Trump Is Right To Worry About the Cost of Aggressive COVID-19 Control Measures. So far politicians have been acting as if only one side of the ledger matters.

Trump is not a man paralyzed by static analysis.

That makes it hard to believe that he actually comes from the American corporate world.

Trump is more of a Proprietor than a Corporate man.

I think because he is a business man.

Politicians just think money grows on trees and is endless.

I really hope Republicans go for the jugular in the next election over what she just tried to pull with the stimulus..even to the point of giving themselves money in the House

Given that he comes from a construction background, I find it less surprising that he is nimble in his thinking. Good construction bosses are adept at modifying their plans and thinking when the unexpected occurs, without reducing the quality of their product.

the “cure” for COVID-19—sweeping restrictions on travel, local movement, business activity, and work—could prove to be “worse” than the disease.

BINGO!!!!!!!!!

politicians have been acting as if only one side of this ledger matters”

a rather extraordinary understatement. sort of like saying the French Revolution was a “little excessive” and “not well thought out”

Chicken Freepers mostly agree with the Democrats that saving one life, especially their own, is worth any cost to the rest of us.

It should seem obvious but anyone who wants to can avoid this virus by self isolating which is more draconian then social distancing. Everyone else can go about their life. Yes hospitals may get overloaded so factor that into your choice as to whether you chose isolation or engagement.

If we are going to live our lives based on hospital capacity then we have given the Dems the prefer method to control our lives. They will not add capacity and then everything will become a health threat the will overwhelm hospital capacity. Global Warming will certainly cause our hospitals to be overwhelmed. So will gun violence. So will eating meat.

That “save one life” canard is really tiresome, but it DOES shut off discussion.

I understand the fear, and right now we are mostly under uncertainty.

Separate issue, I find it amazing that Congress is going to try to pass a bill without a quorum, and not discussion on that. Will the law pass constitutional muster?

Article I, Section 5 – Membership, Rules, Journals, Adjournment

Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.

I understand that technology allows different ways for people to be considered “present” than being phsically in the same room. How is attendance established in this case?

Trump knows that those politicians are hoping to use the pandemic to tank the economy and blame it on Trump so that he will not be re-elected.

. So far politicians have been acting as if only one side of the ledger matters.

In a sense that is true as the FED will sell the debt and then monetize it with fiat currency.

It may work the same way a corporate board I sit on functions. We have a mandatory notification period for board meetings where official business is done, but in cases of emergency we can waive the notification period by getting the unanimous consent of all board members. And if anyone can’t show up after giving their consent to waive the notification period, then they have no recourse to object to the proceedings.

I don’t know the mechanics and legalities of it, but Pelosi may be using the same type of process here.

Personally, I would almost expect some retard like Justin Amash to be the only objector — which means the “absent quorum” approach can’t be used.

Chicken Freepers

That sounds yummy!

The legalities of the chambers of congress having a quorum are long established as physically present. There is no precedent. If fewer than a quorum gather, all the group can do is adjourn, so says the constitution.

Again, I accept that “to gather” might include virtual presence, but THAT takes attendance. I’ve been involved in that recently.

No notice required, or notice already exists. Congressional record says the House adjourned last night, and is open as of 10:00 am today. Congress is in session. Point only being that any notice requirement is met.

— It may work the same way a corporate board I sit on functions. We have a mandatory notification period for board meetings where official business is done, but in cases of emergency we can waive the notification period by getting the unanimous consent of all board members. And if anyone can’t show up after giving their consent to waive the notification period, then they have no recourse to object to the proceedings. —

Can the board conduct business if a quorum is not participating?

How do you establish that a quorum is present?

I’m currently involved in regular meetings of a deliberative body, we are not meeting in the same room, but we are taking attendance, all the people present can participate. But if only two of us are there, we lack the power to conduct business. All that meeting can do is adjourn.

If we conducted business without a quorum, I assume ANY member could object, whether thay had notice or not. IOW, the issue isn’t notice, the issue is quorum itself.

I’m curious. If we could speed the return to normalcy by having everyone wear masks when they go out, would folks on this forum find that accetable?