Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Behind last week’s quorum fight
Next Post: After years of judicial threats, DCFS director held in contempt of court
Posted in:
* Jake Griffin at the Daily Herald…
Before COVID-19 vaccines became available in late 2020, the virus had claimed 145 of every 100,000 Illinois residents.
That was the 11th highest mortality rate for COVID-19 among the 50 states and Washington, D.C., in 2020.
In 2021, after the vaccines had been introduced and made widely available, Illinois recorded the 17th lowest per capita mortality rate in the country, according to U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The virus killed 102 of every 100,000 residents here.
In fact, CDC data show states with higher rates of fully vaccinated residents have significantly lower COVID-19 per capita mortality rates. […]
Only one of the 14 states with the highest COVID-19 per capita mortality rate in 2021 has a vaccination rate above 58%, according to CDC data.
* Meanwhile, here’s Mark Maxwell…
The Illinois Department of Labor filed new rules on Friday to officially adopt the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate for public and private sector employers with more than 100 workers.
According to the federal guidelines, employers must require their workers to show proof of vaccination or wear a mask and submit to testing to enter the workplace. The rules would also order employers to bar workers from the premises if they test positive for COVID-19. […]
While the Supreme Court suggested states could have more legal authority to implement a vaccine mandate over private business than the federal government, a spokesperson for Governor Pritzker said this new OSHA and Department of Labor rule would not be the mechanism to implement that kind of state-led mandate.
“If the court reversed the federal mandate, then our rule will also be rescinded,” Pritzker spokesperson Jordan Abudayyeh said. “We just have to match the feds with whatever happens and filing the rule gives people time to plan if it’s upheld.”
The state was facing a deadline to update the Illinois Department of Labor rule on Friday, which coincided with the Supreme Court’s arguments over the matter.
* Speaking of the US Supreme Court case…
Justice Clarence Thomas asked [Ohio Solicitor General Ben Flowers], who is arguing against the OSHA mandate on behalf of the state of Ohio, “Would the state of Ohio, and I’m not saying this would be an approach that you would take, but you had earlier a discussion about whether or not the federal government had police powers in the workforce and you suggested that the state has these police powers. Could the state of Ohio do what you say OSHA cannot do?”
“My position,” stated Flowers, who clerked for the late Justice Antonin Scalia, “is that the state of Ohio could mandate vaccinations not only for workers but for all individuals. I think that’s an important point to stress as we’re talking as though OHSA is the only entity that can regulate this.”
Emphasis added.
…Adding… Hmm…
First-dose vaccinations quadruple in Quebec ahead of restrictions at liquor and cannabis storeshttps://t.co/DRk3iyBjq9
— Ed Tubb (@EdTubb) January 8, 2022
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 8:58 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Behind last week’s quorum fight
Next Post: After years of judicial threats, DCFS director held in contempt of court
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
the key statement is here…
“If the court reversed the federal mandate, then our rule will also be rescinded,”
No way that JB asks IDPH to mandate statewide.
Comment by Donnie Elgin Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 9:14 am
If the Pritzker Administration is looking for advice a vaccine mandate on all employees might help his administration remove some of those PSAs and SPSAs from agency payrolls that shouldn’t be in public service to begin with.
Comment by Candy Dogood Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 9:43 am
Quebec isn’t allowing people to buy liquor or weed without proof of vaccination. I think that would work here too.
Comment by Cheryl44 Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 9:46 am
I saw Quebec’s results and thought the same as Cheryl 44 that could work here too. Of course the liquor stores would cheat in Effingham county and maybe Orland Park, but the other ones would probably enjoy applying it.
Comment by cermak_rd Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 9:50 am
==Ohio Solicitor General Ben Flowers==
Is he related to Mary Flowers?
Comment by NonAFSCMEStateEmployeeFromChatham Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 9:52 am
From the coverage I read there were a number of ridiculous things said. Thomas speaking of the ability of a worker to take off his hard hat when he got home, but couldn’t take off his vaccination. Perhaps Thomas can explain how that worker can take off his COVID infection prior to going home to his family. Flowers assertion that the Feds are powerless in the face of a multi-state pandemic while the state is omnipotent is mind boggling.
Hopefully, there is a couple of sane GOP justices to prevent the overturning of the mandate.
Comment by Norseman Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 9:53 am
“I’ll never get vaccinated… wait what? No weed or liquor? Get out of my way, I got a date with a needle.” S/ kinda
Comment by Bruce( no not him) Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:01 am
=Thinking such a mandate is sane for a vax that performs so poorly is somewhat….not sane.=
Thinking the vax isn’t effective is not sane. It is doing exactly what it should be doing.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:09 am
No surprise about states with lower vax/higher death rates. These are states that ideologically tend a certain way. No thanks.
The vax does not perform poorly. That’s more anti-vax propaganda. Vaccines protect against hospitalization and death, not just infection. The story is right here, about higher death rates among the unvaccinated, but those with eyes refuse to see (or push disinfo knowingly, to pander to the right wing).
Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:11 am
South Sangamon
Performs poorly? Your numbers please?
Comment by Old and In the Way Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:12 am
South Sangamon facts matter. Vaccines are not 100% effective and they were never claimed to be. Their intent is to help our bodies handle the virus better if/when we catch it. Talk to any hospital the majority of the critical patients are the unvaccinated. These folks are now filling the hospitals. The hospitals are now so full with these selfish folks that people with other illnesses are seeing their care delayed. I am linking an article with a great graph that shows the impact vaccines have. https://www.statista.com/chart/26159/covid-cases-us-age-group-vaccination-status/
Comment by illinifan Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:14 am
“Hopefully, there is a couple of sane GOP justices to prevent the overturning of the mandate”
Not a question of if Vaccines work. The lens that SCOTUS should use is, is the mandate legal and
under authority is the President/OHSA able to impose it. The chief Justice seems skeptical…
“I mean, this has been referred to the approach as a work-around. And I’m wondering what it is you’re trying to work around?” the Chief asked, adding it is “hard to argue” that Congress has given such “free rein” to OSHA, the agency that promulgated the mandate”
Comment by Donnie Elgin Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:21 am
southern Sangamon, would like a reliable source for that information. That is not at all what is reported in any hospital system that I am aware of….
Comment by illdoc Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:25 am
= It is doing exactly what it should be doing. =
For those who think in black and white, or more specifically have been conditioned to think this way, this makes sense to them as a complaint.
It doesn’t make sense as a real concern on the efficacy of vaccines, but coming from the perspective of those saying this it does make sense from their perspective.
When someone makes this claim that the vaccine doesn’t work, what they are doing is announcing they don’t know how vaccines work.
How this can be communicated better, I’m not sure but maybe;
“When you cook a steak, does it go instantly from raw to cooked exactly how you like it, or is there a period of time where the steak is still cooking, but is not yet cooked. You wouldn’t claim fire doesn’t cook steak during the time it is cooking, and for the same conceptual reasons it can’t be claimed vaccines aren’t working.”
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:25 am
South Sangamon banned for disinformation in 3..2..1..
Comment by Lowki Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:26 am
Rich highlights a couple of key points that I’ve maintained.
A) It is likely that SCOTUS will find OSHA exceeded their statutory / regulatory authority. By extension, it’s likely any Federal mandates that affect anyone other than Federal employees, and possibly Federal contractors, will be found unconstitutional. They can recommend but not mandate.
B) Individual State Public Health agencies DO have the authority to issue unuversal vaccination requirements / mandates. That is the regulatory path that should have been followed. And yes, I understand the Federal government may have problems getting some States to do so; such is the workings of a republic.
Comment by RNUG Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:28 am
=Well JS, 30% of our Covid inpatients are vaxxed and 25% of those in ICU status are vaxxed.=
Where? That is not what is being reported. Or…do you “feel” like those are the rates?
=Never in the modern history of vaccines would we have considered that successful, and people certainly shouldn’t be harassed over it.=
Never in the history of history have we had such an avalanche of nonsense.
And talk to me about harassment when the nuts quit showing up at school board meetings and the houses of administrators.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:30 am
The COVID vaccine is remarkably successful in keeping the vast majority of people out of the hospital and alive. It also keeps many from being infected after receiving the entire series. Not having it would have resulted in many thousands or millions more deaths and hospitalizations.
But, certain people must want more disease and death. Goes in line with anti-unionism, no Medicaid expansion,
Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:30 am
South Sangamon: can you unpack that a little more? Those numbers are vastly higher than those being reported elsewhere. Who is “our” patients?
Although even then, you’re suggesting that the vaccinated are much less likely to end up in the ICU than the unvaccinated, given that a majority of people are vaccinated but a majority of COVID-19 patients are unvaccinated.
Comment by Benjamin Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:33 am
The antivaxxers rely heavily on a definition of “vaccine” that requires 100% sterilizing immunity. That has never been rational (see, for example, influenza vaccine). But I found this Atlantic article an interesting response to that antivax argument - suggesting that NO vax is actually sterilizing, it just, at best, eliminates symptoms, so you’re still “infected” but you don’t have the disease - and without symptoms you never know you’re infected. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/09/sterilizing-immunity-myth-covid-19-vaccines/620023/
Comment by WestBurbs Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:44 am
Even before it was legalized in Quebec, at night in downtown Montreal you would smell people toking up everywhere.
One time was there with a group of co-workers and we got offered drugs 8 times (we had to google to look up some of the stuff we were offered).
Not at all surprised that a vaccine requirement is a motivator there.
Comment by OneMan Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 10:59 am
South Sangamon, you are incorrect. But name dropping Ed Cutis is cute.
https://www.sj-r.com/story/news/coronavirus/2022/01/07/springfield-il-hospitals-see-record-levels-covid-19-patients/9131579002/
Comment by FIREDup! Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 11:06 am
@WestBurbs, this issue is very interesting, and is THE debate we should be having–what level of sterilizing immunity is a sufficient basis for mandating a vaccine? I’ll read the article you shared at my next opportunity.
Is there anyone who does not agree that there’s *some* amount of sterilizing immunity a vaccine must confer in order for it to be mandated? So if a vax was 100% sterilizing I’d hope even the most ardent “Screw You, Liberty!!!” people would agree that the local gov’t’s police power could mandate it (perhaps with reasonable narrow exemptions/accommodations needed), but on the other hand if a vax was 0% sterilizing–i.e., conferred benefit only to the recipient but in no way stopped or even slowed spread–I’d hope that even the most ardent “Forcibly Jab Everyone!!!” people would agree that mandating such a vax would essentially be like mandating exercise or a healthy diet, and outside the scope of the gov’t’s police power.
I just don’t know where that line is drawn.
Comment by Steri-Curious Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 11:08 am
==But, certain people must want more disease and death. Goes in line with anti-unionism==
There’s also some pro-union people that apparently also want more disease and death. Examples: AFSCME (especially corrections staff), Roberta Lynch.
Comment by NonAFSCMEStateEmployeeFromChatham Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 11:35 am
Steri-Curious - I may have left the wrong impression. I strongly DISAGREE with your assertion that there must be “*some* amount of sterilizing immunity” for a vax mandate. I’m in favor of a mandate today - even if there is zero sterilizing immunity - because it would dramatically lower the burden on hospitals. We all suffer when hospitals are overburdened.
Comment by WestBurbs Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 11:35 am
===We all suffer when hospitals are overburdened.===
This. The protection extends beyond transmissibility to access to healthcare.
Imagine a scenario where a highly transmissible virus (e.g., R naught=100) causes 100% mortality in the unvaccinated if not hospitalized, and 0% hospitalization needed for the vaccinated, but the vaccine provides zero sterilizing immunity. Absent a vaccine mandate, only 50% of the population gets vaccinated. In Champaign county, that would be some 100K patients all at once for a hospital system that at most would support 200 patients. I’d hope that even the most ardent “Screw You, Liberty” would agree that the police power could mandate a vaccine that would save nearly half the population, irrespective of its sterilizing ability.
Comment by thechampaignlife Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 12:02 pm
And making matters worse for Knox County and surrounding areas, Galesburg’s Cottage Hospital has abruptly closed after recent federal moves to suspend the hospital’s Medicare and Medicaid eligibility:
https://www.galesburg.com/story/news/healthcare/2022/01/08/beleaguered-galesburg-cottage-hospital-now-closed-ceo-makes-no-announcement/9147349002/
Comment by NonAFSCMEStateEmployeeFromChatham Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 12:26 pm
=This. The protection extends beyond transmissibility to access to healthcare.=
If our main focus is easing the strain on our healthcare system, as it rightfully was at the earliest stages of the pandemic, and the effectiveness of the vaccine against viral spread is irrelevant to the appropriateness of a mandate, shouldn’t we target any vaccine mandates on individuals that are likely to require hospital stays? A vaccinated 70+ is more likely to be hospitalized than an unvaccinated 18-29 year old (and all that data out there says children are less than 18-29)
Source: https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1480562137734987778?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Comment by GoBulls Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 12:43 pm
@thechampaignlife, 99.9% of people would kill themselves, in many cases quite literally given the transmissibility and lethality of your hypothetical virus, lining up to take that vaccine–it would not have to be mandated. This particular hypo does not serve as a good thought experiment for what we’re currently experiencing.
Having said that, I agree that where society draws the line is dependent on these types of factors: transmissibility and lethality of the pathogen, and levels of protection (to recipient) and sterilizing immunity of the vaccine.
Comment by Steri-Curious Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 12:55 pm
===the effectiveness of the vaccine against viral spread is irrelevant to the appropriateness of a mandate===
Not irrelevant, but not the only relevant factor.
===shouldn’t we target any vaccine mandates on individuals that are likely to require hospital stays===
If those diseases are currently a significant source of hospitalizations, then yes. Mandating rabies, no. Mandating the flu shot, perhaps. Tailoring those mandates to vulnerable populations like you suggest also is a good idea, although there is a balance between optimizing for science and optimizing for what can effectively be implemented, communicated, and enforced.
===99.9% of people would kill themselves…lining up to take that vaccine===
I assume a vaccine distribution method that eliminates that risk. Assuming a perfectly spherical cow, as physicists like to say for their theoreticals.
Comment by thechampaignlife Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 1:28 pm
===shouldn’t we target any vaccine mandates on individuals that are likely to require hospital stays===
I misinterpreted what you meant. For this particular virus (COVID), there is some sterilizing effect, and some hospitalizations from all demographics. So, the mandate for all makes the most sense.
Comment by thechampaignlife Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 1:31 pm
===So if a vax was 100% sterilizing I’d hope even the most ardent “Screw You, Liberty!
There is no such thing. Even the smallpox and the polio vaccines aren’t 100%. Measles is in the mid-90s% and mumps is low 90%. Reducing transmissibility is great, but the primary purpose of any vaccine is to reduce the harm caused by the disease. If a vaccine reduces the impact of a disease is the primary focus of any vaccine. That can be through transmissibility or reducing symptoms/dangers.
The line to draw is whether the vaccine reduces spread through a community and has very low side effects. Some of the most important aspects of vaccines is that they protect the entire community including those who cannot take it due to allergic reactions or being immunocompromised.
Comment by ArchPundit Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 1:59 pm
This is a new vaccine, and look how good we are already doing in alleviating suffering and death. In the future we can expect better COVID vaccines and drugs. Yes, the pandemic rages, and that is terrible news, but many are protected from the worst of it.
The fully vaccinated and their breakthrough infections are not the biggest drag on us. It’s still overwhelmingly the unvaccinated filling up hospitals and ICU’s. People with mild breakthrough infections are ready to get on with life and the economy in relatively short time.
Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 2:47 pm
not mandating all state agencies to require vaccines endangers all employees that have compromised immune systems. As the governor has directed all state agencies to demand they work in office with the unvaccinated.
Comment by Peanut Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 3:29 pm
yes vaccination works. maybe not perfectly but it works.
The problem is that those who take the vaccines are treated the same as those who don’t. For example there is a requirement to take a test 24 hours before you re enter the country whether you have taken the test or not. Same goes in many part of the nation about mask requirement.
Not a good message to send. Yes, those who have taken their shots should be treated differently than those who do not.
My pharmacist told me there is national database on those who have taken their shots.
Comment by Unconventionalwisdom Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 4:19 pm
Unconventionalwisdom the CDC says there is no national database. Many states have their own databases though https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/adults/vaccination-records.html
Comment by illinifan Monday, Jan 10, 22 @ 4:56 pm