When listening to the press conference yesterday something jumped out to me. Dr. Ezike stressed numerous times that if you had been exposed to someone that tested positive for COVID that you need to isolate for 14 days because even if you test negative on day 10 you could become symptomatic or test positive on day 11. But this seems to contradict what we were told about the Governor being exposed on a Monday, testing negative and then being out and about on Thursday (just three days after exposure). I may be missing something, and if I am, please inform me of what it is. But it seems like contradictory information.
A few months ago it was a bit overwhelming to have all sports going on at the same time, seemingly all the time. Now there is only the embarrassing, atrocious Bears and it feels like a wasteland. Especially with Covid spiking again, I miss the opiate of the masses.
Mnunchin confirmed today that the MLF program will expire December 31. Does the Gov/Ferichs have authorization to borrow or do they need Legislative approval which will not come until next year given the delayed session making this option mute?
- Parler the impaler - Friday, Nov 20, 20 @ 9:31 am:
So, JB endures all the heat for Covid restrictions while legislators get to shelter away from voters on the issue for the most part. Does the Madigan stuff make JB more inclined to want to toss the legislature into the thunder dome or does he shoulder the burden and potentially not run in two years?
During a normal week yes. This being the week before Thanksgiving, most news dumps will be held until next Wednesday.
- Parler the impaler - Friday, Nov 20, 20 @ 9:43 am:
Peter L. if you have a close contact exposure you must quarantine for 10-14 days. I do not know where you heard “you quarantine for 10 days max” but that is incorrect. Yes, JB certainly flouted the public health best practices, which is very concerning.
re: quarantine times etc. I have been explaining this to folks for weeks now…this is the current CDC guideance and such a handy calader of examples.
Re: JB’s outing - I think that the niggest dfference is that that said exposure did fall into the close contact category.
this link may help clear up some of the confusion https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/if-you-are-sick/quarantine.html
Eastside, Peter L, Parler,
This confusion of messaging is how credibility slowly gets eroded to the point where nobody is sure what is true and what is not. So they make up their own rules. It can’t be easy for multiple big government entities to stay on the same page and be consistent when many are talking at once and scientific knowledge keeps progressing and changing. I’m not blaming anyone, but this is why we have a large part of the populace who have dialed out the “experts” and the government. I’m not sure it was avoidable.
Good grief I should be banned for failing to proof read before hitting send. Biggest difference in Gov’s “exposure” is that it did NOT fall under close contact criteria (as was explained by Dr. Ezike)
I promise - will proof closely going forward
Looking at the Speaker of the House issue from the opposite side, what would be the harm if Mr. Madigan deciding to step down? Isn’t a calm transition of leadership possible? Wouldn’t doing so be an effective strategy for Democratic control of the legislature? Just asking. I vote mostly Democratic, and just want to see a focus on the potential positives of transitioning leadership.
I did not hear Dr. Ezike make the distinction of “close contact” in her remarks yesterday. Maybe she did and I missed it. But it is also something that would likely be lost on most even if she did make the distinction. Does not appear to be a clear bright line which you think would be desired by an Adminstration trying to place these restrictions is small, repeatable quips.
Shane Falco - Absolutely correct! In 2017 the Executive Ethics Commission posted an OEIG report about the wife of then candidate for Sangamon County Sheriff on Wednesday, November 22, 2017, the day before Thanksgiving. Taking out the trash, as it were.
Funny thing was Jim Leach of WMAY had it on their news before his afternoon show, and Bernie Schoenberg had in on the SJ-R website by 7 PM that day.
You’re not wrong, but I would be weighing the fact that every time a member of the caucus finds the courage to speak out that they are creating another story and the potential to control the narrative shifts, but that might be more of a long term interest than they have.
I am actually quite concerned that this whole thing will be drawn out until next year and would greatly impeded the ability for the legislature and the Democratic caucus to successfully address the state’s current budget shortfalls. Innocent or not — and trying to cast Madigan as the hapless public servant who trusted the wrong people is possibility, but difficult to buy — Madigan’s presence can tank public support for a lot of the possible solutions just by being there and distract from the real conversations that need to be had.
We already know what the GOP’s playbook is on tax increases, no matter how beneficial they would be to 97% of Illinoisans or almost all of their constituents. I don’t feel like defending every possible means to raise revenue against, “Why? So Mike Madigan can give it to someone who bribed him?”
This isn’t a romantic comedy where a series of misunderstandings has caused our unlikely hero to be cast in a bad light that isn’t representative of who they are. This is a series of federal indictments that requires the public to decide whether Mike Madigan was aware but good at avoiding creating evidence of this or woefully unaware and just trusting the wrong people.
Ask yourself: At this point in Speaker Madigan’s career how many people are going to buy the narrative that he was witless and naive old man whose friends took advantage of his trust?
Speaker Madigan needs to do this now. If he is getting good advice, they are telling him to do this now. The fact that he hasn’t risks making the entire sum of his career about his self centered efforts to cling to power when the indictments started coming.
Are there people who have benefited from Speaker Madigan’s leadership? You bet. We all have.
Are there people who are going to be harmed by his continued efforts to retain the Speakership? You bet, and some of that harm has already come to pass and it’s just going to get worse.
He might be innocent before the law, but no one should be capable of reasonably believing that Speaker Madigan has not been at the center of a patronage racket for decades, and no one is going to believe he was unaware that the racket existed.
And then there’s the Caterpillar investigation. If he stays there is going to be a sequel.
Speaker Madigan’s power and authority only exists to the extent of which others decide to remain complicit.
Peoria Journal-Star has a good article about who gets the COVID vaccines first once they’re ready, with 5 groups of phases: Phase 1A (including front-line health care), 1B (underlying conditions, 65 & over in group facilities), 2 (includes teachers and child care workers), 3 (including young adults, children, those working in higher ed), and 4 (the rest of the general population):
==Where does front-line State Employees fall in this phase plan?==
Possibly varies depending on the agency. I would check with your HR, or your Union rep if you’re Union. I would think they have an idea of what plan is in place.