Finally, the CDC can implement interstate travel restrictions for persons with known exposure to or symptoms of Covid-19.
I feel that this is a good idea, but often times people are unaware if they have Covid when they travel. Or if they got Covid, after they quarantine they still go out even if they still have symptoms. There would have to be an easier way to regulate this.
This is the dark side of federalism: it encourages a patchwork response to epidemics.
I strongly agree with this. Like seen in the article “America’s Governments are at War with Each Other”, Federalism is a nice idea in concept, but you cannot have the best of both worlds all the time.
The primary concern regarding this emergency legal framework has long been that it affords officials too much discretion, with too few checks on poor decisions.
This makes a lot of sense to me but it is not something I ever thought about when It comes to the United States’ response to Covid-19. I know that it is important to have checks and balances, but I feel like there should be a line where public health and the safety of people shouldn’t be political anymore. It’s just when can we decide when this is appropriate.
Because science-based social distancing and targeted quarantine measures can succeed only if implemented wherever the virus is spreading, the lack of interjurisdictional coordination has and will cost lives.
This is really upsetting because we know that there is a way to help prevent the spread and keep is safe, but it is the lack of coordination in government that has put so many lives at risk, as has completely shifted our world because of the pandemic.
If you don’t think there is any work to do in your own town in advancing the cause of racial equality, you are not looking very hard.
I agree with this statement. There are changes needing to be made in all parts of our country weather we are able to recognize it or not.
Instead, they are scrolling through their news feeds, keeping up on all the dramatic turns in Washington that satiate their need for an emotional connection to politics but that help them not at all learn how to be good citizens.
I feel that the author is drawing a lot if conclusions, many of which do not have any factual evidence to back up his claim.
less self-interested
I do not like this wording at all. Standing up for what yo believe in and actively fighting for change is not being self involved. I feel that this wording puts a bad view on what Matias and her group are tryin to accomplish.
What they are doing is no closer to engaging in politics than watching SportsCenter is to playing football.
I feel like this analogy compares two things that are not easily comparable, yet adds a negative connotation to being informed. People are supposed to be informed, and vote to be a part of politics. Normal people are not supposed to play in the NFL. People are meant to be involved in politics, whereas not everyone is going to play in the NFL.