C’mon, man
Friday, Jun 4, 2021 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Amanda Vinicky…
In his interview on Chicago Tonight, Pritzker also defended his actions following a government watchdog’s report that found a lack of preparation and of communication at the LaSalle Veteran Home contributed to a COVID-19 outbreak.
The inspector general’s audit found that the team at LaSalle requested asymptomatic employees show up for shifts even after they’d tested positive for COVID-19, lax masking by staff, and lacked a formal response plan even in October ‘20 when risks of transmission were well known.
At least 36 residents died in the final three months of last year.
“Let me start by reminding you that we’ve been in a global pandemic that has had no mercy, particularly on those who are elderly, those who are in nursing homes,” Pritzker said.
The governor said residents of the nearby community who weren’t wearing masks led to a high local rate of COVID-19 infections, which were brought into the LaSalle home.
Full quote…
This is really challenging. People in the community where that veterans’ home resides aren’t wearing masks and when they’ve got a very high rate of infection, case positivity, test positivity in that area. People who live there and work at the home, unfortunately, were bringing that into the home.
He’s not wrong about the problems in that community, of course. There was a lot of Downstate resistance to mitigations as the state experienced its devastating second wave, and that attitude infected, hospitalized and killed a whole lot of people. Period. But, that doesn’t even begin to excuse the fact that the state had no adequate protocols in place and local and state management was horrid. That would be on the governor.
* Meanwhile, the governor made this claim about Rep. Butler to more than one reporter yesterday, but Hannah Meisel went back to check the actual record…
The governor also pointed to comments from State Rep. Tim Butler (R-Springfield) earlier this spring at a press conference with U.S. Rep. Rodney Davis, who said a fair map would elect more Republicans.
“Does that sound fair to you?” Pritzker asked Thursday. “Does that sound like Republicans are really fighting for fair maps? That’s not what they’re fighting for…What they want to draw is a partisan map in their favor. So at this point I don’t believe anything that they say about this.”
The governor was referring to an April 12th appearance at the Capitol where Butler said he’d heard testimony from communities both in Chicago and rural areas of Illinois. He also drew upon his experience representing a slice of Springfield in the House.
“If you stop dividing up these communities for political reasons, you are going to see more competitive elections and probably you’re going to see more Republicans in the legislature,” Butler said. “I don’t know what the right number is but I guarantee if the lines are more fair, you’re going to see more Republicans in the legislature.”
Butler was being disingenuous about his definition of community. Towns that aren’t landlocked gerrymander their own boundaries quite often when they annex turf.
But Butler isn’t out of line to speculate that, without Democrats putting their fingers on the scale, a fair map could wind up with some districts being more winnable for Republicans. And while I agree that the Republicans would stick it to the Democrats if they were given the right to draw the maps, I don’t think there’s any evidence of that intent within Butler’s remarks.
- Almost the Weekend - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 10:17 am:
For the crowd who doesn’t think Pritzker is running that quote is all you need to know.
Not blaming LCL nor the Deputy Governor instead blaming the local residents in a medium sized county that’s been trending red since 2008. Heck not even admitting any mistake is Rauneresque.
Hes running…
- TheInvisibleMan - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 10:28 am:
— That would be on the governor. —
While he certainly owns the situation, the only thing I can fault him for here is not issuing additional orders to address the local failures to comply. There was a strong push in these types of areas for ‘local control’ because the claim circulating in the area was the state didn’t understand how the state directives were impacting local areas. These local areas decided to ignore state guidelines. He could have kept firing leadership at such a facility until it becomes a revolving door, but it still wouldn’t change the overall problem of individuals at the facility ignoring guidelines when outside of working at the facility.
In a hypothetical situation where there is a severe drought in the summer, the state would issue guidance for no public fireworks displays. Is the responsibility also on the state when local officials ignore those guidelines and hold such displays anyway, then leading to homes burning down. I would think in such a case there wouldn’t be any question the fault was with local officials and not the state.
Perhaps the main error here in the big picture is placing state run facilities in areas which do not want to listen to the state. To prevent this in the future, maybe all state facilities of this nature should be located in areas which have demonstrated an ability to abide by state laws.
- Just Me 2 - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 10:31 am:
If the Democrats believe their policy ideas are so much better, then they should be able to defend them in campaigns with districts that aren’t gerrymandered.
- Pizza Man - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 10:34 am:
Read this today from WSJ’s editorial board…wow.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-incredible-illinois-gerrymander-11622759603
It’s always going to be a partisan map led by the party that is the majority in the GA.
- Candy Dogood - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 10:38 am:
===lax masking by staff===
The state lost an opportunity with it’s mask policy. There’s no faster way to figure out which exempt employees to fire than by seeing whether or not they were able to adhere to an agency’s mask policy and whether or not they actually followed instructions to order staff to work from home, or lied to them in order to have them return to the office when it was not necessary.
A supervisor that won’t enforce a mask policy or a supervisor that won’t actually follow work from home instructions is one that very clearly isn’t going to follow policy, regulation, or statute they disagree with either and they should be fired but as it has always been with the state there will be minimal consequences for people in PSA and SPAS titles.
=== People in the community where that veterans’ home resides aren’t wearing masks and when they’ve got a very high rate of infection, case positivity, test positivity in that area.===
Why, even the legislators which represent those communities were calling for an end to mask mandates on social media and participating in events without masks.
===Butler was being disingenuous about his definition of community===
Given his statements on Capital Township, it is an awfully fun take.
- Anyone Remember - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 10:53 am:
The kindest thing that can be said about the statement by “Tantrum Tim” is he is historically unaware. The “slicing and dicing” of Springfield’s districts started with the GOP’s 1990 Census remap designed to take out then-Rep. Durbin. Specifically, for his Voting Rights Lawsuit testimony about the existence and operation(s) of the Sangamon County “Republicrat” Party.
- Shield - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 10:57 am:
At the same press conference, Davis and the Republicans attacked HR 1, a proposed federal law to require independent commissions for congressional redistricting nationwide.
- lake county democrat - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:06 am:
Hey Governor, respond to me, a Democrat who wants fair maps and who you promised you would use your veto to ensure.
- Louis G Atsaves - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:23 am:
The Governor’s definition of a fair map is basically one that will not elect more Republicans but instead will elect more Democrats?
You’d think he would come up with a better reason to sign the bill than that one. Or maybe the real problem is trying to reasonably explain why he now favors gerrymandered maps drawn not by an independent commission?
- Candy Dogood - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:24 am:
=== Is the responsibility also on the state when local officials ignore those guidelines and hold such displays anyway, then leading to homes burning down. ===
There’s definitely room to debate a deeper meaning of “Governors own” but I have always presumed that this referred to the political ramifications and not moral or ethical ramifications. While there are certainly things the administration could have theoretically done the root cause of the problem was the local staff and local leadership of the staff along with an absent director. People place a lot of trust in their staff to accurately report what is going on and since the failure was widespread, I would imagine lying about it to superiors would be widespread as well.
I may have felt differently about this before the pandemic, but after what I have seen and heard about over the last year and a half I think it might be a good idea for agency directors to have “someone they trust” periodically surprise satellite offices and facilities to see how things are going.
What happened in the LaSalle Veterans Home was terrible, but we can at least try to learn from it. I think that’s why the legislators representing that area frustrate me so much because they have the gall to rail against mask mandates and indoor dining restrictions and then be upset when the impact of their behavior (and that of others) is that people die.
At the end of this some epidemiologist is going to take some data and build a regression and we’ll be able to have an idea of how many hundreds or even thousands of people died in our state because local governments didn’t encourage or enforce public health measures and just told people to “make their own choices.”
That’s why no one goes to the Good Place.
- thisjustinagain - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:49 am:
To: Candy Dogood “Governors Own”:
No, there are times Governors own something ethically and morally. LaSalle is one of those; JB and his team fumbled issuing critical guidance to State agencies and operations, then failed at both the Governor’s Office and IDVA/IDPH management and supervisory personnel to follow up in person, in real time to timely ensure strict compliance. The explanations coming out now of what happened are owned by those who repeatedly and fatally failed our veterans. There is no parsing politics vs. morality/ethics on something this terrible; criminal liability should also attach to them. The terrible disconnect between IDPH and the county/city health departments is another example; at some point it became an ethical issue, with a lack of decisive exercise of authority by the State against the health departments playing politics with lives; those who allowed it to go on bear an ethical responsibility and will own it forever.
- Candy Dogood - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 2:35 pm:
===No, there are times Governors own something ethically and morally.===
I appreciate your opinion, but ethical and moral implications are typically opinion oriented. The rule that “governors own” as a practical political matter is easier to demonstrate because it does not matter who is actually responsible for what occurs, because it is the Governor’s administration and he is the person who runs for office he owns it.
It sounds like the staff out the ground routinely failed to comply with the instructions they were given and that management at the facility had other priorities besides keeping people safe during a pandemic.
There were a lot of people in positions of authority who were lying about what was going on or repeating lies about what was going on, or simply ignoring instructions that they received.
===criminal liability should also attach to them===
This is an awfully high bar to reach.
===with a lack of decisive exercise of authority by the State against the health departments playing politics with lives===
While I don’t disagree with the sentiment, I wonder about the pragmatism of making this attempt when local law enforcement has started making public statements about refusing to comply with things they think to be illegal or unconstitutional orders.
- TheInvisibleMan - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 2:46 pm:
– The terrible disconnect between IDPH and the county/city health departments is another example –
Sorry, I’m just thinking about the history of why we have county level health departments, and how history has come full circle on this. Which seems to be lost on those who don’t know why county level health departments were created. There’s no disconnect here, just a failure of local health departments almost across the board.
The state gave the power, through state law passed in 1943, to counties who were demanding local control and financing of health issues. Before it was an official department, they were called “health defense zones”. Now that the local control they demanded has proven to be a fault and not a strength, they are going to get angry at the state for listening to them and giving the counties what they asked for? I’m sure there is a subset of the population who will fall for this, but it’s a disingenuous argument to say the least.
The experiment failed, and with a historical perspective combined with recent events it becomes even more clear why this should be a state agency alone, and not split between state and county health departments. Much like the DMV has offices in every county, but the county doesn’t get to decide what the rules of the road are independent from the state rules.