Friam

Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

Classic

List

Threaded

16 messages Options

Steve Smith

Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

Friammers -

Mary's daughter, who lives in Wisconsin alerted us to the big court-decision overturning the governor's stay-at-home order:

https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/wisconsin-supreme-court-strikes-down-stay-at-home-order/article_fd2be344-666f-5437-8955-f5cd9ae17a50.html

In a concurring opinion, Kelly said the court’s decision hinged on determining the extent of Palm’s authority, not whether her emergency order was a good idea.

“The order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response to COVID-19,” Kelly said. “Either way, that is not the question before the court.”

I'm (nicely?) split on issues like this and I think this last quote really says a lot. I understand that 2 or more counties immediately issued their own "safer at home" order matching the one repealed at the state level. I'm not clear on whether a similar "overreach of authority" will ultimately be decided against those.

Anecdotally, in the meantime, many bars have opened and apparently many patrons have returned (without masks and not observing social distancing guidelines).

This seems like a good test bed of some of the assumptions behind Dave's "prophecy". Will the (if we believe in the germ theory and network transmission) uptick in cases resulting from this lead to a continuation of the pandemic (or "pandemic" if we prefer to believe the only uncontrolled growth is in hysterical media coverage and hypochondria). The best case (and one I mostly hope for) might be if the subset of the WI population who now disregard the (former) rules is small enough and insular (only infecting one another) enough and/or the herd immunity has grown enough (highest estimates in places like NYC I think are still down as low as 20% out of the believed 70% required to bring R0 below 1.0 w/o masks/social-distance measures?).

Given that the courts may well be accurate in their interpretation of the limits to the governor's powers, I would expect a domino of challenges across republican-majority courts in other states, and a subsequent surge in the unrestricted opening of businesses and events.

I find a bit of cognitive/emotional/spiritual dissonance in trying to hold all three of the following in my head/heart/soul at the same time:

The rule of law is important in our society and if a governor does not have the right to shut down as hard as some have, then that needs to be acknowledged and reversed.
There is a lot of evidence suggesting that like Kelly above is quoted that "the order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response... " and that reversing it in fact as well as in law may well yield a significant increase in R0 in those states (and among states who have significant mixing *with* those states), possibly putting us back close to where we were in late March.
I don't like the idea of telling others what to do (wholesale), nor being told what to do (specifically), but I also recognize that we do not live isolated, solitary lives, and "what we do matters". My threshold on accepting secondary and tertiary consequences may be above "helmet and seatbelt laws" but below "measures to suppress epidemic spread of deadly disease". But how does that jive with my threshold for accepting "limits to personal agency and volition"?

These are indeed, interesting times, and as with the basis of Dave's prophecy, "only time will tell"... and with Glen's "put a pin in it", I just hope we keep track and pay attention to how well our prophecies/projections/forecasts play out.

- Steve

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

gepr

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

I know I said I wouldn't spam the list with these plots anymore. But the comparison of DeKalb/Hall to Milwaukee/Racine and Milwaukee/Brown is interesting. (Sorry for the nearly inscrutable colors.)

On 5/14/20 7:55 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> This seems like a good test bed of some of the assumptions behind Dave's "prophecy". Will the (if we believe in the germ theory and network transmission) uptick in cases resulting from this lead to a continuation of the pandemic (or "pandemic" if we prefer to believe the only uncontrolled growth is in hysterical media coverage and hypochondria). The best case (and one I mostly hope for) might be if the subset of the WI population who now disregard the (former) rules is small enough and insular (only infecting one another) enough and/or the herd immunity has grown enough (highest estimates in places like NYC I think are still down as low as 20% out of the believed 70% required to bring R0 below 1.0 w/o masks/social-distance measures?).

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

out.png (510K) Download Attachment

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

What are the colors from top to bottom in the time series?

On 5/14/20, 8:21 AM, "Friam on behalf of uǝlƃ ☣" <[hidden email] on behalf of [hidden email]> wrote:

I know I said I wouldn't spam the list with these plots anymore. But the comparison of DeKalb/Hall to Milwaukee/Racine and Milwaukee/Brown is interesting. (Sorry for the nearly inscrutable colors.)

On 5/14/20 7:55 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> This seems like a good test bed of some of the assumptions behind Dave's "prophecy". Will the (if we believe in the germ theory and network transmission) uptick in cases resulting from this lead to a continuation of the pandemic (or "pandemic" if we prefer to believe the only uncontrolled growth is in hysterical media coverage and hypochondria). The best case (and one I mostly hope for) might be if the subset of the WI population who now disregard the (former) rules is small enough and insular (only infecting one another) enough and/or the herd immunity has grown enough (highest estimates in places like NYC I think are still down as low as 20% out of the believed 70% required to bring R0 below 1.0 w/o masks/social-distance measures?).

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

gepr

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

"#0A0A66FF" "#66660AFF" "#660A0AFF" "#0A660AFF" "#660A66FF" "#0A6666FF"

I get them with:

> set.seed(1234567890)
> cols <- rainbow(length(counties), s=0.9, v=0.4)[sample(1:length(counties),length(counties))]

On 5/14/20 8:23 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> What are the colors from top to bottom in the time series?

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

What I was really asking for was to permute the legend to follow the magnitudes because my old eyes can't discriminate the shades!

On 5/14/20, 8:27 AM, "Friam on behalf of uǝlƃ ☣" <[hidden email] on behalf of [hidden email]> wrote:

"#0A0A66FF" "#66660AFF" "#660A0AFF" "#0A660AFF" "#660A66FF" "#0A6666FF"

I get them with:

> set.seed(1234567890)
> cols <- rainbow(length(counties), s=0.9, v=0.4)[sample(1:length(counties),length(counties))]

On 5/14/20 8:23 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> What are the colors from top to bottom in the time series?

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

gepr

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

Ha! OK. Added to the todo list for my next bout of insomnia.

On 5/14/20 8:29 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> What I was really asking for was to permute the legend to follow the magnitudes because my old eyes can't discriminate the shades!

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Eric Charles-2

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

In reply to this post by Steve Smith

The news coverage of this has been odd. The order is definitely not countering a "governor's stay-at-home order", which is what I see most people saying. The governor took emergency powers, made a few orders directly, and then instructed the Health Secretary to take the lead on state-wide response. The Health Secretary then issued several orders under her own signatory authority, only one of which was challenged (Order 28). The ruling is that that particular order was so broad and general as to count as executive branch rule making, which has its own set of rules, including a period of time for review by the legislature.

Full decision:

https://evers.wi.gov/Documents/COVID19/EMO28-SaferAtHome.pdf

From the opinion of the court, paragraph 1:

This case is about the assertion of power by one unelected official, Andrea Palm, and her order to all people within Wisconsin to remain in their homes, not to travel and to close all businesses that she declares are not "essential" in Emergency Order 28. Palm says that failure to obey Order 28 subjects the transgressor to imprisonment for 30 days, a $250 fine or both. This case is not about Governor Tony Evers' Emergency Order or the powers of the Governor.

From paragraph 7:

On April 16, 2020, Palm issued Emergency Order 28, also titled "Safer at Home Order." This order was not issued by the Governor, nor did it rely on the Governor's emergency declaration. Rather, it relied solely on "the authority vested in [Andrea Palm, Department of Health Services Secretary-designee] by the Laws of the State, including but not limited to [Wis. Stat. §] 252.02(3), (4), and (6)." Emergency Order 28 commands all individuals in Wisconsin "to stay at home or at their place of residence" with certain limited exceptions approved by Palm or risk punishment "by up to 30 days imprisonment, or up to $250 fine, or both." 8 Order 28 also:

* Prohibits "[a]ll forms of travel" except what Palm deems essential.
* Orders "[a]ll for-profit and non-profit businesses" to "cease all activities" except for minimum operations that Palm deemed basic.
* Prohibits "[a]ll public and private gatherings of any number" "not part of a single household."
* Declares that all public and private K-12 schools "shall remain closed" for the remainder of the year.
* Declares that libraries shall remain closed for "all inperson services."
* Declares all "public amusement and activity" places closed regardless of whether "indoors or outdoors" except golf courses (with restrictions). The order says "Driving ranges and miniature golf must remain closed."
* Continues the ordered closure of all salons and spas.
* Continues the closure of every restaurant and bar except for take-out or delivery service.
* Orders religious groups to limit gatherings to "fewer than 10 people in a room" including weddings and funerals.
* Imposes a six-foot social distancing requirement for any person not "residing in a single living unit or household."

[hidden email]

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 10:55 AM Steven A Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

Friammers -

Mary's daughter, who lives in Wisconsin alerted us to the big court-decision overturning the governor's stay-at-home order:

https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/wisconsin-supreme-court-strikes-down-stay-at-home-order/article_fd2be344-666f-5437-8955-f5cd9ae17a50.html

In a concurring opinion, Kelly said the court’s decision hinged on determining the extent of Palm’s authority, not whether her emergency order was a good idea.

“The order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response to COVID-19,” Kelly said. “Either way, that is not the question before the court.”

I'm (nicely?) split on issues like this and I think this last quote really says a lot.   I understand that 2 or more counties immediately issued their own "safer at home" order matching the one repealed at the state level.   I'm not clear on whether a similar "overreach of authority" will ultimately be decided against those.

Anecdotally, in the meantime, many bars have opened and apparently many patrons have returned (without masks and not observing social distancing guidelines).

This seems like a good test bed of some of the assumptions behind Dave's "prophecy".   Will the (if we believe in the germ theory and network transmission) uptick in cases resulting from this lead to a continuation of the pandemic (or "pandemic" if we prefer to believe the only uncontrolled growth is in hysterical media coverage and hypochondria).   The best case (and one I mostly hope for) might be if the subset of the WI population who now disregard the (former) rules is small enough and insular (only infecting one another) enough and/or the herd immunity has grown enough (highest estimates in places like NYC I think are still down as low as 20% out of the believed 70% required to bring R0 below 1.0 w/o masks/social-distance measures?).

Given that the courts may well be accurate in their interpretation of the limits to the governor's powers, I would expect a domino of challenges across republican-majority courts in other states, and a subsequent surge in the unrestricted opening of businesses and events.

I find a bit of cognitive/emotional/spiritual dissonance in trying to hold all three of the following in my head/heart/soul at the same time:

The rule of law is important in our society and if a governor does not have the right to shut down as hard as some have, then that needs to be acknowledged and reversed.

There is a lot of evidence suggesting that like Kelly above is quoted that "the order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response... " and that reversing it in fact as well as in law may well yield a significant increase in R0 in those states (and among states who have significant mixing *with* those states), possibly putting us back close to where we were in late March.

I don't like the idea of telling others what to do (wholesale), nor being told what to do (specifically), but I also recognize that we do not live isolated, solitary lives, and "what we do matters". My threshold on accepting secondary and tertiary consequences may be above "helmet and seatbelt laws" but below "measures to suppress epidemic spread of deadly disease".   But how does that jive with my threshold for accepting "limits to personal agency and volition"?

These are indeed, interesting times, and as with the basis of Dave's prophecy, "only time will tell"... and with Glen's "put a pin in it", I just hope we keep track and pay attention to how well our prophecies/projections/forecasts play out.

- Steve

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

thompnickson2

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

In reply to this post by gepr

Glen,

I think these are great, and I hope you will keep them coming. My eyesight is sufficiently bad that I also appreciate you gloss on them, because I cannot always distinguish the colors.

My schadenfreude is tracing Hall very closely.

Thanks for doing this.

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of u?l? ?
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 9:21 AM
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

I know I said I wouldn't spam the list with these plots anymore. But the comparison of DeKalb/Hall to Milwaukee/Racine and Milwaukee/Brown is interesting. (Sorry for the nearly inscrutable colors.)

On 5/14/20 7:55 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> This seems like a good test bed of some of the assumptions behind Dave's "prophecy". Will the (if we believe in the germ theory and network transmission) uptick in cases resulting from this lead to a continuation of the pandemic (or "pandemic" if we prefer to believe the only uncontrolled growth is in hysterical media coverage and hypochondria). The best case (and one I mostly hope for) might be if the subset of the WI population who now disregard the (former) rules is small enough and insular (only infecting one another) enough and/or the herd immunity has grown enough (highest estimates in places like NYC I think are still down as low as 20% out of the believed 70% required to bring R0 below 1.0 w/o masks/social-distance measures?).

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

thompnickson2

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

In reply to this post by Eric Charles-2

Interesting, EricC.

Maddow had the governor on last night and he treated it as a complete renunciation of his authority. “It’s the Wild West out there”, he said. As he presented it, the only resolution was for him to agree with the legislature on laws to govern the situation.

Hmmmmm!

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Eric Charles
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 10:14 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

Full decision:

https://evers.wi.gov/Documents/COVID19/EMO28-SaferAtHome.pdf

From the opinion of the court, paragraph 1:

This case is about the assertion of power by one unelected official, Andrea Palm, and her order to all people within Wisconsin to remain in their homes, not to travel and to close all businesses that she declares are not "essential" in Emergency Order 28. Palm says that failure to obey Order 28 subjects the transgressor to imprisonment for 30 days, a $250 fine or both. This case is not about Governor Tony Evers' Emergency Order or the powers of the Governor.

From paragraph 7:

On April 16, 2020, Palm issued Emergency Order 28, also titled "Safer at Home Order." This order was not issued by the Governor, nor did it rely on the Governor's emergency declaration. Rather, it relied solely on "the authority vested in [Andrea Palm, Department of Health Services Secretary-designee] by the Laws of the State, including but not limited to [Wis. Stat. §] 252.02(3), (4), and (6)." Emergency Order 28 commands all individuals in Wisconsin "to stay at home or at their place of residence" with certain limited exceptions approved by Palm or risk punishment "by up to 30 days imprisonment, or up to $250 fine, or both." 8 Order 28 also:

* Prohibits "[a]ll forms of travel" except what Palm deems essential.
* Orders "[a]ll for-profit and non-profit businesses" to "cease all activities" except for minimum operations that Palm deemed basic.
* Prohibits "[a]ll public and private gatherings of any number" "not part of a single household."
* Declares that all public and private K-12 schools "shall remain closed" for the remainder of the year.
* Declares that libraries shall remain closed for "all inperson services."
* Declares all "public amusement and activity" places closed regardless of whether "indoors or outdoors" except golf courses (with restrictions). The order says "Driving ranges and miniature golf must remain closed."
* Continues the ordered closure of all salons and spas.
* Continues the closure of every restaurant and bar except for take-out or delivery service.
* Orders religious groups to limit gatherings to "fewer than 10 people in a room" including weddings and funerals.
* Imposes a six-foot social distancing requirement for any person not "residing in a single living unit or household."

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 10:55 AM Steven A Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

Friammers -
Mary's daughter, who lives in Wisconsin alerted us to the big court-decision overturning the governor's stay-at-home order:
https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/wisconsin-supreme-court-strikes-down-stay-at-home-order/article_fd2be344-666f-5437-8955-f5cd9ae17a50.html
In a concurring opinion, Kelly said the court’s decision hinged on determining the extent of Palm’s authority, not whether her emergency order was a good idea.
“The order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response to COVID-19,” Kelly said. “Either way, that is not the question before the court.”
I'm (nicely?) split on issues like this and I think this last quote really says a lot.   I understand that 2 or more counties immediately issued their own "safer at home" order matching the one repealed at the state level.   I'm not clear on whether a similar "overreach of authority" will ultimately be decided against those.

Anecdotally, in the meantime, many bars have opened and apparently many patrons have returned (without masks and not observing social distancing guidelines).

This seems like a good test bed of some of the assumptions behind Dave's "prophecy".   Will the (if we believe in the germ theory and network transmission) uptick in cases resulting from this lead to a continuation of the pandemic (or "pandemic" if we prefer to believe the only uncontrolled growth is in hysterical media coverage and hypochondria).   The best case (and one I mostly hope for) might be if the subset of the WI population who now disregard the (former) rules is small enough and insular (only infecting one another) enough and/or the herd immunity has grown enough (highest estimates in places like NYC I think are still down as low as 20% out of the believed 70% required to bring R0 below 1.0 w/o masks/social-distance measures?).

Given that the courts may well be accurate in their interpretation of the limits to the governor's powers, I would expect a domino of challenges across republican-majority courts in other states, and a subsequent surge in the unrestricted opening of businesses and events.

I find a bit of cognitive/emotional/spiritual dissonance in trying to hold all three of the following in my head/heart/soul at the same time:
The rule of law is important in our society and if a governor does not have the right to shut down as hard as some have, then that needs to be acknowledged and reversed.
There is a lot of evidence suggesting that like Kelly above is quoted that "the order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response... " and that reversing it in fact as well as in law may well yield a significant increase in R0 in those states (and among states who have significant mixing *with* those states), possibly putting us back close to where we were in late March.
I don't like the idea of telling others what to do (wholesale), nor being told what to do (specifically), but I also recognize that we do not live isolated, solitary lives, and "what we do matters". My threshold on accepting secondary and tertiary consequences may be above "helmet and seatbelt laws" but below "measures to suppress epidemic spread of deadly disease".   But how does that jive with my threshold for accepting "limits to personal agency and volition"?
These are indeed, interesting times, and as with the basis of Dave's prophecy, "only time will tell"... and with Glen's "put a pin in it", I just hope we keep track and pay attention to how well our prophecies/projections/forecasts play out.
- Steve
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

I will admit my discomfort with the equivalation of physical law with culture. Our laws are a mechanism for maintaining stability. When everything is collapsing then our laws have limited utility. Physical laws trump human law.

There’s no great foresight in, say, predicting a Trump win or some cynical resolution of the pandemic. I sent all the money I could to Hillary Clinton precisely because I could see the menacing possibility of a Trump win. Anyone that’s been in this country, and not been wearing rose-colored glasses can see there many people that are disgusting and shortsighted. Stopping them is an ongoing struggle. Accommodating them is exactly the wrong thing to do. There’s no NP-hard problem to sort out to reach this conclusion.

Marcus

From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Date: Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 9:21 AM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

Interesting, EricC.

Hmmmmm!

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

Full decision:

https://evers.wi.gov/Documents/COVID19/EMO28-SaferAtHome.pdf

From the opinion of the court, paragraph 1:

This case is about the assertion of power by one unelected official, Andrea Palm, and her order to all people within Wisconsin to remain in their homes, not to travel and to close all businesses that she declares are not "essential" in Emergency Order 28. Palm says that failure to obey Order 28 subjects the transgressor to imprisonment for 30 days, a $250 fine or both. This case is not about Governor Tony Evers' Emergency Order or the powers of the Governor.

From paragraph 7:

On April 16, 2020, Palm issued Emergency Order 28, also titled "Safer at Home Order." This order was not issued by the Governor, nor did it rely on the Governor's emergency declaration. Rather, it relied solely on "the authority vested in [Andrea Palm, Department of Health Services Secretary-designee] by the Laws of the State, including but not limited to [Wis. Stat. §] 252.02(3), (4), and (6)." Emergency Order 28 commands all individuals in Wisconsin "to stay at home or at their place of residence" with certain limited exceptions approved by Palm or risk punishment "by up to 30 days imprisonment, or up to $250 fine, or both." 8 Order 28 also:

* Prohibits "[a]ll forms of travel" except what Palm deems essential.

* Orders "[a]ll for-profit and non-profit businesses" to "cease all activities" except for minimum operations that Palm deemed basic.

* Prohibits "[a]ll public and private gatherings of any number" "not part of a single household."

* Declares that all public and private K-12 schools "shall remain closed" for the remainder of the year.

* Declares that libraries shall remain closed for "all inperson services."

* Declares all "public amusement and activity" places closed regardless of whether "indoors or outdoors" except golf courses (with restrictions). The order says "Driving ranges and miniature golf must remain closed."

* Continues the ordered closure of all salons and spas.

* Continues the closure of every restaurant and bar except for take-out or delivery service.

* Orders religious groups to limit gatherings to "fewer than 10 people in a room" including weddings and funerals.

* Imposes a six-foot social distancing requirement for any person not "residing in a single living unit or household."

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 10:55 AM Steven A Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

Friammers -

Mary's daughter, who lives in Wisconsin alerted us to the big court-decision overturning the governor's stay-at-home order:

https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/wisconsin-supreme-court-strikes-down-stay-at-home-order/article_fd2be344-666f-5437-8955-f5cd9ae17a50.html

In a concurring opinion, Kelly said the court’s decision hinged on determining the extent of Palm’s authority, not whether her emergency order was a good idea.

“The order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response to COVID-19,” Kelly said. “Either way, that is not the question before the court.”

I'm (nicely?) split on issues like this and I think this last quote really says a lot.   I understand that 2 or more counties immediately issued their own "safer at home" order matching the one repealed at the state level.   I'm not clear on whether a similar "overreach of authority" will ultimately be decided against those.

Anecdotally, in the meantime, many bars have opened and apparently many patrons have returned (without masks and not observing social distancing guidelines).

This seems like a good test bed of some of the assumptions behind Dave's "prophecy".   Will the (if we believe in the germ theory and network transmission) uptick in cases resulting from this lead to a continuation of the pandemic (or "pandemic" if we prefer to believe the only uncontrolled growth is in hysterical media coverage and hypochondria).   The best case (and one I mostly hope for) might be if the subset of the WI population who now disregard the (former) rules is small enough and insular (only infecting one another) enough and/or the herd immunity has grown enough (highest estimates in places like NYC I think are still down as low as 20% out of the believed 70% required to bring R0 below 1.0 w/o masks/social-distance measures?).

Given that the courts may well be accurate in their interpretation of the limits to the governor's powers, I would expect a domino of challenges across republican-majority courts in other states, and a subsequent surge in the unrestricted opening of businesses and events.

I find a bit of cognitive/emotional/spiritual dissonance in trying to hold all three of the following in my head/heart/soul at the same time:

The rule of law is important in our society and if a governor does not have the right to shut down as hard as some have, then that needs to be acknowledged and reversed.
There is a lot of evidence suggesting that like Kelly above is quoted that "the order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response... " and that reversing it in fact as well as in law may well yield a significant increase in R0 in those states (and among states who have significant mixing *with* those states), possibly putting us back close to where we were in late March.
I don't like the idea of telling others what to do (wholesale), nor being told what to do (specifically), but I also recognize that we do not live isolated, solitary lives, and "what we do matters". My threshold on accepting secondary and tertiary consequences may be above "helmet and seatbelt laws" but below "measures to suppress epidemic spread of deadly disease".   But how does that jive with my threshold for accepting "limits to personal agency and volition"?

These are indeed, interesting times, and as with the basis of Dave's prophecy, "only time will tell"... and with Glen's "put a pin in it", I just hope we keep track and pay attention to how well our prophecies/projections/forecasts play out.

- Steve

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Steve Smith

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

In reply to this post by Eric Charles-2

Eric -

Thanks for the more penetrative review of the situation. I was, in fact, working from new-reports and anecdotes from family... I suppose that means that the dominoes across the country set to fall might not fall as crisply (or at all?).... I'm still torn (hypothetically) about the distinction between "doing the right thing" and "the rule of law". I believe that the distinction is both about "context" (one size fits all in space and time and circumstance) and time-scale... if a rule set in cement (legislation) becomes in-apt for a new circumstance (pandemic threat), it may take longer to adjust it to fit than the time-scale of the event (weeks?) as it unfolds. I suppose this is what executive emergency powers exist for... to allow for timely tactical response while the strategic longer-term/broader-implication responses can muster as appropriate.

Too bad we seem to have (at least?) one significant faction in our politics interested in pitting those against one another when I *think* they were designed to work cooperatively in the best of times and provide checks and balances in the worst of times. My biases have me wanting to believe that this "pitting" is entirely the contrivance of the GOP/Right but of course I hear just the opposite *from* them and am left wondering how much of an imbalance there is... anecdotally, "packing the courts" and "voter suppression" and "gerrymandering" are (almost) exclusively the province of the (authoritarian, loyalty-before-sensemaking?) Right. The counter argument from the other side seems to reduce to "voter fraud" and maybe citing an (unbalanced?) number of court-packings, and gerry-manderings.

Too much (IMO) of politics today seems to be no more than "gaming the system" by "mucking with the machinery" rather than truly trying to satisfice or optimise the design and operation of the machinery to achieve collectively beneficial results.

mumble,

- Steve

On 5/14/20 10:13 AM, Eric Charles wrote:

The news coverage of this has been odd. The order is definitely not countering a "governor's stay-at-home order", which is what I see most people saying. The governor took emergency powers, made a few orders directly, and then instructed the Health Secretary to take the lead on state-wide response. The Health Secretary then issued several orders under her own signatory authority, only one of which was challenged (Order 28). The ruling is that that particular order was so broad and general as to count as executive branch rule making, which has its own set of rules, including a period of time for review by the legislature.

Full decision:

https://evers.wi.gov/Documents/COVID19/EMO28-SaferAtHome.pdf

From the opinion of the court, paragraph 1:

This case is about the assertion of power by one unelected official, Andrea Palm, and her order to all people within Wisconsin to remain in their homes, not to travel and to close all businesses that she declares are not "essential" in Emergency Order 28. Palm says that failure to obey Order 28 subjects the transgressor to imprisonment for 30 days, a $250 fine or both. This case is not about Governor Tony Evers' Emergency Order or the powers of the Governor.

From paragraph 7:

On April 16, 2020, Palm issued Emergency Order 28, also titled "Safer at Home Order." This order was not issued by the Governor, nor did it rely on the Governor's emergency declaration. Rather, it relied solely on "the authority vested in [Andrea Palm, Department of Health Services Secretary-designee] by the Laws of the State, including but not limited to [Wis. Stat. §] 252.02(3), (4), and (6)." Emergency Order 28 commands all individuals in Wisconsin "to stay at home or at their place of residence" with certain limited exceptions approved by Palm or risk punishment "by up to 30 days imprisonment, or up to $250 fine, or both." 8 Order 28 also:

* Prohibits "[a]ll forms of travel" except what Palm deems essential.

* Orders "[a]ll for-profit and non-profit businesses" to "cease all activities" except for minimum operations that Palm deemed basic.

* Prohibits "[a]ll public and private gatherings of any number" "not part of a single household."

* Declares that all public and private K-12 schools "shall remain closed" for the remainder of the year.

* Declares that libraries shall remain closed for "all inperson services."

* Declares all "public amusement and activity" places closed regardless of whether "indoors or outdoors" except golf courses (with restrictions). The order says "Driving ranges and miniature golf must remain closed."

* Continues the ordered closure of all salons and spas.

* Continues the closure of every restaurant and bar except for take-out or delivery service.

* Orders religious groups to limit gatherings to "fewer than 10 people in a room" including weddings and funerals.

* Imposes a six-foot social distancing requirement for any person not "residing in a single living unit or household."

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 10:55 AM Steven A Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

Friammers -

Mary's daughter, who lives in Wisconsin alerted us to the big court-decision overturning the governor's stay-at-home order:

https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/wisconsin-supreme-court-strikes-down-stay-at-home-order/article_fd2be344-666f-5437-8955-f5cd9ae17a50.html

In a concurring opinion, Kelly said the court’s decision hinged on determining the extent of Palm’s authority, not whether her emergency order was a good idea.

“The order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response to COVID-19,” Kelly said. “Either way, that is not the question before the court.”

I'm (nicely?) split on issues like this and I think this last quote really says a lot.   I understand that 2 or more counties immediately issued their own "safer at home" order matching the one repealed at the state level.   I'm not clear on whether a similar "overreach of authority" will ultimately be decided against those.

Anecdotally, in the meantime, many bars have opened and apparently many patrons have returned (without masks and not observing social distancing guidelines).

This seems like a good test bed of some of the assumptions behind Dave's "prophecy".   Will the (if we believe in the germ theory and network transmission) uptick in cases resulting from this lead to a continuation of the pandemic (or "pandemic" if we prefer to believe the only uncontrolled growth is in hysterical media coverage and hypochondria).   The best case (and one I mostly hope for) might be if the subset of the WI population who now disregard the (former) rules is small enough and insular (only infecting one another) enough and/or the herd immunity has grown enough (highest estimates in places like NYC I think are still down as low as 20% out of the believed 70% required to bring R0 below 1.0 w/o masks/social-distance measures?).

Given that the courts may well be accurate in their interpretation of the limits to the governor's powers, I would expect a domino of challenges across republican-majority courts in other states, and a subsequent surge in the unrestricted opening of businesses and events.

I find a bit of cognitive/emotional/spiritual dissonance in trying to hold all three of the following in my head/heart/soul at the same time:

The rule of law is important in our society and if a governor does not have the right to shut down as hard as some have, then that needs to be acknowledged and reversed.

There is a lot of evidence suggesting that like Kelly above is quoted that "the order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response... " and that reversing it in fact as well as in law may well yield a significant increase in R0 in those states (and among states who have significant mixing *with* those states), possibly putting us back close to where we were in late March.

I don't like the idea of telling others what to do (wholesale), nor being told what to do (specifically), but I also recognize that we do not live isolated, solitary lives, and "what we do matters". My threshold on accepting secondary and tertiary consequences may be above "helmet and seatbelt laws" but below "measures to suppress epidemic spread of deadly disease".   But how does that jive with my threshold for accepting "limits to personal agency and volition"?

These are indeed, interesting times, and as with the basis of Dave's prophecy, "only time will tell"... and with Glen's "put a pin in it", I just hope we keep track and pay attention to how well our prophecies/projections/forecasts play out.

- Steve

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Eric Charles-2

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

In reply to this post by thompnickson2

On Maddow huh.... that would explain why so many of my more liberal Facebook friends are spewing so much venom over the issue.... Did she ask him any questions that required him to justify his interpretation of the court's decision? Or have any assessment of what the court decision was, separate from the Governor's complaining about it? (Honest questions, I didn't see it.)

I really think of her as the Bill O'Reilly of the left. Not the Glen Beck mind you, but the O'Reilly. In both cases, if they would just own how biased their shows are, it would make the whole situation much better.

-----------

Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Department of Justice - Personnel Psychologist

American University - Adjunct Instructor

[hidden email]

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 12:21 PM <[hidden email]> wrote:

Interesting, EricC.

Maddow had the governor on last night and he treated it as a complete renunciation of his authority. “It’s the Wild West out there”, he said. As he presented it, the only resolution was for him to agree with the legislature on laws to govern the situation.

Hmmmmm!

N

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Eric Charles
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 10:14 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

The news coverage of this has been odd. The order is definitely not countering a "governor's stay-at-home order", which is what I see most people saying. The governor took emergency powers, made a few orders directly, and then instructed the Health Secretary to take the lead on state-wide response. The Health Secretary then issued several orders under her own signatory authority, only one of which was challenged (Order 28). The ruling is that that particular order was so broad and general as to count as executive branch rule making, which has its own set of rules, including a period of time for review by the legislature.

Full decision:
https://evers.wi.gov/Documents/COVID19/EMO28-SaferAtHome.pdf

From the opinion of the court, paragraph 1:
This case is about the assertion of power by one unelected official, Andrea Palm, and her order to all people within Wisconsin to remain in their homes, not to travel and to close all businesses that she declares are not "essential" in Emergency Order 28. Palm says that failure to obey Order 28 subjects the transgressor to imprisonment for 30 days, a $250 fine or both. This case is not about Governor Tony Evers' Emergency Order or the powers of the Governor.

From paragraph 7:
On April 16, 2020, Palm issued Emergency Order 28, also titled "Safer at Home Order." This order was not issued by the Governor, nor did it rely on the Governor's emergency declaration. Rather, it relied solely on "the authority vested in [Andrea Palm, Department of Health Services Secretary-designee] by the Laws of the State, including but not limited to [Wis. Stat. §] 252.02(3), (4), and (6)." Emergency Order 28 commands all individuals in Wisconsin "to stay at home or at their place of residence" with certain limited exceptions approved by Palm or risk punishment "by up to 30 days imprisonment, or up to $250 fine, or both." 8 Order 28 also:
* Prohibits "[a]ll forms of travel" except what Palm deems essential.
* Orders "[a]ll for-profit and non-profit businesses" to "cease all activities" except for minimum operations that Palm deemed basic.
* Prohibits "[a]ll public and private gatherings of any number" "not part of a single household."
* Declares that all public and private K-12 schools "shall remain closed" for the remainder of the year.
* Declares that libraries shall remain closed for "all inperson services."
* Declares all "public amusement and activity" places closed regardless of whether "indoors or outdoors" except golf courses (with restrictions). The order says "Driving ranges and miniature golf must remain closed."
* Continues the ordered closure of all salons and spas.
* Continues the closure of every restaurant and bar except for take-out or delivery service.
* Orders religious groups to limit gatherings to "fewer than 10 people in a room" including weddings and funerals.
* Imposes a six-foot social distancing requirement for any person not "residing in a single living unit or household."

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 10:55 AM Steven A Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:
Friammers -
Mary's daughter, who lives in Wisconsin alerted us to the big court-decision overturning the governor's stay-at-home order:
https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/wisconsin-supreme-court-strikes-down-stay-at-home-order/article_fd2be344-666f-5437-8955-f5cd9ae17a50.html
In a concurring opinion, Kelly said the court’s decision hinged on determining the extent of Palm’s authority, not whether her emergency order was a good idea.
“The order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response to COVID-19,” Kelly said. “Either way, that is not the question before the court.”
I'm (nicely?) split on issues like this and I think this last quote really says a lot.   I understand that 2 or more counties immediately issued their own "safer at home" order matching the one repealed at the state level.   I'm not clear on whether a similar "overreach of authority" will ultimately be decided against those.

Anecdotally, in the meantime, many bars have opened and apparently many patrons have returned (without masks and not observing social distancing guidelines).

This seems like a good test bed of some of the assumptions behind Dave's "prophecy".   Will the (if we believe in the germ theory and network transmission) uptick in cases resulting from this lead to a continuation of the pandemic (or "pandemic" if we prefer to believe the only uncontrolled growth is in hysterical media coverage and hypochondria).   The best case (and one I mostly hope for) might be if the subset of the WI population who now disregard the (former) rules is small enough and insular (only infecting one another) enough and/or the herd immunity has grown enough (highest estimates in places like NYC I think are still down as low as 20% out of the believed 70% required to bring R0 below 1.0 w/o masks/social-distance measures?).

Given that the courts may well be accurate in their interpretation of the limits to the governor's powers, I would expect a domino of challenges across republican-majority courts in other states, and a subsequent surge in the unrestricted opening of businesses and events.

I find a bit of cognitive/emotional/spiritual dissonance in trying to hold all three of the following in my head/heart/soul at the same time:
The rule of law is important in our society and if a governor does not have the right to shut down as hard as some have, then that needs to be acknowledged and reversed.
There is a lot of evidence suggesting that like Kelly above is quoted that "the order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response... " and that reversing it in fact as well as in law may well yield a significant increase in R0 in those states (and among states who have significant mixing *with* those states), possibly putting us back close to where we were in late March.
I don't like the idea of telling others what to do (wholesale), nor being told what to do (specifically), but I also recognize that we do not live isolated, solitary lives, and "what we do matters". My threshold on accepting secondary and tertiary consequences may be above "helmet and seatbelt laws" but below "measures to suppress epidemic spread of deadly disease".   But how does that jive with my threshold for accepting "limits to personal agency and volition"?
These are indeed, interesting times, and as with the basis of Dave's prophecy, "only time will tell"... and with Glen's "put a pin in it", I just hope we keep track and pay attention to how well our prophecies/projections/forecasts play out.
- Steve
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

gepr

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

[ahem] It's Glenn Beck! Maybe the *only* time I care about how many Ns are used. 8^)

On 5/14/20 10:57 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> Not the Glen Beck mind you, but the O'Reilly.

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Eric Charles-2

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

In reply to this post by Steve Smith

Steve,

Yeah, it will be interesting to see how this plays out. It is the type of issue you would expect to vary from state to state: How much power do various executive-branch members get during a state of emergency? Do the laws that create that system provide oversight during the declared emergency? Note, for example, that we are talking about powers that are definitely not held by our President, as much as he likes to act like he does.

Rule of Law vs. Doing The Right Thing is always a problem. In this case we are dealing with laws that were exactly intended to limit what the government could do to it's citizens. Those types of laws have oversized cache in the American Mythos, when compared with the historic views of many other countries. That cache remains strong, despite having been eroded over the past century, and that erosion is at the core of much of our current political/social strife.

The most deleterious effect of the rampant "gaming of the system" that you allude to is the destruction of our ability to have honest, straightforward conversations about how we would like the system to look. Perfectly reasonable assertions can't be made, because those assertions have become "dog whistles" or coded messages, likely to indicate certain hidden agendas. :- (

-----------

Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Department of Justice - Personnel Psychologist

American University - Adjunct Instructor

[hidden email]

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 1:26 PM Steven A Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

Eric -

Thanks for the more penetrative review of the situation. I was, in fact, working from new-reports and anecdotes from family... I suppose that means that the dominoes across the country set to fall might not fall as crisply (or at all?).... I'm still torn (hypothetically) about the distinction between "doing the right thing" and "the rule of law". I believe that the distinction is both about "context" (one size fits all in space and time and circumstance) and time-scale... if a rule set in cement (legislation) becomes in-apt for a new circumstance (pandemic threat), it may take longer to adjust it to fit than the time-scale of the event (weeks?) as it unfolds. I suppose this is what executive emergency powers exist for... to allow for timely tactical response while the strategic longer-term/broader-implication responses can muster as appropriate.

Too bad we seem to have (at least?) one significant faction in our politics interested in pitting those against one another when I *think* they were designed to work cooperatively in the best of times and provide checks and balances in the worst of times. My biases have me wanting to believe that this "pitting" is entirely the contrivance of the GOP/Right but of course I hear just the opposite *from* them and am left wondering how much of an imbalance there is... anecdotally, "packing the courts" and "voter suppression" and "gerrymandering" are (almost) exclusively the province of the (authoritarian, loyalty-before-sensemaking?) Right. The counter argument from the other side seems to reduce to "voter fraud" and maybe citing an (unbalanced?) number of court-packings, and gerry-manderings.

Too much (IMO) of politics today seems to be no more than "gaming the system" by "mucking with the machinery" rather than truly trying to satisfice or optimise the design and operation of the machinery to achieve collectively beneficial results.

mumble,

- Steve

On 5/14/20 10:13 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
The news coverage of this has been odd. The order is definitely not countering a "governor's stay-at-home order", which is what I see most people saying. The governor took emergency powers, made a few orders directly, and then instructed the Health Secretary to take the lead on state-wide response. The Health Secretary then issued several orders under her own signatory authority, only one of which was challenged (Order 28). The ruling is that that particular order was so broad and general as to count as executive branch rule making, which has its own set of rules, including a period of time for review by the legislature.

Full decision:

https://evers.wi.gov/Documents/COVID19/EMO28-SaferAtHome.pdf

From the opinion of the court, paragraph 1:

This case is about the assertion of power by one unelected official, Andrea Palm, and her order to all people within Wisconsin to remain in their homes, not to travel and to close all businesses that she declares are not "essential" in Emergency Order 28. Palm says that failure to obey Order 28 subjects the transgressor to imprisonment for 30 days, a $250 fine or both. This case is not about Governor Tony Evers' Emergency Order or the powers of the Governor.

From paragraph 7:

On April 16, 2020, Palm issued Emergency Order 28, also titled "Safer at Home Order." This order was not issued by the Governor, nor did it rely on the Governor's emergency declaration. Rather, it relied solely on "the authority vested in [Andrea Palm, Department of Health Services Secretary-designee] by the Laws of the State, including but not limited to [Wis. Stat. §] 252.02(3), (4), and (6)." Emergency Order 28 commands all individuals in Wisconsin "to stay at home or at their place of residence" with certain limited exceptions approved by Palm or risk punishment "by up to 30 days imprisonment, or up to $250 fine, or both." 8 Order 28 also:

* Prohibits "[a]ll forms of travel" except what Palm deems essential.

* Orders "[a]ll for-profit and non-profit businesses" to "cease all activities" except for minimum operations that Palm deemed basic.

* Prohibits "[a]ll public and private gatherings of any number" "not part of a single household."

* Declares that all public and private K-12 schools "shall remain closed" for the remainder of the year.

* Declares that libraries shall remain closed for "all inperson services."

* Declares all "public amusement and activity" places closed regardless of whether "indoors or outdoors" except golf courses (with restrictions). The order says "Driving ranges and miniature golf must remain closed."

* Continues the ordered closure of all salons and spas.

* Continues the closure of every restaurant and bar except for take-out or delivery service.

* Orders religious groups to limit gatherings to "fewer than 10 people in a room" including weddings and funerals.

* Imposes a six-foot social distancing requirement for any person not "residing in a single living unit or household."

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 10:55 AM Steven A Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

Friammers -

Mary's daughter, who lives in Wisconsin alerted us to the big court-decision overturning the governor's stay-at-home order:

https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/wisconsin-supreme-court-strikes-down-stay-at-home-order/article_fd2be344-666f-5437-8955-f5cd9ae17a50.html

In a concurring opinion, Kelly said the court’s decision hinged on determining the extent of Palm’s authority, not whether her emergency order was a good idea.

“The order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response to COVID-19,” Kelly said. “Either way, that is not the question before the court.”

I'm (nicely?) split on issues like this and I think this last quote really says a lot.   I understand that 2 or more counties immediately issued their own "safer at home" order matching the one repealed at the state level.   I'm not clear on whether a similar "overreach of authority" will ultimately be decided against those.

Anecdotally, in the meantime, many bars have opened and apparently many patrons have returned (without masks and not observing social distancing guidelines).

This seems like a good test bed of some of the assumptions behind Dave's "prophecy".   Will the (if we believe in the germ theory and network transmission) uptick in cases resulting from this lead to a continuation of the pandemic (or "pandemic" if we prefer to believe the only uncontrolled growth is in hysterical media coverage and hypochondria).   The best case (and one I mostly hope for) might be if the subset of the WI population who now disregard the (former) rules is small enough and insular (only infecting one another) enough and/or the herd immunity has grown enough (highest estimates in places like NYC I think are still down as low as 20% out of the believed 70% required to bring R0 below 1.0 w/o masks/social-distance measures?).

Given that the courts may well be accurate in their interpretation of the limits to the governor's powers, I would expect a domino of challenges across republican-majority courts in other states, and a subsequent surge in the unrestricted opening of businesses and events.

I find a bit of cognitive/emotional/spiritual dissonance in trying to hold all three of the following in my head/heart/soul at the same time:

The rule of law is important in our society and if a governor does not have the right to shut down as hard as some have, then that needs to be acknowledged and reversed.

There is a lot of evidence suggesting that like Kelly above is quoted that "the order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response... " and that reversing it in fact as well as in law may well yield a significant increase in R0 in those states (and among states who have significant mixing *with* those states), possibly putting us back close to where we were in late March.

I don't like the idea of telling others what to do (wholesale), nor being told what to do (specifically), but I also recognize that we do not live isolated, solitary lives, and "what we do matters". My threshold on accepting secondary and tertiary consequences may be above "helmet and seatbelt laws" but below "measures to suppress epidemic spread of deadly disease".   But how does that jive with my threshold for accepting "limits to personal agency and volition"?

These are indeed, interesting times, and as with the basis of Dave's prophecy, "only time will tell"... and with Glen's "put a pin in it", I just hope we keep track and pay attention to how well our prophecies/projections/forecasts play out.

- Steve

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

Eric writes:

“The most deleterious effect of the rampant "gaming of the system" that you allude to is the destruction of our ability to have honest, straightforward conversations about how we would like the system to look. Perfectly reasonable assertions can't be made, because those assertions have become "dog whistles" or coded messages, likely to indicate certain hidden agendas. :-(“

The vast debt that is being taken-on, and how everything turned on a dime to do it is really remarkable to me. All of the cognitive inertial of “the conversations that can’t be had” and their potential public cost consequences seem to pale in comparison to the financial commitments that are being made now. For example, the cash flow variations from Affordable Care Act vs. the cost of the individual and corporate bailouts. This country has become unable to plan or adapt. All we can do now is panic. I think we are really in trouble.

Marcus

thompnickson2

Re: Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

In reply to this post by Eric Charles-2

Eric I judge her by her predictive hit=rate: how many of the things she says are going to happen actually happen. She is pretty good, but I find that, as a lefty, I am sometime led by her to be more optimistic than I should be. The most egregious example was her hair-on-fire promotion of an old page from a Trump tax return, which SNL mercilessly satirized. I think she also led me to fear Barr less than I should have. I give her an 80 percent. Still, I think of her as comfort food. I don’t know O Reilly.

However, if your understanding of the Wisconsin legal situation is accurate, she really, really blew it. There was no qualification or ambiguity, whatsoever. Ditto, the governor’s representation. He implied that he had no power to do anything until empowered by the legislature.

If it was bad, it was very bad.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Eric Charles
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 11:58 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

-----------

Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Department of Justice - Personnel Psychologist

American University - Adjunct Instructor

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 12:21 PM <[hidden email]> wrote:

Interesting, EricC.

Maddow had the governor on last night and he treated it as a complete renunciation of his authority. “It’s the Wild West out there”, he said. As he presented it, the only resolution was for him to agree with the legislature on laws to govern the situation.

Hmmmmm!

N

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Eric Charles
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 10:14 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Wisconsin stay-at-home (safer at home) order overturned

The news coverage of this has been odd. The order is definitely not countering a "governor's stay-at-home order", which is what I see most people saying. The governor took emergency powers, made a few orders directly, and then instructed the Health Secretary to take the lead on state-wide response. The Health Secretary then issued several orders under her own signatory authority, only one of which was challenged (Order 28). The ruling is that that particular order was so broad and general as to count as executive branch rule making, which has its own set of rules, including a period of time for review by the legislature.

Full decision:
https://evers.wi.gov/Documents/COVID19/EMO28-SaferAtHome.pdf

From the opinion of the court, paragraph 1:
This case is about the assertion of power by one unelected official, Andrea Palm, and her order to all people within Wisconsin to remain in their homes, not to travel and to close all businesses that she declares are not "essential" in Emergency Order 28. Palm says that failure to obey Order 28 subjects the transgressor to imprisonment for 30 days, a $250 fine or both. This case is not about Governor Tony Evers' Emergency Order or the powers of the Governor.

From paragraph 7:
On April 16, 2020, Palm issued Emergency Order 28, also titled "Safer at Home Order." This order was not issued by the Governor, nor did it rely on the Governor's emergency declaration. Rather, it relied solely on "the authority vested in [Andrea Palm, Department of Health Services Secretary-designee] by the Laws of the State, including but not limited to [Wis. Stat. §] 252.02(3), (4), and (6)." Emergency Order 28 commands all individuals in Wisconsin "to stay at home or at their place of residence" with certain limited exceptions approved by Palm or risk punishment "by up to 30 days imprisonment, or up to $250 fine, or both." 8 Order 28 also:
* Prohibits "[a]ll forms of travel" except what Palm deems essential.
* Orders "[a]ll for-profit and non-profit businesses" to "cease all activities" except for minimum operations that Palm deemed basic.
* Prohibits "[a]ll public and private gatherings of any number" "not part of a single household."
* Declares that all public and private K-12 schools "shall remain closed" for the remainder of the year.
* Declares that libraries shall remain closed for "all inperson services."
* Declares all "public amusement and activity" places closed regardless of whether "indoors or outdoors" except golf courses (with restrictions). The order says "Driving ranges and miniature golf must remain closed."
* Continues the ordered closure of all salons and spas.
* Continues the closure of every restaurant and bar except for take-out or delivery service.
* Orders religious groups to limit gatherings to "fewer than 10 people in a room" including weddings and funerals.
* Imposes a six-foot social distancing requirement for any person not "residing in a single living unit or household."

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 10:55 AM Steven A Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:
Friammers -
Mary's daughter, who lives in Wisconsin alerted us to the big court-decision overturning the governor's stay-at-home order:
https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/wisconsin-supreme-court-strikes-down-stay-at-home-order/article_fd2be344-666f-5437-8955-f5cd9ae17a50.html
In a concurring opinion, Kelly said the court’s decision hinged on determining the extent of Palm’s authority, not whether her emergency order was a good idea.
“The order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response to COVID-19,” Kelly said. “Either way, that is not the question before the court.”
I'm (nicely?) split on issues like this and I think this last quote really says a lot.   I understand that 2 or more counties immediately issued their own "safer at home" order matching the one repealed at the state level.   I'm not clear on whether a similar "overreach of authority" will ultimately be decided against those.

Anecdotally, in the meantime, many bars have opened and apparently many patrons have returned (without masks and not observing social distancing guidelines).

This seems like a good test bed of some of the assumptions behind Dave's "prophecy".   Will the (if we believe in the germ theory and network transmission) uptick in cases resulting from this lead to a continuation of the pandemic (or "pandemic" if we prefer to believe the only uncontrolled growth is in hysterical media coverage and hypochondria).   The best case (and one I mostly hope for) might be if the subset of the WI population who now disregard the (former) rules is small enough and insular (only infecting one another) enough and/or the herd immunity has grown enough (highest estimates in places like NYC I think are still down as low as 20% out of the believed 70% required to bring R0 below 1.0 w/o masks/social-distance measures?).

Given that the courts may well be accurate in their interpretation of the limits to the governor's powers, I would expect a domino of challenges across republican-majority courts in other states, and a subsequent surge in the unrestricted opening of businesses and events.

I find a bit of cognitive/emotional/spiritual dissonance in trying to hold all three of the following in my head/heart/soul at the same time:
The rule of law is important in our society and if a governor does not have the right to shut down as hard as some have, then that needs to be acknowledged and reversed.
There is a lot of evidence suggesting that like Kelly above is quoted that "the order may be a brilliantly conceived and executed response... " and that reversing it in fact as well as in law may well yield a significant increase in R0 in those states (and among states who have significant mixing *with* those states), possibly putting us back close to where we were in late March.
I don't like the idea of telling others what to do (wholesale), nor being told what to do (specifically), but I also recognize that we do not live isolated, solitary lives, and "what we do matters". My threshold on accepting secondary and tertiary consequences may be above "helmet and seatbelt laws" but below "measures to suppress epidemic spread of deadly disease".   But how does that jive with my threshold for accepting "limits to personal agency and volition"?
These are indeed, interesting times, and as with the basis of Dave's prophecy, "only time will tell"... and with Glen's "put a pin in it", I just hope we keep track and pay attention to how well our prophecies/projections/forecasts play out.
- Steve
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/