CT Sean

This is an interesting article about the ban

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/fl-bz-silversea-cruises-to-require-vaccinations-20210412-7ok6fwabpndc5aop6oyla5tgvq-story.html

I'm quite sure the reality is "it's complicated", but these 2 paragraphs suggest he doesn't have the authority:

As it stands - the cruise lines can't.  I doubt this would hold up in court if they challenge it, and if they don't challenge it, they risk a loss of a fair amount of business.  I think a lot of vaccinated cruisers - myself included - would not get on a ship that doesn't require vaccination.

Another article has a direct quote:

Gee I wonder whether desantis will sign it or not.  It's a bit off topic, but with his "anti-vaccine mandate", the only way ships can sail to or from FL is if the cruiselines backtrack on their (verbal) vaccine requirements - or fight it in court of course.  Even fully vaccinated (which I currently am) - there's no way I'd get on a ship that doesn't require them.

On 4/24/2021 at 6:02 PM, Daniel A said:

Here is a hypothetical question for you.  If the KW ban is overruled by the state and then CDC allows a phased in approach to cruising using only all vaccinated cruises.  Would the Governor's order that no business operating in Florida can mandate a vaccine block those ships from KW anyway?

That order should block them from departing from FL in the first place wouldn't they?  At least last I heard, Royal and Norwegian (others as well) will require vaccines. If they stick with that they either can't operate in FL at all, or they fight it. I have trouble believing the order would be upheld in court.  

I've been following the bills since you posted this originally. It's looking pretty good for those who like Key West as a cruise stop and bad for those who think locals should have a say in the local economy.

Edited to add:  Looks like it passed on the Senate floor this morning 25-14. 

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2021/426/?Tab=VoteHistory

House hasn't voted but all the subcommittee comments say "favorable" 

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2021/267/?Tab=BillHistory

I'd be pretty surprised if this doesn't pass in time for summer (obviously with the intent that cruising restarts from FL by summer)

8 hours ago, Hlitner said:

Just to keep it full disclosure, FL prohibits collection of fines for failure to follow local mask rules.  That being said you would have to look far and wide in our country to find folks who have actually paid fines for not wearing a mask.  And while we were in KY (early Dec) they did have a mask requirement (even outdoors) that was followed by more then 50%.

 

Those who live in States where Governor's are enjoying dictatorial powers might enjoy visiting FL where just about everything is open (and has been open) with the usual capacity restrictions.  They are doing much better then NY (where lock downs were strict) and about the same as the Newsom Republic of CA.

 

Hank

None of that is relevant.  The claim that FL state honors local FL regulations and is not doing  "something they would do in North Korea" is false as evidenced by the article.

13 hours ago, Hlitner said:

Not in my world!  That sounds like something they would do in North Korea (where the State owns all the piers) or perhaps Venezuela.  

While I agree with your perspective - the locals should get a say, don't forget that FL state gov't prevents local gov't from enforcing mask rules, so it's not exactly without precedent. 

"Pre-emption" is actually bit of a problem in FL it appears, base don this article: https://www.orlandoweekly.com/orlando/floridas-local-governments-are-sick-and-tired-of-state-lawmakers-pre-empting-home-rule-and-theyre-starting-to-push-back/Content?oid=26756020

19 hours ago, cruisemom2 said:

I know a lot of people in the service industry who were not for the ban, but many of them don't live in KW city limits and were unable to vote.  

The goal of the ban large ships isn't to reduce tourism, it's to change the demographic of the tourists.  Someone in the service industry (in theory) only needs to be worried about getting a new job at an upscale T-shirt store when the budget T-short store closes.

19 hours ago, dfminor said:

The questions that I have for anyone are simple...as a cruise ship passenger in May 2021, my itinerary shows Key West as our 1st port.  1) Will Key West still be available or will the cruise lines just drop it from the schedule?  I was looking forward to seeing Key West. and 2) If KW is eliminated as a port, would Carnival replace it with another port or just shorten the cruise?  Any insights that you may have would be appreciated.  Thanks. 

It's anybody's guess at this point. Nobody knows whether KW will actually be an available port once cruising restarts. What Carnival would do might be better asked in the Carnival forum - there may be historical precedent for missing a KW stop.  I do see that Royal Carib. offers 5 days that go to Cozumel and Bahamas, or Cozumel and Grand Cayman (which is actually a nice itinerary) so there are some options.  Carnival may also opt to just stay in Cozumel an extra day.  

8 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

Your constant use of the term "tyrannical" completely distorts the definition.  Tyranny via election (peoples choice) is not tyranny but simply the voice of the people   If you read the dictionary definition of tyranny it is generally used in terms of a tyrannical government or a tyrannical ruler.  Twisting definitions to fit one's agenda just ignores the meaning of the word you use.  It is like arguing that the sky is green because you decide to use the word green.  

 

Hank 

I feel like you should re-read what I wrote, and probably some of the other comments to understand why I wrote tyranny in quotes.  I've also used the word tyranny exactly once (excluding this comment) and it was in response to the person that actually claimed an election, at the most granular level of US government, is "tyranny of the majority".

On 11/13/2020 at 6:10 PM, BNBR said:

 

I'm betting these posts will get deleted for going too far off-topic, lol.  But we already have protections against majority rule.  For example, every State, regardless of population, has 2 senators.

 

Anyways, recognizing something isn't working right doesn't mean I have to have all the answers when it comes to fixing it.  But simply, there should be limits on what voters get to impose on others - and in MY opinion, this is an example of it.  It went too far.  If you started your dream business and it happened to rely heavily on cruise tourists in Key West, you may feel the majority are tyrants as well.  And that's not right.

The Senate is an example of why states need to have individual rights - which they do - because that is an example where "tyranny of the majority" can actually exist. That is a majority at a national level over-ruling a majority at a state level.

Individual residents directly voting on a referendum for their own town is at the most granular level available (and probably the most pure form of democracy there is). The only additional level would be to somehow limit the vote to residents who benefit from (or are harmed by) cruise traffic. I see is as wildly unfair to say "you get a vote because you personally profit from cruisers" and "you don't get a vote because your concerns over traffic from tour buses and scooter rentals are not valid"

11 hours ago, BNBR said:

 

Yes, absolutely tyrants.  I'm not a fan of majority rule.

 Lot of that going round lately.  So who, in place of the majority, should "rule"?

21 hours ago, keywester33 said:

you must have missed the part where I said 92 percent of our tourism revenue has nothing to do with cruise ships.  Yes, there are some businesses that took a hit from the lack of cruise ships, but most of that already happened due to Covid.  There hasn’t been a ship here in 8 months and I doubt we will see any before next year with or without a referendum. Key West runs at over 90 percent hotel occupancy practically year round.  We have some of the highest average room rates in Florida.  The island will be fine without large ships.  Thanks for your concern.

Do you have a source for your statistics?  I could not the 92% of revenue and hotel occupancy is closer to mid 80s according to this (see page 6):

https://www.keywestchamber.org/wp-content/themes/divi-child/pdf/demographics_and_economy_update_2020.pdf

If the 92% stat is accurate, and we'll need to source to confirm that - that means 27% of visitors are only contributing 8% to revenue. If this is actually true, then it makes all the sense in the world to limit cruisers.

23 hours ago, keywester33 said:

have you even been to one of the hundreds and hundreds of destinations without cruise ships?  Their main streets are busy and successful and usually more attractive than areas around cruise ports.  Duval Street will be the same.

I have been to Key west many times and I have been to destinations that aren't a cruise destination many times.  To suggest that there non cruise destinations, by overwhelming majority are busy successful and more attractive is simply not true. Some are in fact busy and successful and more attractive, some are only 2 of 3, some are none of 3.     It also ignores the fact that such destinations have developed their supply based on the demand of available tourists - none of which arrive by ship.  I don't know the specifics of what the net daily passenger change may be when large ships no longer dock, but to suggest the there will be no impact to supply following an immediate reduction in demand is to ignore basic economics.

Duval street may very well be fine - eventually - and I really hope it is,  but an economic "adjustment" is unavoidable.

On 11/5/2020 at 3:10 PM, Hlitner said:

We can hope 🙂

 

Hank

And replace them with what?  I'm not sure the demand is there for 50 high end boutiques instead.  It's hard to imagine that most of them will be anything but a closed up shop.

Assuming this makes through all legal hurdles, will be interesting to see the effect on Duval street (and all adjacent shopping areas). The demand necessary to support 50 Tshirt shops all selling the same shirts is gonna dry up.

1 hour ago, nomad098 said:

 

This has got to be one of the weakest arguments I've seen against the GBD

 

An open source document signed by a few pranksters and possibly by some to discredit the views of the genuine scientists is irrelevant.

 

 

It's entirely relevant.  It shows that anyone can "sign the document" however they choose, and that's not the important part.  The important part is the declaration is just that - a declaration.  It is a series of assertions with no supporting documentation.  If I am to be compelled to believe that masks and social distancing aren't necessary, then someone needs to come up with data supporting it because every practically country in the world is publishing daily data that refutes it.  Countries and areas of countries that don't follow any guidelines have cases that go up.  When they start following guidelines, the cases go down.  When the go down long enough and people start relaxing, they start to go up again.  If you want to refute that - go ahead, but it needs to be done with evidence.

21 hours ago, compman9 said:

 

So you are using your confirmation bias to presume I have confirmation bias - Okay

 

How many epidemiologists have signed the Great Barrington Declaration?

 

How many public servants across the western world, whose finances are not affected in the slightest, are ruining young, fit and healthy peoples lives?

That is not what confirmation bias means.

I am under no obligation to verify the signatories of the declaration - I'm not the one attempting to claim its legitimacy. The fact that it includes such notable experts as:

Mr Banana Rama

Dr Johnny Fartpants

Dr Person Fakename

Professor Notaf Uckingclue

Prof Cominic Dummings

Tells me all I need to know about the validity of any name on the list.

Your final question warrants no response. If you'd like to present data, feel free to do so. Otherwise it's a dramatic statement based on nothing.

8 hours ago, compman9 said:

 

The declaration is written by eminent experts that disagree with those you have chosen to believe in - Their report is far from bunk

 

Except it isn't 

"The declaration was authored by Sunetra Gupta of the University of Oxford, Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford University, and Martin Kulldorff of Harvard University. It was sponsored by the American Institute for Economic Research, a libertarian think tank that is part of a Koch-funded network of organizations associated with climate change denial.

Dr Gupta is an epidemiologist, the other 2 are not.  Their position is contrary to who knows how many other experts around the world.  What, besides your confirmation bias, makes the opinion of these 3 valid an the rest of the world invalid?

Pick any topic ever and you'll be able to find a couple experts going against the scientific mainstream - that doesn't make them right.  Back in the 70's the lead industry has no problem finding experts to testify that pumping lead into the air via burning leaded gas was safe.  I'm sure one can still find experts that will claim wearing a seatbelt is more dangerous than not. I bet there's even a doctor or two out there that will claim a healing crystal is more than just a pretty rock.  That doesn't make any of these cases true.

14 hours ago, Lou33 said:

 

Why are so many people are praising Sweden's COVID response?  Just click on https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/, and click the top column of "deaths/1M population". 

This was maybe rhetorical, but if not, the reason is simple - confirmation bias.  People want to believe they don't have to do anything and the pandemic will just go away.  They ignore giant piles of evidence for the effectiveness mask use and social distancing and temporary lockdowns because it doesn't agree with their feeling that they shouldn't have to do anything to help minimize the outbreak. In the US this is of course compounded by the fact that the use of masks has been successfully politicized and wearing one is somehow unpatriotic.   They hear or read about Sweden and "herd immunity" and that's all they need to be convinced they are right.  They certainly aren't looking at Sweden's actual data  - it's not possible to conclude they took the right approach from the actual data

Sweden doesn't even claim Sweden was successful

Some stats I compiled for some other post somewhere that was also trying to sell the falsehood that "Sweden did well"

Taxi to the airport - yes

Drive the 7 miles bridge - yes there's technically time, but it's about an hour each way in the best of conditions - which are uncommon. Being the only road in and out of the Keys, one accident anywhere can shut the whole thing down for a while.  You  have to go all the way back to yesterday, 7/13, for the last traffic problem which was an accident on the 7 mile bridge, fortunately it was only alternating traffic (I assume they closed down 1 lane) - you have to go back to last Tuesday for a full road closure due to an acident. Even without an accident, traffic can make the trip south very slow. Having made the drive from the mainland to Key West numerous times - and sat in traffic somewhere for most of them - I'd never risk it on a cruise stop.

Here's the official map with stops and some points of interest (along with a downloadable PDF)

https://www.cityofkeywest-fl.gov/egov/apps/document/center.egov?view=item;id=18310

This is just an assumption, but I don't think the United States cares what you bring back on the ship.  That is up to the cruiseline to decide

23 hours ago, disneykins said:

We did this 2 years ago, great beach and snorkelling, no facilities though.

We were just there a couple months ago and they now have bathrooms with outdoor showers