~50 words at 30mo rather than 24 months. The CDC just lowered the bar for milestones because development is clearly hindered by something (masks).”
You clearly don’t understand how these CDC guidelines work. Previously, these guidelines represented what 50% of children at a given age were doing. This has now changed to what 75% of children are doing. These milestones are used as a screener for kids to get early childhood interventions.
It had nothing to do with masks. 50% of kids will still say around 50 words at 24 months but 75% of kids will be saying 50 words at 30 months. (By the way, the previous guidelines didn’t even have milestones for 15 or 30 months.)
Again, it had nothing to do with masks.
Comment by M Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:15 am
Arrogance kills.
There are plenty out there who think they got it right. Battle with school parents at your own peril. If logic prevailed, imagine how far afield the conversation here is. You simply cannot believe any judge, let alone a panel could disagree with your point of view. A separate power came to a separate decision. Repeating. Arrogance kills. Learn it or things can change very quickly.
Comment by A Guy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:25 am
Is there a chance Lightford didn’t appear because she would have been the lone vote supporting JB? He did support her for Senate President after all. Did she know what was about to happen and thought absence was better than being the single vote in support? That’s plausible to me.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:27 am
For the post from A Guy, I recommend imagining it rendered in letters cut out from magazines.
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:28 am
===Arrogance kills===
Very true, and it’s why we’ve seen hundreds of thousands of covid deaths because people arrogantly believed their immune systems alone would protect them and others.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:34 am
A Guy.
Militant right out in force today, eh?
Comment by Jason Bourne Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:35 am
===Arrogance kills===
So does covid. 900,000 found out the hard way.
Comment by PublicServant Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:38 am
Glad I’m not a school board member wishing to continue with kids wearing masks today and next variant outbreak.
Comment by BTO2 Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:39 am
==Very true, and it’s why we’ve seen hundreds of thousands of covid deaths because people arrogantly believed their immune systems alone would protect them and others.==
Somewhere, some time you saw me debate the fact you’re stating? Don’t think so. Statistics have changed (thank God) for the positive? Think so. Fact remains, Arrogance kills.
Comment by A Guy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:39 am
==Arrogance kills.==
Yep. And it’s the arrogance of the anti-vax, anti-mask, anti-mandate crowd that has killed more than should have been killed.
So don’t lecture us about arrogance.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:39 am
So what’s the over/under on how soon Pritzker releases a response (action?)?
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:39 am
@ IL COncerned
=I am worried about the newer BA.2 subvariant to Omicron.=
This is the potential nightmare scenario, right? Should a serious variant like BA.2 take off throughout downstate IL, there is no way in Hades that even schools will be able to force children to wear masks. Locals will conclude DeVore won and masks are not required. While that is not what this ruling concludes (it simply says this is a moot case because it is no longer a live case), I am certain most of those opposing masks on the newly found grounds of “due process” will simply suggest neither the state nor the local school administrators nor the school boards have the authority to impose mask mandates. If so, there will be potential serious health ramifications (and attendance problems) while the courts revive the case.
Hopefully, just as the current data suggest most people are now immunized sufficiently to resists Omicron, so too will most people now be sufficiently immunized to resist new variants. But for those who are not able, what a nightmare this court has wrought by not addressing the issue of enforcement of emergency powers.
Comment by H-W Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:40 am
===So it looks like the three democrats who voted against it ===
You really need to subscribe, or at least stop commenting until you do a little homework.
Taking a walk or voting present is effectively a vote in favor of the governor’s position in this matter.
The only people who voted with the Republicans were the three House Democrats.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:40 am
Couldn’t this all have been avoided if the democrat controlled legislature passed, and the governor signed, a law mandating masking in schools? Oops, I’m sorry. I was temporarily lost in a haze of responsible and accountable politicians. Never mind.
Comment by Motambe Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:40 am
===Arrogance kills.===
“Freedom and ‘Merica”
A man refused to get vaccinated so he can receive a heart transplant.
Think on that.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:41 am
==A Guy.
Militant right out in force today, eh?==
Jason Bourne aka JB,
No.
Comment by A Guy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:41 am
===I was temporarily lost in a haze of responsible and accountable politicians.===
The unintended consequences of pushing and wanting the idea and truth of “Governors own”… played out to an end.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:42 am
Demo,
You should know better. Let’s see if the pack and the Leader of the Pack continue to ridicule judges. Does anyone really believe those 3 votes in JCAR were not influenced by the parents and residents in those districts? Dems represent a lot of more conservative districts than they used to. The old speaker knew that. The new one is learning the hard way.
Comment by A Guy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:45 am
===Does anyone really believe those 3 votes in JCAR were not influenced by the parents and residents in those districts?===
Speculation until they speak on the matter.
It could be the polling in their districts favored masks, and they personally don’t.
Speaking for the three, speculation, is just that.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:48 am
==Battle with school parents at your own peril.==
Good thing to remind the people against masks in schools, since the majority of parents support it.
I know, I know. “Everyone you know” is against masks in schools. But every parent I know is for it, so we can go anecdote to anecdote. I’ll take the data as a tie breaker.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:48 am
==Does anyone really believe those 3 votes in JCAR were not influenced by the parents and residents in those districts?==
Given how frequently you’ve been wrong on your declarations of what people “really believe”, yes, yes I do.
The fact is, “JCAR wanted someone else to solve the problem” perfectly adequately explains the issue, so we don’t need to get into your esoteric theories of how the polling is wrong and only A Guy’s personal observations are right, finally, this time, for the first time.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:51 am
==were not influenced by the parents and residents in those districts?==
And you’ve also hit on what has been one of the most ridiculous things that has happened during this pandemic, which is that responding to one is somehow political.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:52 am
==which is that responding to one is somehow political==
Well, anything the government does is fundamentally political. Maybe it’d be nice if we could keep partisan, electoral politics out of it? But since it first hit in an election year- and it’s now another election year- that would’ve been hard to pull off.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:55 am
Rich - a present vote or not voting at all does not equate to a direct vote with the republicans on this. I agree with that. But it also doesn’t equate to a vote in full support of the Gov’s position, which I believe this vote needed from the democrats. I’m a party guy, and it certainly mattered to me. I want to believe they are there to support me, and we’ve delivered them super majorities to do that.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:55 am
The courts logic here was weirdly circular.
The JCAR acted as it did entirely because they were waiting to see what the courts said. And the courts are now saying well, thanks to that, we don’t really need to rule at all?
I think justice white had the right of it. The issue of the governors authority to issue mask and testing requirements wasn’t moot and should have been ruled on.
Comment by Nick Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 9:59 am
==The JCAR acted as it did entirely because they were waiting to see what the courts said. And the courts are now saying well, thanks to that, we don’t really need to rule at all? ==
I admit that the situation ends up being silly, but courts aren’t really supposed to consider “why” a legislature takes certain action unless it can help explain what an ambiguous statute means.
==The issue of the governors authority to issue mask and testing requirements wasn’t moot and should have been ruled on. ==
But, to the best of my knowledge, the EO wasn’t the basis of the lawsuit or the appeal, the IDPH rule was. Generally speaking, we want courts to limit themselves to the precise question in front of them.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 10:04 am
==the EO wasn’t the basis of the lawsuit or the appeal, the IDPH rule was==
So it would have been useful to decide on the authority of the IDPH to issue rules.
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 10:07 am
==So it would have been useful to decide on the authority of the IDPH to issue rules. ==
It would’ve been, but then JCAR didn’t extend the rule- so there was no rule, and thus, no case. At that point, it’s essentially an advisory opinion, and courts just hate to issue those.
You don’t have to like it. I don’t. But it explains why the court didn’t do it.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 10:10 am
==The fact is, “JCAR wanted someone else to solve the problem” ==
Last response. I keep hearing the GA dropped the ball. With a supermajority, the Majority in the GA certainly dropped the ball. By not meeting, by not establishing remote sooner in there Arena Phase, by simply not being interested in even doing a hearing on what the (tyranically perceived) Governor was doing. Arrogance by the Majority to go with Arrogance by the Governor. Both openly chided the 3rd Branch of government; more arrogance. Today’s discussion reveals how little has been learned. Covid is real. Always was. It’s far less fatal as it has been more weakly mutated. There are effective vaccines. There are effective treatments. Masks, while helpful, were not inpenetrable by any means. These policies, well meaning as they may have been have had very severe consequences on many people as well, from education to employment to everything else. Recognize that. Could we be slowly seeing many more tens of thousands of people die or impaired from the collateral damage of these policies? Perhaps be quiet and think about it before your clever response or insults that don’t bother me an iota. This isn’t a victory dance. We’ll be living with the fallout of this for years. There’s no celebration. Realization and more collaboration would work for me.
Arrogance kills.
Comment by A Guy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 10:11 am
===Arrogance by the Majority to go with Arrogance by the Governor.===
The GA did not want any responsibly to any orders during the pandemic.
How can one be arrogant AND abdicate as to not to be held accountable?
You can’t.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 10:13 am
==very severe consequences on many people==
==Could we be slowly seeing many more tens of thousands of people die or impaired from the collateral damage of these policies?==
From wearing masks? No. If you’re going to make over the top claims, you need to find some facts to back them up. Is there any evidence that even a single person has died from wearing a mask?
Comment by The Velvet Frog Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 10:16 am
OW,
You pretend to be a smart man. Nothin could be more arrogant. For example, read your last response and then perhaps give your ears a chance. Refusal to learn is even worse than arrogance. Ciao.
Comment by A Guy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 10:17 am
===Arrogance kills.===
… and yet the very same people that will celebrate are the arrogant that likely won’t get vaccinated, vaccinate eligible children, and for sure won’t wear masks.
“Freedom and ‘Merica” is the antithesis of… “promote the general welfare”
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 10:17 am
===You pretend to be a smart man. Nothin could be more arrogant.===
… yet you didn’t say it wasn’t true.
Who said I was smart? I missed that, lol
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 10:18 am
I believe these two stories influenced Rep. Hurley’s JCAR vote:
https://wgntv.com/news/coronavirus/parents-upset-their-children-were-told-to-wear-masks-in-mount-greenwood-school-despite-lawsuit/
https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2022/02/16/principal-at-queen-of-martyrs-fired-despite-protest-from-parents-students/
Comment by Jockey Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 10:24 am
==Last response.==
I guess not.
==Arrogance by the Majority to go with Arrogance by the Governor.==
I don’t see the arrogance in either place. I think the GA has erred from the start by making the Executive go it alone, but that’s not an error of arrogance, that’s an error of laziness. And I don’t see how the Governor was arrogant at all, unless he’s just not supposed to fight for his policies…
…which of course is exactly what you mean. He has a policy that you disagree with, so he is not allowed to pursue it. And you call other people “arrogant”.
==These policies, well meaning as they may have been have had very severe consequences on many people as well, from education to employment to everything else.==
Every government policy has negative consequences for someone. So does *no government policy*.
==Could we be slowly seeing many more tens of thousands of people die or impaired from the collateral damage of these policies?==
Could we be quickly seeing many more tens of thousands of people die or impaired from the collateral damage of not taking simple mitigation measures? Perhaps be quiet and think about it before I make another clever response or insult that clearly does bother you, since your “last response” ended up not being your last response since you just *had* to get a dig in at OW.
==Arrogance kills. ==
I’m going to remember this mantra next time you try to tell me that the data is wrong because of your personal experiences, pal.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 10:33 am
==You pretend to be a smart man.==
And you pretend to be tribune of what the people “actually” want, no matter how much the evidence says otherwise, based solely on your personal observations.
So, I mean, I guess I would credit you as something of an expert on “arrogance”.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 10:35 am
Pritker’s COVID record since the mask mandate was implemented last year speaks for itself: fewest per capita hospitalizations and deaths per 100k in the Midwest, and fewer hospitalizations and less ICU use than when the mandate started. The bottom line is saving lives, reducing suffering and easing the burden on front line health workers. That’s a strong campaign message.
Comment by Grandson of Man Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 11:19 am
I guess that some commenters think that a child cannot talk or learn with a face mask. Usually children are physically in a classroom & they can talk & write on instructional curriculum that the teacher or teachers place in their lesson plan. The commenters’ views don’t make any sense.
Comment by Chris in ChiTown Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 11:31 am
==I guess that some commenters think that a child cannot talk or learn with a face mask.==
There are certainly limitations to it, tho. I’ve had speech teachers tell me it’s more awkward to teach students when they can’t see your mouth move, and facial expressions are just a huge part of communication in general. But I would agree that these problems are surmountable, and not as big of a deal as certain critics claim.
Comment by Arsenal Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 11:36 am
==People are learning about JCAR. If you have ever worked in a state agency or gov’s office, you know too well the JCAR process is pretty much another chase for the legislative branch to “check” the executive branch.==
At least JCAR attempted to stand up and say No to Blago particularly on health care expansion and facility closures–even though he went around them and did it anyway. I admired them and liked them better when they were trying to stop Blago’s schemes. Not in the past few days with their cowardice, however.
Comment by NonAFSCMEStateEmployeeFromChatham Friday, Feb 18, 22 @ 12:31 pm