Pandemic Part 10. A new paradigm?

 

February 17, 2022

The Center for Disease Control estimates that, taking the massive spread of Omicron around the country into account and the final relatively high vaccination rate in the country, 73% of the nation is now immune from the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2, i.e. COVID 19.

Nobody is really sure exactly what that means.  But it might mean that we're entering a phase where the virus doesn't disappear, but it's much less disruptive to society.

It's still the case, however, that it remains a danger for the unvaccinated.

March 1, 2022

Wyoming's public health emergency shall expire on March 14.

March 21, 2022

A new variant of Omicron has developed, which is about 30% more transmissible than the already more transmissible Omicron.  It's spiking in Europe and in Hong Kong has caused an outbreak with a massive death rate, mostly concentrated in the unvaccinated elderly.

China has reported its first deaths in many months.

According to experts, the world is about 50% through the probable course of the pandemic.

April 14, 2022

Over 1,000,000 Americans have now died from the COVID 19.

July 22, 2022

President Biden has COVID 19.

At this point, two members of our four member family also have, with one having had it quite recently and finding it awful, but being grateful accordingly for having been vaccinated.

A new, more traditional type of vaccine, has now been approved.

September 20, 2022

On 60 Minutes over the weekend, President Biden stated; "The pandemic is over. We still have a problem with COVID. We're still doing a lot of work on it. But the pandemic is over."  The HHS Secretary later confirmed that position.

Epidemiologically, it isn't over, but then neither is the plague's pandemic either.  The statement has been criticized, with 400 people per day dying of the disease, but by and large it reflects the mood of the public which has largely gone back to a new post Covid introduction, world in which COVID 19 is part of the background.

December 15, 2022

The new defense spending authorization includes a requirement that the Secretary of Defense rescind vaccination requirements for troops because, well because that's the idiotic sort of thing that politicians like to stick into bills.

All of the troops should be vaccinated.

December 24, 2022

China, which has not accepted western vaccines, reported 37,000,000 new vaccinations in a single day.

January 2, 2023

A new variant of Omicron, XBB.1.5, now makes up 40% of the new cases in the U.S.

And Covid is still killing.

January 20, 2023

Governor Gordon Tests Positive for COVID-19

CHEYENNE, Wyo. –  Governor Mark Gordon has received results of a COVID-19 test that showed he is positive for the virus. The Governor is experiencing only minor symptoms at this time and will continue working from home on behalf of Wyoming. 

March 1, 2023

The Washington Post broke a story that the Department of Energy issued a report believing, with "low confidence", that the SARS-CoV-2 virus originated in a Chinese lab.

A really good analysis of this story can be found here:  

Why Scientists, Lawmakers & Diplomats Care Where COVID Began

In actuality, the Biden Administration early on ordered governmental intelligence agencies to get to the bottom of the virus' origin.  Eight intelligence agencies were assigned to the tasks, two of which have concluded, but with confidence doubts, that the virus was natural in origin. Two, we know now, felt the opposite, with it already known since 2021 what the FBI felt, with "moderate confidence" that the origin was a Chinese lab.  Two just haven't reported.

None of this kept some from claiming that it's now proven that the virus originated in the lab.

FWIW, private scientists, as opposed to intelligence agencies, overwhelmingly feel that it originated due to animal transfer in the Wuhan market.

March 18, 2023

Recent evidence points to raccoon dogs at the Wuhan market as the source.

April 11, 2023

President Biden declared the COVID emergency to be over.

August 22, 2023

Declared over or not, two new strains are on the loose and a new booster should be available mid September.

April 12, 2024

The CDC has found there's no link between the COVID vaccines and cardiac arrest in young people.

Not that this is a surprise.

It'll make no difference in the anti-scientific atmosphere of the day. A society that can believe that legalizing marijuana, which is largely untested and wholly unregulated, and that Donald Trump won hte 2020 election, will still believe that the vaccine is risky, but cause it wishes to.

Last prior installment:

Pandemic Part 9. Omicron becomes dominant

The 2024 Wyoming Legislative Session. Part 4. Oedant Arma Toga.

 

February 26, 2024

The start of week three.

February 27, 2024

Given the huge differences between the House and Senate versions of the budget, a special session is being discussed.

The legislature just passed the halfway mark last Friday.

The much talked about tax restructuring House Bill 203 was heavily amended yesterday so that the $1,000,0000 home value exemption was dropped to  $200,000 and the sales tax from 2% to 1%, effectively eliminating the real structure of the bill.

I earlier predicted it would die, and this is, unfortunately, a new bill.  It'll still die, but for the overwhelming majority of Wyomingites, all this would do is create a new tax.  Changing the $1,000,000 to, perhaps, $500,000 would have made sense, but probably most Wyoming homes now have a $200,000 value.

The Senate passed SF 105 which bans credit card tracking of firearms purchased, a totally non-existent problem that even an interview from a local sporting goods store was baffled about.

February 27, cont:

Not really legislative, but:

Governor Gordon Issues Line-Item Vetoes to Secretary of State’s ESG Investing Rules

CHEYENNE, Wyo. – After careful review of a rules package proposed by Secretary of State Chuck Gray on Environmental, Social, and Governance (“ESG”) investment disclosure and consent, Governor Mark Gordon has determined that parts of the rules go beyond the Secretary’s legal authority. As a result the Governor issued line item-vetoes of portions of the rules. 

The Governor has long-opposed any artificial implementation of ESG factors in investment strategies. 

“While I agree that ESG investment guidance is improper and misleading, the answer to too much government interference in our lives is not more government,” Governor Gordon said. “No government should have the right to direct people’s personal investment strategies.”

In a letter sent to Secretary Gray, Governor Gordon notes that by law he can only approve rules within the bounds set by statute. In the case of the proposed rules addressing ESG investing, the statute does not allow the government to tell individuals how they must invest their dollars. The consumer protection required by Wyoming and federal law speaks to transparency and disclosure only. Informed consumers should have the freedom to make their own investment choices. 

“To be clear, I agree with your efforts to better illuminate investment practice and strategy through disclosure. Properly informed investors are always better able to make good decisions for themselves,” Governor Gordon wrote.

“Our appetite to oppose radical and misguided ESG initiatives in Wyoming does not justify implementing rules beyond the scope of statutory authority or interfering in the personal investment choices of Wyoming citizens. Personal responsibility and liberty are sacred principles that are all too often usurped by government mandate,” he added.

In the letter, the Governor also noted that federal securities laws expressly prohibit state conflicts “in the regulation of (1) federally covered securities, (2) broker dealers, (3) federally covered investment advisors, (4) investment advisor representatives, and (5) securities agents.”

The Governor’s letter to the Secretary of State may be viewed here. A copy of the Governor’s line-item vetoes can be found here.

 And:

Secretary Gray Expresses Disappointment in Governor's Line-Item Veto of Rules to Protect Investors from ESG Investments through Increased Disclosure; Secretary Gray Reiterates Need to Protect Investors from Radical ESG Investments

     CHEYENNE, WY – On February 27, 2024, Governor Mark Gordon line-item vetoed amendments to Chapters 2, 4, 5, and 10 of the Wyoming Secretary of State’s Securities Rules, which required disclosure and consent to Environmental, Social, and Governance (“ESG”) investment strategies by requiring investment advisers, broker-dealers, and securities agents to disclose to their customers or clients whether they are incorporating a social objective, i.e. whether they are considering social criteria, in the investment or commitment of customer or client funds, and obtain their consent. Following the Governor’s line-item veto, the rules limit the definition of a social objective, and will require written disclosure for some ESG-related investments, but will not require customer or client consent.

     “I am disappointed in and disagree with Governor Gordon’s decision to line-item veto key portions of our proposed Securities Rules,” Secretary of State Chuck Gray said in a statement. “From the beginning of this rulemaking, we addressed concerns raised by Governor Gordon. We underwent a thorough public comment period, and fully considered all feedback received. As I wrote previously in my letter dated July 19, 2024, and again in my letter dated January 16, 2024, the Wyoming Uniform Securities Act clearly allows Wyoming to protect customers and clients from the harmful effects of ESG investments. I am disappointed to see the Governor’s rationale has adopted the recycled talking points of the radical left and Wall Street elites, rather than sound legal arguments. We must take concrete, proactive action to protect our state and consumers from the dangers presented by ESG investments maliciously targeting our core industries.”

     “Although the Governor’s line-item veto weakened the amount of protections we attempted to provide to customers and clients to protect them from the dangers of ESG investment strategies, I believe the final rules offer a necessary starting point to protect Wyomingites from social ideologues imposing their radical, clown-show agenda on our state.”  

Cont:

Passed Senate, on to House:

SENATE FILE NO. SF0094

An act regarding compelled speech and state employers.

Sponsored by: Senator(s) Hutchings, French and Ide and Representative(s) Styvar and Ward

A BILL

for

AN ACT relating to the administration of government; prohibiting the state and its political subdivisions from compelling speech as specified; authorizing a civil remedy; providing an exception to the Wyoming governmental claims act; and providing for an effective date.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

Section 1.  W.S. 9‑14‑301 is created to read:

ARTICLE 3

COMPELLED OR PROHIBITED SPEECH

9‑14‑301.  Compelled speech; civil action.

(a)  The state and its political subdivisions shall not compel or require an employee to refer to another employee using that employee's preferred pronouns:

(i)  As a condition of continuing or commencing employment or contracting with the state or a political subdivision;

(ii)  As a condition to receive a grant, contract, license or other benefit afforded by the state or a political subdivision; or

(iii)  Under threat of adverse action by the state or a political subdivision, including but not limited to an adverse employment action, exclusion, sanction or punishment.

(b)  Any person aggrieved by a violation of subsection (a) of this section may file a civil action in any court of competent jurisdiction against the state or any political subdivision, and its employees acting in their official capacities, responsible for the violation to recover appropriate relief, including injunctive or declaratory relief, compensatory damages, reasonable attorney fees and court costs.

Section 2.  W.S. 1‑39‑104(a) is amended to read:

1‑39‑104.  Granting immunity from tort liability; liability on contracts; exceptions.

(a)  A governmental entity and its public employees while acting within the scope of duties are granted immunity from liability for any tort except as provided by W.S. 1‑39‑105 through 1‑39‑112 and 9‑14‑301. Any immunity in actions based on a contract entered into by a governmental entity is waived except to the extent provided by the contract if the contract was within the powers granted to the entity and was properly executed and except as provided in W.S. 1‑39‑120(b). The claims procedures of W.S. 1‑39‑113 apply to contractual claims against governmental entities.

Section 3.  This act applies to civil causes of action that are initiated on or after the effective date of this act.

Section 4.  This act is effective July 1, 2024.

Passed House, on to Senate, and totally ineffectual due to the Supremacy Clause:

HOUSE BILL NO. HB0036

Natural Resource Protection Act.

Sponsored by: Select Federal Natural Resource Management Committee

A BILL

for

AN ACT relating to protection of constitutional rights; providing a declaration of authority and policy; prohibiting the enforcement of federal rules or regulations regarding federal land management as specified; providing an exception; and providing for an effective date.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

Section 1.  W.S. 9‑14‑301 through 9‑14‑303 are created to read:

ARTICLE 3

NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION ACT

9‑14‑301.  Short title.

This article shall be known and may be cited as the "Natural Resource Protection Act."

9‑14‑302.  Declaration of authority and policy.

(a)  The Natural Resource Protection Act is enacted under the authority of the tenth amendment to the United States constitution and Wyoming's agreement with the United States that the state adopted when it joined the union under the United States constitution's system of dual sovereignty.

(b)  The legislature finds and declares:

(i)  The federal government shall comply with federal law when administering federal lands;

(ii)  The federal government arbitrarily restricting significant amounts of federal lands from public use is contrary to managing federal land under principles of multiple use and sustained yield;

(iii)  Any failure by the federal government to abide by the law undermines the rule of law that is vital to our system of government. 

9‑14‑303.  Prohibiting the enforcement of federal regulation regarding federal land management; penalty.

(a)  Upon a determination by the governor, with advice from the attorney general, that an executive order, final rule or regulation of the federal government does not comply with federal laws regarding federal land management and upon providing notice, this state and all political subdivisions of this state shall not use any personnel, funds appropriated by the legislature or any other source of funds that originate within the state of Wyoming to enforce or administer that federal executive order, final rule or regulation. The governor shall not revoke a valid primacy agreement with a federal agency over the regulation and enforcement of a federal law or program until a court of competent jurisdiction determines the federal executive order, final rule or regulation is unlawful.

(b)  Nothing in this act shall limit or restrict a public officer, as defined by W.S. 6‑5‑101(a)(v), from providing assistance to federal authorities for purposes not specifically identified in subsection (a) of this section. Nothing in this act shall be construed to prohibit any governmental entity from accepting federal funds for law enforcement purposes.

Section 2.  This act is effective July 1, 2024.

February 28, 2024

The Joint Conference Committee was picked to work out the $1B difference between the House and the Senate budgets.  The members are Sens. Dave Kinskey, R-Sheridan, Tim Salazar, R-Riverton, Sens. Anthony Bouchard, R-Cheyenne, Dan Laursen, R-Powell, and Troy McKeown, R-Gillette. Three of the members are extremely conservative.

This signals there's going to be a lot of cutting in the Senate version of the budget.

Chloe's law passed the Senate. The bill bans sexual mutilation of children, something that should simply be overall outright banned.

SENATE FILE NO. SF0099

Chloe's law-children gender change prohibition.

Sponsored by: Senator(s) Bouchard, Biteman, Boner, Brennan, Dockstader, French, Hicks, Hutchings, Ide, Kinskey, Kolb, Laursen, D, McKeown, Salazar and Steinmetz and Representative(s) Andrew, Davis, Heiner, Hornok, Jennings, Knapp, Locke, Neiman, Niemiec, Ottman, Pendergraft, Penn, Rodriguez-Williams, Slagle, Strock, Styvar, Trujillo and Winter

A BILL

for

AN ACT relating to public health and safety; prohibiting physicians from performing procedures for children related to gender transitioning and gender reassignment; providing an exception; providing that gender transitioning and reassignment procedures are grounds for suspension or revocation of a physician's or health care provider's license; providing definitions; specifying applicability; requiring rulemaking; and providing for effective dates.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

Section 1.  W.S. 35‑4‑1001 is created to read:

ARTICLE 10

GENDER‑RELATED PROCEDURES

35‑4‑1001.  Gender transitioning and reassignment procedures for children prohibited.

(a)  As used in this section:

(i)  "Child" means a person who is younger than eighteen (18) years of age;

(ii)  "Health care provider" means a person other than a physician who is licensed, certified or otherwise authorized by Wyoming law to provide or render health care or to dispense or prescribe a prescription drug in the ordinary course of business or practice of a profession;

(iii)  "Physician" means any person licensed to practice medicine in this state by the state board of medicine under the Medical Practice Act.

(b)  Except as provided in subsection (c) of this section and for purposes of transitioning a child's biological sex as determined by the sex organs, chromosomes and endogenous profiles of the child or affirming the child's perception of the child's sex if that perception is inconsistent with the child's biological sex, no physician or health care provider shall:

(i)  Perform a surgery that sterilizes the child, including castration, vasectomy, hysterectomy, oophorectomy, metoidioplasty, orchiectomy, penectomy, phalloplasty and vaginoplasty;

(ii)  Perform a mastectomy;

(iii)  Provide, administer, prescribe or dispense any of the following prescription drugs that induce transient or permanent infertility:

(A)  Puberty suppression or blocking prescription drugs to stop or delay normal puberty;

(B)  Supraphysiologic doses of testosterone to females;

(C)  Supraphysiologic doses of estrogen to males.

(iv)  Remove any otherwise healthy or nondiseased body part or tissue.

(c)  This section shall not apply to:

(i)  Procedures or treatments that are performed with the consent of the child's parent or guardian and are for a child who is born with a medically verifiable genetic disorder of sex development, including 46, XX chromosomes with virilization, 46, XY with undervirilization or both ovarian and testicular tissue;

(ii)  Any procedure or treatment that is performed with the consent of the child's parent or guardian and is for a child with medically verifiable central precocious puberty.

Section 2.  W.S. 33‑21‑146(a)(xi), (xii) and by creating a new paragraph (xiii), 33‑24‑122(a)(intro), (ix) and by creating a new paragraph (xi) and 33‑26‑402(a) by creating a new paragraph (xxxvi) are amended to read:

33‑21‑146.  Disciplining licensees and certificate holders; grounds.

(a)  The board of nursing may refuse to issue or renew, or may suspend or revoke the license, certificate or temporary permit of any person, or to otherwise discipline a licensee or certificate holder, upon proof that the person:

(xi)  Has failed to submit to a mental, physical or medical competency examination following a proper request by the board made pursuant to board rules and regulations and the Wyoming Administrative Procedure Act; or

(xii)  Has violated a previously entered board order;. or

(xiii)  Has violated W.S. 35‑4‑1001.

33‑24‑122.  Revocation or suspension of license and registration; letter of admonition; summary suspension; administrative penalties; probation; grounds.

(a)  The license and registration of any pharmacist may be revoked or suspended by the board of pharmacy or the board may issue a letter of admonition, refuse to issue or renew any license or require successful completion of a rehabilitation program or issue a summary suspension for any one (1) or more of the following causes:

(ix)  For senility or mental impairment which impedes the pharmacist's professional abilities or for habitual personal use of morphine, cocaine or other habit forming drugs or alcohol; or

(xi)  For violating W.S. 35‑4‑1001.

33‑26‑402.  Grounds for suspension; revocation; restriction; imposition of conditions; refusal to renew or other disciplinary action.

(a)  The board may refuse to renew, and may revoke, suspend or restrict a license or take other disciplinary action, including the imposition of conditions or restrictions upon a license on one (1) or more of the following grounds:

(xxxvi)  Violating W.S. 35‑4‑1001.

Section 3.  W.S. 35‑4‑1001, as created by section 1 of this act, shall apply only to conduct or procedures occurring on and after the effective date of this act.

Section 4.  The department of health, state board of medicine and state board of pharmacy shall promulgate all rules necessary to implement this act.

Section 5.  

(a)  Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, this act is effective July 1, 2024.

(b)  Sections 4 and 5 of this act are effective immediately upon completion of all acts necessary for a bill to become law as provided by Article 4, Section 8 of the Wyoming Constitution.

The bill restructuring Wyoming's tax system died, as we predicted.

A bill eliminating gun free zones in Wyoming passed the House.  My prediction is that it shall die in the Senate.

February 28, cont:

The Senate has voted to defund gender studies and the diversity office at the University of Wyoming.  This is not a surprise,

Right wing populist Senator Bob Ide, on the action, stated:

I think we have a real opportunity to set University of Wyoming apart as a grassroots, traditional-value university.

This was done by way of a footnote in the budget, and it's far from certain that the footnote will survive budget resolution. 

February 29, 2024

A bill to require abortion clinics to be licensed pass the House and is through a Senate committee.  It provides:

HOUSE BILL NO. HB0148

Regulation of surgical abortions

Sponsored by: Representative(s) Lawley, Bear and Washut and Senator(s) Biteman, Boner, Brennan, Hutchings, Salazar and Steinmetz

A BILL

for

AN ACT relating to public health and safety; requiring the licensure of surgical abortion facilities as specified; requiring licensed physicians to perform abortions after an ultrasound; providing criminal penalties for violations; specifying civil liability for damages resulting from abortions; providing definitions; making conforming amendments; specifying applicability; requiring rulemaking; and providing for an effective date.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

Section 1.  W.S. 35‑6‑201 through 35‑6‑205 are created to read:

ARTICLE 2

REGULATION OF SURGICAL ABORTIONS

35‑6‑201.  Definitions.

(a)  As used in this article:

(i)  "Abortion" means the act of using or prescribing any instrument, medicine, drug or any other substance, device or means with the intent to terminate the clinically diagnosable pregnancy of a woman, including the elimination of one (1) or more unborn babies in a multifetal pregnancy, with knowledge that the termination by those means will, with reasonable likelihood, cause the death of the unborn baby. "Abortion" shall not include any use, prescription or means specified in this paragraph if  the use, prescription or means are done with the intent to:

(A)  Save the life or preserve the health of the unborn baby;

(B)  Remove a dead unborn baby caused by spontaneous abortion or intrauterine fetal demise;

(C)  Treat a woman for an ectopic pregnancy; or

(D)  Provide treatment for a pregnant woman when a medical procedure or treatment is necessary, based on reasonable medical judgment, to save or preserve the life of the pregnant woman.

(ii)  "Hospital" means those institutions licensed by the Wyoming department of health as hospitals;

(iii)  "Physician" means any person licensed to practice medicine in this state;

(iv)  "Pregnancy" or "pregnant" means the human female reproductive condition of having a living unborn baby or human being within a human female's body throughout the entire embryonic and fetal stages of the unborn human being from fertilization to full gestation and childbirth;

(v)  "Reasonable medical judgment" means a medical judgment that would be made or a medical action that would be undertaken by a reasonably prudent, qualified physician who is knowledgeable about the case and the treatment possibilities with respect to the medical conditions involved;

(vi)  "Surgical abortion" means an induced abortion performed or attempted through use of a machine, medical device, surgical instrument or surgical tool, or any combination thereof, to terminate the clinically diagnosable pregnancy of a woman with knowledge and the intent that the termination by those means will cause, with reasonable likelihood, the death of the unborn child;

(vii)  "Surgical abortion facility" means any facility, other than a hospital, that provides a surgical abortion to a woman and performs not less than three (3) first‑trimester surgical abortions in any one (1) month or not less than one (1) second‑trimester or third‑trimester surgical abortion in any one (1) year.

35‑6‑202.  Surgical abortion facilities; licensure requirement; prohibitions; penalties.

(a)  Each surgical abortion facility in Wyoming shall be licensed as an ambulatory surgical center in accordance with W.S. 35‑2‑901 through 35‑2‑914 and the rules of the department of health. Each surgical abortion facility performing surgical abortions shall have a separate license.

(b)  No surgical abortion facility shall provide surgical abortions to any pregnant woman without first being licensed as an ambulatory surgical center.

(c)  Each surgical abortion facility shall comply with all rules of the department of health concerning the operation and regulation of ambulatory surgical centers. No license issued to a surgical abortion facility shall be transferable or assignable to any other person or facility.

(d)  Each licensed physician performing at least one (1) surgical abortion at a surgical abortion facility shall:

(i)  Report each surgical abortion to the department of health and shall attest in the report that the physician is licensed and in good standing with the state board of medicine;

(ii)  Submit documentation in a form and frequency required by the department of health that demonstrates that the licensed physician has admitting privileges at a hospital located not more than ten (10) miles from the abortion facility where the licensed physician is performing or will perform surgical abortions.

(e)  Any person who violates this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00). Each calendar day in which a violation of this section occurs or continues is a separate offense.

35‑6‑203.  Abortion facilities; surgical abortions; requirements; rulemaking.

(a)  Any surgical abortion performed at a surgical abortion facility in the state shall only be performed by a physician licensed in the state of Wyoming.

(b)  Any person who performs in the state any surgical abortion at a surgical abortion facility in violation of subsection (a) of this section is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not less than one (1) year nor more than fourteen (14) years.

(c)  No person shall perform a surgical abortion at a surgical abortion facility in Wyoming who is not a licensed physician with admitting privileges at a hospital located not more than ten (10) miles from the abortion facility where the surgical abortion is performed.

(d)  Any person who violates subsection (c) of this section or if a pharmacist or physician violates W.S. 35‑6‑205 shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of one thousand dollars ($1,000,00). For purposes of this subsection, each surgical abortion at a surgical abortion facility shall constitute a separate offense of subsection (c) of this section.

(e)  The department of health shall promulgate rules necessary to regulate surgical abortion facilities as ambulatory surgical centers under W.S. 35‑2‑901 through 35‑2‑914, provided that the rules:

(i)  Applicable to surgical abortion facilities are not less stringent than those rules applicable to ambulatory surgical centers;

(ii)  Provide for the physical inspection of surgical abortion facilities by the department of health every three (3) years.

35‑6‑204.  Applicability; effect.

If any provision of this article conflicts with the Life is a Human Right Act or W.S. 35‑6‑139, the provisions of the Life is a Human Right Act and W.S. 35‑6‑139 shall control over this article to the extent that the Life is a Human Right Act and W.S. 35‑6‑139 are enforceable.

35‑6‑205.  Abortion facilities; licensure requirements verification; prohibitions; penalties.

Not less than forty‑eight (48) hours before a pregnant woman procures the drugs or substances for a chemical abortion, before a physician or pharmacist dispenses the drugs or substances necessary for a chemical abortion or before a pregnant woman undergoes a surgical abortion, the physician or pharmacist shall ensure that the pregnant woman receives an ultrasound in order to determine the gestational age of the unborn child, to determine the location of the pregnancy, to verify a viable intrauterine pregnancy and to provide the pregnant woman the opportunity to view the active ultrasound of the unborn child and hear the heartbeat of the unborn child if the heartbeat is audible. The provider of the ultrasound shall provide the pregnant woman with a document that specifies the date, time and place of the ultrasound.

Section 2.  W.S. 35‑2‑901(a)(ii) is amended to read:

35‑2‑901.  Definitions; applicability of provisions.

(a)  As used in this act:

(ii)  "Ambulatory surgical center" means a facility which provides surgical treatment to patients not requiring hospitalization and is not part of a hospital or offices of private physicians, dentists or podiatrists. "Ambulatory surgical center" shall include any surgical abortion facility as defined by W.S. 35‑6‑201(a)(vii);

Section 3.

(a)  Nothing in this act shall be construed as creating an individual right to abortion.

(b)  It is the intent of the legislature that this act shall not be construed as holding abortion as lawful in the state pending a decision from a court of competent jurisdiction on the current state of the law.

(c)  It is the intent of the legislature that this act shall not recognize or define abortion as a health care decision under Article 1, section 38 of the Wyoming Constitution.

Section 4.  The department of health shall promulgate all rules necessary to implement this act.

Section 5.  This act is effective immediately upon completion of all acts necessary for a bill to become law as provided by Article 4, Section 8 of the Wyoming Constitution.

This may seem like an odd bill in that the legislature has outlawed abortion already, although the disposition of that law is in peril due to a poorly thought out paranoid Wyoming Constitutional amendment that was aimed at the fictional threat of Obamacare "death panels", a good example of paranoia in operation combined with the Law of Unintended Consequences.  Those who backed that law should be ashamed of themselves.  Anyhow, this bill seeks to regulate infanticide abattoirs if they're allowed to exist, and during the period in which the issue is pending in what seems like a glacially slow Teton County proceeding.

It might be questioned why no effort has been made to repeal the silly Obamacare Paranoia Amendment, but none has.  Probably "They're Going To Make Me Vaccinate" paranoia has something to do with that.

March 1, 2024

A bill to relocate bighorn sheep from Sweetwater Rocks has gotten through a House Committee after passing the Senate.  The measure is designed to protect domestic sheep.

SENATE FILE NO. SF0118

Bighorn and domestic sheep relocation-federal action.

Sponsored by: Senator(s) Hicks and Representative(s) Western

A BILL

for

AN ACT relating to wildlife and livestock; providing legislative findings; requiring the game and fish department to relocate or remove bighorn sheep from the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area in response to specified federal action; providing for the reimbursement of costs for relocation or removal of bighorn sheep; requiring and authorizing attorney general action as specified; amending the duties of the wildlife/livestock research partnership board; providing appropriations; and providing for an effective date.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

Section 1.  W.S. 11‑19‑605 is created to read:

11‑19‑605.  Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep relocation and removal; legislative findings; reimbursement; attorney general action.

(a)  The legislature finds and declares that it is the state's policy to vigorously defend its interests in maintaining and enhancing viable livestock grazing operations on public lands in conjunction with the conservation and maintenance of healthy bighorn sheep populations in the state of Wyoming. These two (2) policies are mutually compatible as demonstrated since the adoption of the collaboratively developed Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan in 2004, which was codified into law under W.S. 11‑19‑604 in 2015. The legislature further finds and declares that:

(i)  Reintroduction of bighorn sheep and management action to protect existing populations of bighorn sheep on federal public lands has been effectively accomplished in conformance with the Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan;

(ii)  All wildlife in the state of Wyoming is the property of the state, and it is the policy of the state to provide an adequate and flexible system for control, propagation, management, protection and regulation of all Wyoming wildlife;

(iii)  Any removal of bighorn sheep from the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area under this act shall not be attributable to domestic livestock grazing on federal bureau of land management administered lands. Rather, the removal of bighorn sheep shall be directly attributable to:

(A)  Onerous federal regulation that unduly impedes the state of Wyoming's ability to manage wildlife and domestic livestock grazing in conformance with the Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan;

(B)  Third‑party litigation designed to use bighorn sheep as a means of eliminating domestic livestock grazing on bureau of land management administered lands in and adjacent to the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area.

(iv)  The provisions of this section shall be enforced by the state.

(b)  In conformance with the Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan in W.S. 11‑19‑604 and pursuant to W.S. 23‑1‑103, the game and fish department shall relocate or remove bighorn sheep from the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area if any federal judicial action or federal agency action requires or could require the following:

(i)  The elimination or suspension of domestic sheep grazing or trailing; or

(ii)  Any changes to a United States bureau of land management resource management plan, grazing allotments or livestock grazing agreements due to the presence of bighorn sheep in the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area or any adjacent grazing allotment that is not in a designated bighorn sheep herd unit after July 1, 2024 without the consent of the grazing permittee.

(c)  Any relocation or removal of bighorn sheep from the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area required by subsection (b) of this section shall commence as soon as practicable but not later than six (6) months after the Wyoming department of agriculture certifies to the governor that a condition specified in subsection (b) of this section is met. The governor shall notify the game and fish department that the removal of bighorn sheep from the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area shall commence in accordance with this section.

(d)  The game and fish department shall be responsible for the expedient removal of bighorn sheep that stray outside the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area if that straying or foray is not into another designated herd unit.

(e)  The state and its agencies shall coordinate and assist the Wyoming congressional delegation in pursuing changes to federal law, rules and policies in order to bring them into conformance with the Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan created under W.S. 11‑19‑604.

(f)  The Wyoming game and fish department shall not seek to change, alter or otherwise affect changes to domestic livestock grazing authorization on public and state lands due to the presence of bighorn sheep in the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area or adjacent grazing allotments that are not within an existing bighorn sheep herd unit.

(g)  The game and fish department shall be reimbursed for the costs of relocation or removal of bighorn sheep pursuant to subsection (b) of this section from any available funds in the wildlife/livestock disease research partnership account created by W.S. 11‑19‑603.

(h)  With the approval of the governor, the attorney general shall seek to intervene in any lawsuit if a federal action is contrary to the state's policy regarding Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep set forth in subsection (a) of this section or that is inconsistent with the Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan.

(j)  With the approval of the governor, the attorney general shall file an action against any federal agency to stop the enforcement, administration or implementation of any federal agency rule, instructional memo, handbook or other action taken by a federal agency if the rule, instructional memo, handbook or other action is contrary to the Wyoming bighorn/domestic sheep plan or is otherwise contrary to law.

Section 2.  W.S. 11‑19‑602(b) by creating a new paragraph (vii) and 11‑19‑603 are amended to read:

11‑19‑602.  Wyoming wildlife/livestock disease research partnership board created; membership; duties; purposes.

(b)  The board shall:

(vii)  Allocate funds for monitoring, tracking and conducting disease surveillance before and following the introduction of bighorn sheep in the Sweetwater Rocks cooperative review area.

11‑19‑603.  Account created.

There is created a wildlife/livestock disease research partnership account. Funds from this account shall be used only for purposes specified in W.S. 11‑19‑601 through 11‑19‑604 11‑19‑605. Any interest earned on the account shall remain within the account.

Section 3.

(a)  There is appropriated one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) from the general fund to the wildlife/livestock disease research partnership account for purposes of reimbursing the game and fish department for the costs of relocation or removal of bighorn sheep under this act. This appropriation shall be for the period beginning with the effective date of this act and ending June 30, 2030. This appropriation shall not be transferred or expended for any other purpose. Notwithstanding W.S. 9‑2‑1008, 9‑2‑1012(e) and 9‑4‑207, this appropriation shall not revert until June 30, 2030.

(b)  There is appropriated fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) from the general fund to the department of agriculture for the rangeland health assessment program to conduct rangeland monitoring of the United States bureau of land management grazing allotments in or adjacent to the Sweetwater Rocks bighorn sheep cooperative review area. This appropriation shall be for the period beginning with the effective date of this act and ending June 30, 2030. This appropriation shall not be transferred or expended for any other purpose. Notwithstanding W.S. 9‑2‑1008, 9‑2‑1012(e) and 9‑4‑207, this appropriation shall not revert until June 30, 2030.

Section 4.  This act is effective July 1, 2024.

The area is near Agate Flats in Fremont County.

March 1, cont:

Governor Gordon Signs First Bills of 2024 Legislative Session 

CHEYENNE, Wyo. – Governor Mark Gordon signed the first bills of the 2024 Legislative session at the Capitol today.

The first bill to be signed by the Governor was Senate File 0004 Rehiring retired firefighters-continued retirement benefits. Sponsored by the Joint Labor, Health and Social Services committee, the bill allows retired firefighters to be rehired while continuing to receive retirement benefits, including a pension.

The Governor signed the following bills into law today:

Enrolled Act # Bill No. Bill Title

SEA0001 SF0017 Plane coordinates system-amendments.

SEA0002 SF0015 Acceptance of retrocession-federal military installations.

SEA0003 SF0004 Rehiring retired firefighters-continued retirement benefits.

Last Prior Edition:

The 2024 Wyoming Legislative Session. Part 3. The start of the budget session.

Appendix:

The 2024 Wyoming Legislative Session. Part 3 Appendix. Bill Status at the end of Week 2.

A decline in U.S. Life Expectancy.

Which, we would note, the government, which addressed this oddly enough on Twitter, terms catastrophic.

Dr. Robert M. Califf @DrCaliff_FDA

We are facing extraordinary headwinds in our public health with a major decline in life expectancy. The major decline in the U.S. is not just a trend. I’d describe it as catastrophic.

JAMA Internal Medicine published earlier this month that our overall life expectancy has dropped to 76 years, and remarkably, that male life expectancy in the U.S. has dropped to 73 years.

Since then, CDC released a report showing a slight rebound from lower life expectancy caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Even with this encouraging report, we still have a lot of work to do before we see pre-pandemic life expectancy again. https://cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/vsrr031.pdf

As we all know, life expectancy is far from uniformly distributed. Disparities as a function of race, ethnicity, wealth, education and geospatial location are profound and widening.

A college degree is associated with an 8.5 year longer life and differences of more than a decade in life expectancy are common when we go from urban areas and university towns to rural areas.

We expect to lose over 450K Americans due to tobacco related illness this year – we need to change that. We have a very important and ambitious agenda to tackle in our work on tobacco. We’ve made some important advances in that area recently, but there is still much to be done.

Each year, more than a million Americans die from diet-related diseases, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and certain forms of cancers.

While we’ve seen enormous progress in terms of controlling or developing treatments for many of these diseases, alarmingly, we’re in the midst of a significant backsliding relating to many of these and other chronic illnesses.

Our work in this area also supports the food industry in their efforts to reformulate in healthier ways and provide additional knowledge/choices for American consumers. Working with industry is an important part of the equation, since govt most assuredly can’t do this alone.

An important aspect of this life expectancy dynamic is the challenge of drug shortages, particularly low-cost generics. With over 90% of our prescriptions now generic, these low cost, effective medications are an essential part of an effective public health strategy.

But these medications are not effective if they are not available! Shortages are very frustrating, consume an enormous share of talented pharmacist and clinician time to find alternatives and explanations to patients.

Shortages also undermine the underlying goal of increased accessibility of these often life-saving products. Simply put, shortages put patients at risk.

I believe that we need to seriously examine our level of accountability and changes that we can make to help what needs to be an “all hands on deck” effort to continue and amplify the improvement in life expectancy discussed in CDCs latest report.

Earlier this month, I spoke to a group of professors of medicine about declining life expectancy, and in that speech, I talked about my short list of changes that they might lead to help reverse the negative trend.

🔗⬇️

Every other sector in the health care ecosystem could develop its own list of improvements, and together, we could accelerate last year’s progress.

The government, industry, and the public all have a role to play in improving life expectancy. Let’s get to it.

Blog Mirror: The 2 key facts about US Covid policy that everyone should know

 

The 2 key facts about US Covid policy that everyone should know

The glory of being a trial lawyer.

The dirty little secret. . . there isn't any.

One of the nice things about being in a farm community as a working travelers is that their Sunday morning Masses usually start really early, as in 7:00 a.m. in this case.

At least not like portrayed in the movies, and certainly not like the silly "whaling for justice" type of stuff that the plaintiff's bar likes to shovel out.

Recently I tried a case out of town. I've tried so many in the past three decades I no longer have any idea how many I've tried, and if I stopped to try to count them, I know that I'd be inaccurate.  When you apply for a judicial appointment, which I've done several times, unsuccessfully (obviously), you are required to count them up, and I'm sure my numbers weren't the same any time I did that, even though I made an effort to be correct.

I do know that the year COVID restrictions on the courts lifted, I tried three that year.  That may not sound like a lot, but for a civil litigator it is.  I know quite a few civil litigators who have tried less than that over decades' long careers.  One law school colleague of mine who does the same work, has never, in so far as I know, tried a case.  An ABA review I once read of lawyers who had long civil careers and then retired (which seems to be a rarity) remarked that one of the subjects was proud of her "six" trials.

Six.

Hah.

There are a lot of reason there are not very many civil trials and even fewer serious civil trials, but one reason is that trials are hard stressful work.

But I'll get to that.

This past year, dating back a year ago or so, has not been a good one for me on a personal level.  I had surgery in the fall and missed the hunting season.  It was colon surgery, and I've never completely recovered, which is to say that my digestive track has not returned to normal, and it isn't going to.  During that process, it was revealed by a scan that I had a major thyroid nodule.  Followup on that showed it to almost certainly be cancerous, so during the trial, was looking forward to a second surgery, a partial thyroidectomy, and if really lucky I won't have to take medicine for the rest of my life.  There is, however, a good chance that I will have to. 

Having  the trial to accomplish meant that I didn't have to think about it, however.

In terms of good news, it turned out to be benign. Strange, but benign.  It's basically a result of an old injury, one I don't ever recall sustaining.

Current wound status.

Hopefully the recovery time isn't really long, but it varies quite a bit for people.  

I ended up never taking a day off from the second surgery, not even the day of the surgery, which was a mistake, I'll note.

Anyhow, for about a year running now, my life has been nothing but work.  As noted, I missed the hunting season and what little I got in prior to surgery was marred by being incredibly tired.  I'm not sure what was up with that (perhaps the thyroid), but I was.  I couldn't go for big game after that least I rip my stitches out.  

I did get out for waterfowl quite a bit late in the season, mostly on Sunday's after Mass.  I'd work on Sundays but for the Commandment to keep the Sabbath holy, which I take seriously, although occasionally I find myself working on that day too.

That's mostly a reflection of my personality.

The trial in question had been from a pre COVID case and it finally rolled around to to.  Just before it did, my opponent let me know that his young female partner was leaving, and she did before the trial commenced.  I was stunned, really, as she was bailing out of a really good firm and she's a really good lawyer.  She was leaving private practice to go in house.  

No more trials for her.

Then my younger female partner let me know she was leaving. She stuck with me through the trial.

Finding a lawyer you can comfortably try cases with isn't easy.  Frankly, maybe one in ten lawyers who do trial work are really talented at it and of those, maybe only 10% anyone one person meshes with well enough to have that role.  But here she definitely did.  Her leaving is a big loss to me, just as my opponent's younger counsel leaving was a big loss to him.  I don't know, really, if I'll be able to replace her.

For some time I've frankly wondered how she does it, as she's married with young children.  When I was first practicing law, the female litigators I'd meet, and they were few, tended to be childless, often by choice.  Quite a few women started to come into the law about the time that I did, and by and large if they were married and started to have children, they dropped out of practice.  It was just too much of a burden.

This recalls the old phrase, supposedly written by Jean Little, a Canadian author:

A man can work from sun to sun, But a woman's work is never done.

There's a lot of truth to that, quite frankly.

For some reason, even in our "modern" age, the traditional division of labor in which women are burdened with raising children while they're young and keeping the household has never gone away, even when the woman of the house is a professional and its first breadwinner.  Perhaps its simply genetic, although we're not supposed to say that.  About the only relief I see them getting is from willing grandparents, really, and that too, oddly enough, is a very traditional role for grandparents.

Anyhow, juggling a household and having a professional job that requires long hours and travel. . . that's brutal.  I don't blame these women a bit for seeking something else out.

One more example of how our modern "you live to serve this ship" lifestyle makes no sense and makes nobody happy.

You always go to the location of the trial early.

On Sunday, I looked out of my hotel window and saw this:

Horses by an old homestead, still being farmed.

Sigh.

The only thing I got out to do was to go to Mass.

I like everyone to have their own vehicles at a trial.  It gives everyone some independence.  If I control things, and at my age I do, everyone drives themselves.  

This, I'll note, isn't the case with some lawyers, although it is with all the ones I know.  Those people must be the really extraverted ones who just think everyone needs lots of sharing time all the time, and therefore they make the whole team prisoners to their automobile.

Hotels have evolved quite a bit in the past thirty years.  Thirty years ago I'd look for a hotel with a restaurant and then catch breakfast.  Now, most hotels that I stay at are "business hotels" which means that they have a light kitchen with the bare minimum. As breakfast is an afterthought with me anyhow, I’m good to go with that.

I’m not good to go with these monstrosities:

I hate Keurig machines and their stupid one cup at a time system.  I always have.  I never drink just one cup of coffee bu several, and I don't want to screw around making endless little cups. To make matters worse, it's invariably the case that the person who stocks the rooms leaves you hardly any real coffee, but lots of stuff like Ceylonese Green Herbal Tea or something. 

Blech.

We always go down and get a bunch of real coffee for the stupid Keurig machine.

One thing about trials is you get to wear your cool dress shoes that otherwise would look odd in our modern era.

These are saddle oxfords.  Saddle oxfords made from buffalo hide, I might add.  

I've never worn out, I might note, a pair of dress shoes.  I have my black low quarters from basic training still.  When I was first practicing, I bought a pair of wingtips made in Ireland, just like the dress shoes my father had when I was young. They've been resoled once, but they're still in good shape.

Indeed, I only have five pairs of dress shoes, one being the aforementioned Army low quarters I very rarely wear.  I'm never going to need to buy another pair.

I do need to shine them.

Parking lot view.

One thing about doing a trial in farm country is that it always causes me to think how lucky some people are that they get to farm as a career.

I don't think they appreciate that.

I never think that about trying a case in a big city.  I've tried cases twice in Denver and wasn't envious of a soul associated with Denver. The poor judge looked like he'd been rode hard and put away wet in the second one. Denver itself, out on the street, was like a Middle Easter Dysentery Ward in the 30s.  The jurors had jobs I wouldn't have wanted.  

Grim.

In farm country you see, however, people living the way that people are supposed to live.

Restaurant view.  The field below is one I've hunted geese in.

I constantly hear people in agriculture complain about it, and by that I don't mean the weather or something, but about being in agriculture itself.  Maybe complaining is just something people do.  Pascal noted:

If a soldier or labourer complain of the hardship of his lot, set him to do nothing.

I'm not sure what Pascal was aiming at there, but I think it might have been that people just complain.  I also think, however, that a lot of people who were born into agriculture have no idea what other work is like, including working as a professional.   

I turned 60 recently as well, which of course is a sort of milestone for many people, although I really didn't pay that much attention to it at the time.  It really started to set in, however, when I attended a mule action by video. Everything was too expensive, and I didn't buy anything, but leading up to it, I got a fair amount of opposition from my spouse.  Most of it was of the nature of "you don't have time".

I don't have time, which is because I work a work schedule at the office, in this civil litigator line of country, that's very heavy.  I work a schedule that's heavier than a lot of lawyers in their 20s and 30s.  I have nobody, I guess, but myself to blame for that, sort of.  Part of it too has to do with the circumstances during which I came up in the law, and part of it has to do with my own character.

When I was young, before I was a lawyer, I wanted to work outdoors.

It's never really stopped being in a least the back of my mind.  The net effect of that is that from the exterior I'm one of the rare trial lawyers who tries a lot of cases.  I'm cited to other lawyers that way, and because of the work that comes through my door, it's pretty obvious that my reputation as a trial lawyer is impossible to escape.  But part of the reason that I can't escape it is that those immediately around me, including those closest to me, see me that way and can't imagine a world in which I'm not yoked to the plow in this fashion.

Elijah set out, and came upon Elisha, son of Shaphat, as he was plowing with twelve yoke of oxen; he was following the twelfth. Elijah went over to him and threw his cloak on him.

Elisha left the oxen, ran after Elijah, and said, “Please, let me kiss my father and mother good-bye, and I will follow you.” Elijah answered, “Go back! What have I done to you?”

Elisha left him and, taking the yoke of oxen, slaughtered them; he used the plowing equipment for fuel to boil their flesh, and gave it to the people to eat. Then he left and followed Elijah to serve him.

1 Kings, Chapter 19.

I've always thought Elisha's actions baffling.  But they are not.  He was wanting to set out with Elijah, who had just anointed him his successor.  When he left the oxen and spoke to Elijah, Elijah seemed annoyed and told him to go back.

Yoke's were expensive, and so were oxen.  By burning his wooden yokes, there was no going back.

If this seems harsh, consider the similar lines from Luke in the New Testament:

As they were proceeding on their journey someone said to him, “I will follow you wherever you go.” Jesus answered him, “Foxes have dens and birds of the sky have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to rest his head.”

And to another he said, “Follow me.” But he replied, “[Lord,] let me go first and bury my father.” But he answered him, “Let the dead bury their dead.* But you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God.”

And another said, “I will follow you, Lord, but first let me say farewell to my family at home.”  Jesus said, “No one who sets a hand to the plow and looks to what was left behind is fit for the kingdom of God.” 

In modern American life we imagine we can always go back and most of us live our lives that way.  Had Elisha decided, well, I'll plow the field and bring in the crops and take up being a prophet later, he wouldn't have become a prophet.  Those setting a hand to the plow, and looking back, don't plow a straight row.

And so back to the main.

There's really no glory in trial work, in spite of what people like to imagine.  It's hard work.  If you win, your clients view the victory as theirs.  If you lose, it's your fault.  Everyone wins some and loses some, and moreover, wins some they should lose and lose some they should win.  It's so stressful that most civil litigators, truth be known, and this includes both plaintiffs and defendants lawyers, won't try a case.  Those who will tend to be a tiny minority, and we try lots of cases, because we will.  You get used to a lot of the things about it, but like the way Jock Lewes is portrayed in SAS, Rogue Heroes (stay tuned for a review shortly), some of that is suppression of anxiety rather than its elimination, although anxiety does indeed decrease with time.  People who run around claiming they love everything about a trial tend to be weirdos or liars, more often the latter than the former.

And, for what its worth, I've tried a minor case since this one.

Disparity

It's worth noting that the world's oldest democracy, the United Kingdom, saw its Prime Minister fall for having a party in violation of COVID rules, and then see him resign from Parliament for lying about it, while the United States is in serious danger of reelecting a President who attempted to overthrow an election.

Blog Mirror: Three Years

 

Three Years

Foothill Agrarian: Tending Sheep; Experiencing COVID

Foothill Agrarian: Tending Sheep; Experiencing COVID: Way back in the "before" times (back in February 2020, that is), I'm pretty sure I caught COVID-19 on the last day of the Soci...

Airborne

I flew this week for the first time since COVID hit.

Before that, I used to travel a lot for work.  

I'm not a natural traveler, so it's never been something that I really enjoyed, even though I usually enjoy seeing any place that I go to.  That is, I don't enjoy the process of traveling much, and I don't enjoy thinking about traveling.  My father was the same way, and nearly all of the long distance traveling he'd done had been due to the Air Force.

Occupational traveling, so to speak.

Most of my traveling has been that way as well.

This is 2022, and to be accurate, the last time I flew somewhere was in 2019.  I can't really recall the last time I flew anywhere, or to where, but the mostly likely spot would be Denver, as I used to fly to Denver and back in a day routinely.  COVID ended that as when COVID hit, it dropped air travel down to nothing for obvious reasons, and when it came back, the number of flights in and out of here locally were cut significantly.  The red eye to Denver was a casualty of that. The one to Salt Lake also went away, although I think that was even prior to that.

I used to also fly a lot to Texas for depositions.  I'm not sure of when I last did that, but it was before COVID.   Zoom took over most of that, so it's rarely done now.

One major thing I worked on should have had trips to South Carolina, Arizona and Illinois, but did not.  All of those were done via Zoom.  It worked out okay, I guess, but I can't say that I'm a fan even now.  It's good enough, however, that you acclimate yourself to it and begin to believe that it's good enough

Anyhow, some travel is slowly coming back, and earlier this week I flew to Oklahoma City.

Oklahoma City.

I've been to OKC before, the first time in 1982 when an airliner discharged me there after having taken off from Cheyenne.  Their terminal was much more primitive, by my recollection, at the time, and we did the classic old-fashioned walk down airliner stairs, which is seemingly a rarity now, across the tarmac and into the terminal, and then on to a bus, which went to Ft. Sill.

More recently, and in different circumstances, I've flown to Denver and boarded a large Boeing airliner.  Based upon another one of our blogs, the last time I was there was in 2014.  On that trip I went with two other lawyers, one of whom I knew really well, and it was a fun trip. We flew from OKC to Houston after that, that time on a small commuter jet.  Since that time, he's passed away, having only been retired for a year or so when he became very ill and died.

As noted, we flew from Denver to OKC in a big airliner on that occasion.

Not this time.  

Locally I boarded a Bombardier CRJ200 and then, to my surprise, in Denver boarded a second CRJ200.

Boarding the CRJ200 in Denver.

I'm not a huge fan of the CRJ200, although it's better than boarding a twin-engined turboprop.  Looking it up, I see where production of the CRJ200 ceased in 2006 and that may partially explain it.  I've never been on one that was really new, and they show it.   Back in 06, locally, you probably boarded a turboprop.

On the ground, the stewardess assured us the plane had been thoroughly cleaned, but we were given wipes.  I didn't use mine.  I'm getting pretty fatalistic about COVID 19, although I'm zealous on the vaccines and boosters.  Some folks did use them, and I can't blame them. The plane smelled vaguely antiseptic.

The stewardess in Denver, upon taking off, warned us the flight was going to be turbulent.  The last times I flew, in 2019, they were doing that too, with the same result.  It wasn't at all.  I'm okay with that, but I wonder what brought about the hypersensitivity to warning of turbulence.  

She was also pretty blunt and somewhat familiar in her tone, which is a change from what had been the norm.

It was a smooth ride all the way to OKC.

Getting off the plane was hot.  That was the same as it was in 1982.

So the first change noted.

I never would have expected a flight from Denver to OKC on a CRJ200.  Are they trying to run smaller planes now as fewer people are flying?  I wasn't the only one surprised, the guy sitting next to me remarked, "I thought for Oklahoma City they would have used a bigger plane".

The trip back was more remarkable, but not in good ways.

First of all, I'd moved my flight up by two days, due to a big change in what I was doing there.  I didn't pay that much attention to the closeness of the connection in Denver.  I used to always do that.  It was extremely right.

Concluding my business in OKC I had to rush, by foot, back to the hotel and turned my right ankle something fierce.  As a high school student, I turned it severely, and it's never really been the same, although it rarely causes me problems.  I injured it very severely a second time, probably about fifteen years ago or so.  So it'll turn.

It's still really hurting.

Added to that, some weeks ago, I somehow injured my right elbow.  I haven't gone in for attention to it, but it really hurts.  

I've never flown injured before, but it's miserable.

When I got on the plane in OKC, an elderly woman was seated next to me.  I rarely pay any attention to the passengers seated next to me, but she was hard not to notice right from the onset.  For one thing, she was extremely nervous getting seated.  She even remarked to me, "you'd think I'd never flown before".

Once on the plane, she was absolutely convinced that there was some trouble with the airplane, as the pilots were not in the cabin.  As luck would have it, a pilot from another airline was seated in the set in front of her, and hence nearly me, flying back to his home in Denver.  That meant he was subject to continual questions, including "can you fly the plane if they don't come?"

She wasn't kidding, and actually assumed that he could.

The pilots weren't in the cabin as the airplane, we learned, had been on the ground in Denver all day and the interior was very hot.  They were outside as there's a way that the plants can be hooked up to external air conditioning, and they were working on that project.  The plane never did get cool, but it was tolerable.

The same type of plane on the way down was fine, I thought, but two colleagues who also traveled down, at different times, both indicated that their planes were hot.  One volunteered the opinion that CRJ200s were simply a hot aircraft.  I'm not sure.

At any rate, we got rolling on the tarmac and the stewardess announced we'd lost some time, but would try to make it up, particularly as there were afternoon thundershowers expected in Denver.  As it was, we left twenty minutes late, and then again announced that there were afternoon thundershowers expected, and it might be rough.

The lady next to me was really now worried about her plane being late in Denver.  In spite of the instructions of the crew to turn off cell phones, she didn't, and texted the entire flight and took placed a phone call using the hands-free option, making those of us near her unwilling eavesdroppers.  From time to time, she leaned up to the traveling pilot and asked if we'd make it to Denver on time.  He always assured her that we would.  In the row behind me, in the meantime, there were two gentlemen from a foreign land speaking in their native language so loudly that I'm sure it could have been heard back home, wherever that was.

I don't know if we landed on time or not, but we were delayed on the tarmac as they looked for stairs and then had a hard time hooking them up.  By the time they opened the cabin door, I had 20 minutes to make it to my next flight, on a different concourse.  When they opened up the doors, the stewardess, as they now do, asked if anyone had a "tight" connection, and the lady next to me said she did. The pilot immediately said "two hours, you do not".  

I did, and stated that I did. They let me go.

I sped walked through the terminal, concourse A to B with the train in between, on my injured ankle, making it just as they were boarding my plane.  Amazingly, they were loading my baggage as I got on.

That's pretty impressive, really.

The final plane was a CRJ700.  They made them up until 2020, and they're a little bigger. Better yet, the exit row actually has legroom.

Overall observations?  I don't like the smaller planes for longer trips, but who would?  I guess I can't blame them for switching to them.  I suspect fewer people are traveling for any reason.  

And it's easy to forget the manners and habits of traveling, even after just a short couple of years break.  I mean that for myself as much as anyone else.

Blog Mirror: NIFA-Funded Study Detects Omicron Variant in White-Tailed Deer

NIFA-Funded Study Detects Omicron Variant in White-Tailed Deer

Trudeau invokes the Emergency Act

It's the first time the 1988 Canadian statute has been invoked at that.

This due to the ongoing trucker's protest, which has been angering many, encouraging some, and gathering some support from Americans who are like-minded, but who likely would otherwise get angry if Canadians voiced an opinion on US politics, which they sometimes do, and usually not charitably.

The act gives the government extraordinary powers to address assemblies and the like.  It replaced the prior Canadian War Measures Act of 1914.

This protest, at least from an American prospective, has been hard to grasp, but it seems part of a general movement of a certain percentage of the population in the Wester world just having had enough of having their lives disrupted due to COVID 19. The fact that COVID 19 can in fact end lives, and that the protest is concentrated among those who have refused to be vaccinated, doesn't seem to matter to those who are protesting.  The entire matter has gotten tied up with general concepts of liberty and freedom, and at this part it's hard to sort out what's what with these matters.

In Canadian terms the protest, much like similar ones in the US, also have an undercurrent of populist and conservative disgust, or distress, about the general directions of their countries. This is harder to sort out, and in the US its highly populist rather than highly conservative.  How this sorts out in Canada is not clear.

At any rate, the protest, which came to be concentrated at border crossings, was beginning to have an impact on the economies of Canada and the United States, which is likely why this extraordinary action has been taken.

As of the last press here, which might be hopelessly obsolete, the Canadian government had cleared bridges into the US, but had not cleared the truckers out of Ottowa.

Pandemic Part 9. Omicron becomes dominant

 

December 22, 2021

Well, with Omicron now becoming dominant, time for a new installment.

Israel is recommending a second booster.  It was the first country to recommend a booster shot in general.

The CDC warns that the Omicron may see 140,000,000 new cases in the United States in the next couple of months.

The Archbishop of Canterbury has stated that it is a moral duty to be vaccinated.  The Catholic Bishop of Cairns, Australia, decried the role of ignorant and divisive parishioners in spread vaccine myths.

In a rare instance of some unity in politics, former President Trump stated in an interview how pleased he was that President Biden mentioned his administration's role in developing the vaccine. Trump went on to state that healing of the nation's divides needed to occur and urged people to get vaccinated, while also stating that he though mandates counterproductive.

December 31, 2021

An additional 200+ Marines have been discharged for refusing orders to take the vaccine.

Israel has approved a 4th booster shot.

January 10, 2022

Listening to the weekend shows, it's become clear that the new Coronavirus strategy is now "learn to live with it".  Going forward, it's going to be treated with annual (if not more frequent) vaccinations and treated upon infection.

Perhaps this was inevitable, but it also represents a global public health failure.  In the developed world, large numbers of the population refused to acknowledge the disease as fundamentally different and overall the world in general failed to act to prevent the spread of the disease in the Third World.  If there's a bright spot, a big if, it seems to be evolving towards less lethal.

Which doesn't mean it isn't lethal.  This will mean we'll have a period of years in which the unvaccinated and those who were vaccinated but who slip into disregard will in fact get killed by the disease until vaccination becomes general.

January 14, 2020

The US Supreme Court ruled that OSHA lacks the authority to impose mask mandates on conventional workplaces under the existing laws and regulations applying to it.

January 22, 2022

The state has hit an all-time new high for new infections.

February 3, 2022

The Army is discharging soldiers who refused to get the vaccine.  The discharges are for misconduct, so they are in fact bad conduct discharges, which will therefore carry some lifelong negative implications.

The Secretary of the Army also replied to Governor Gordon, and some other Governors, that this applies to National Guardsmen in spite of their letters of protest.

New Zealand is reopening its boarders.

Justin Trudeau and his family apparently have COVID.  His infection is coincident with a massive trucking industry protest over new rules applying to unvaccinated truckers.

February 11, 2022

The United States has sustained 900,000 deaths due to COVID 19.

A spike in deaths has occurred since January, principally due to the Omicron variant in the unvaccinated.  The US has the highest reported deaths of any country on earth, which is due to the resistance to getting vaccinated.

The American death toll now exceeds the number of deaths due to the Spanish Flu, which is a reported 675,000, although in reality due to the lingering effects of the disease, it was higher than that.  Put in context, however, given the population at the time, that would equate to approximately 2,000,000 Americans today.

Put back in context, it's clear the US is going to exceed 1,000,000 deaths due to COVID 19.

Last prior installment:

Pandemic Part 8. Enter Omicron