Skip to main content

The Emergency Has Become A Money Pot


“I think this is the only path forward. It is the right thing to do. ... Ultimately, it allows parents to make that final choice”
– State Senator Rob Samson on the question “Who should decide?”

Let’s begin with the obvious.

COVID and its variants, each succeeding variant more contagious but far less fatal than its predecessor, is not an emergent medical problem. It has been with us on the front pages of our newspapers for two years, approximately 730 days. We are old enemies. Here in Connecticut, “science,” such as it is, has prompted the state to redraw its battle lines.

Many stores no longer requiring masks have pulled themselves back from the economic brink. The emergency powers of Governor Lamont, more than 20 as Connecticut entered its first year of the pandemic that originated in China, a hostile communist, authoritarian regime, have been trimmed considerably. All the indicators, both in the United States and Europe, suggest that COVID has now become manageable – to be treated in the future as have other flu-like viruses.

In what sense is a non-emergent medical problem an emergency?

Governor Ned Lamont’s numerous executive orders have now been reduced to two, a positive sign on the part of the Lamont administration that the emergency is no longer emergent.

The reduction of emergency powers leads us to several questions, some of which have not been addressed openly in the court of public opinion, since news generating public hearings on issues of grave importance to Connecticut have been one of the many casualties of the shutdown of the General Assembly.

Why now? Why are most executive orders headed for the ashcan of history now?

Chris Keating of the Hartford Courant, a longtime reporter who has managed to avoid being submerged into the Coronavirus political sewer pipe or the attendant  political whirlpool, writes in a February 11 story, “House extends emergencies to guarantee federal money, “After a sometimes passionate debate, state legislators voted Thursday afternoon to extend two emergencies so that the state can continue to receive more than $50 million in critical federal funds.”

The debate lasted two hours and the two money making measures passed on a party line vote. The vote was necessary because Lamont’s emergency powers were due to expire on February 15.

As in all debates in the General Assembly, both sides of the issue up for discussion -- should mask mandates in schools lapse along with the bulk of the governor’s extraordinary powers? – were represented by different legislators, a welcomed return to normalcy.

Arguing in favor of continuing the state’s masking policy in schools was Middletown Democrat State Senator Matt Lesser, who pointed out that a measure before the Senate rejected by Republicans that would continue a masking policy in schools “does not grant the governor any powers. We are reclaiming the legislature’s authority ... We all want the pandemic to end. We are all exhausted.’’

Lesser’s party also rejected “an amendment Monday that would have allowed parents — rather than school boards or the governor — to make the final decision on whether individual students wear masks in school.”

Both the Governor and Democrats in the General Assembly had already let fall from Lamont’s iron plenary grip decision making powers that now reverted to municipalities. Decisions that previously had rested entirely with Lamont would now be made by the municipal governing authority, with one notable exception. The decision on the question – to mask, or not to mask -- would remain with a General Assembly dominated by Democrats that adamantly refused to allow parents to decide whether their children should be forced to wear masks at a time when many important scientists had agreed that the prophylactic utility of masks had been, so to speak, greatly exaggerated.

Concerning the utility of masks, the “yes, no” meandering pronouncements issued over the years by Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s chief COVID policy enforcer, suggests, at the very least, that so called “science” – the last refuge, some think, of authoritarian scoundrels – had not affirmed Fauci’s  politically shifting dicta.

And somewhere along the line, woke parents noticed that “science” was being used by master politicians to sanction dubious policies, a realization that  has flowered, among other places, in Boards of Education meetings, even in quiet, austere, go-along-to-get-along Connecticut.

Tempers are not so much flaring as changing in Connecticut. There is a cleavage in the question – should young children be forced to wear masks in schools? – that has not sufficiently been appreciated by politicians.

Two questions, not one, have been presented to Connecticut parents. Question one: Should children in, say, K-8 be forced to wear masks, given the changes that have occurred in the “science” of COVID from 2020 to 2022? And question two: Who is best able to decide the issue, a parent familiar with the quirks, medical and otherwise, of their child, as always in consultation with the child’s doctor, or a remote bureaucrat, state or national, irrationally and unscientifically committed to a one-size-fits-all solution to whatever ails us, medically or politically?

The answer to the second question is now being played out in Boards of Education meetings across Connecticut. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."