Jump to content

Florida Looking to Push Back Against CDC


Mtn2Sea
 Share

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, KroozNut said:

 

Yes, if you're referring to cruises sailing out of their ports..

While, again, no legal expert, I don't believe you are correct.  The governor cannot control international travel.  He can impose a quarantine for anyone entering the state, but that must apply either to specific locations and risk factors, or uniformly to everyone.  Travel restrictions, interstate, have not been proven valid yet, and some in the  past have been struck down due to vague or discriminatory reasons for the restriction.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

 

And that Bill will go into the hopper and never see the light of day again.  Probably good PR for the 3 Senators whose name is on it.

 

Did you notice that the name of Alaska's Senior Senator is not attached to this Bill?

Experience may cause some to know that "tilting at windmills" yields little.  

No cosponsors from the party in the majority. This does not get out of committee, if it even gets that far.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Brentt_M said:

Looks like the CRUISE act was introduced in the Senate... wonder if it will go any wherem

Screenshot_20210413-171352_Webull.jpg

“Resume cruises by July 4” 😂😂😂

These clowns haven’t a clue.  That is less than 10 weeks from today.  Cruise lines would need to round up crews, all materials needed to cruise, all permits needed to access ports, and enough passengers willing to drop everything at a moments notice to fill these ships.  Plus in Alaska, get Canada agree to allow a stopover of some sort to meet the foreign port requirement.

It is nothing but another stunt to play to their base so they can say “See, we tried to get things open” 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Reagan0712 said:

“Resume cruises by July 4” 😂😂😂

These clowns haven’t a clue.  That is less than 10 weeks from today.  Cruise lines would need to round up crews, all materials needed to cruise, all permits needed to access ports, and enough passengers willing to drop everything at a moments notice to fill these ships.  Plus in Alaska, get Canada agree to allow a stopover of some sort to meet the foreign port requirement.

It is nothing but another stunt to play to their base so they can say “See, we tried to get things open” 

While agree it is unlikely to be restarted by July 4th it is not nearly as impossible as you seem to make it out to be.  One major line had already submitted that they plan to start on that date.   If the CDC dropped most or all of their current requirements the cruise lines would be sailing from US ports as quickly as they could.  Again, not likely at all, but not completely impossible.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm wondering based on the progress described in the Seatrade article today by portside organizations in the key Miami, Ft Lauderdale and Cape Canaveral port cities, what other major conflicts would be necessary to overcome in the CDC Phase 2 Technical Instructions?
 
Also consider CDC's recent modification to their cruise travel guidance which seems to correlate with the COVID testing protocols associated with the new non-US home port cruises in the Caribbean starting in June. To me it would appear things are starting to come together. But then, I'm an optimist. 🙃
 
Preparations to resume cruising at key Florida homeports
 

His Tallahassee discussions followed meetings with local government officials and industry executives in Miami, Fort Lauderdale and Cape Canaveral. During those, he was shown the preparations to support cruise resumption.

 

According to an FMC release, it was demonstrated that each port was ready to provide onsite testing; that they have protocols and plans in place to evacuate, isolate and treat passengers in need of medical assistance; and that they have coordinated with appropriate authorities and partners to provide vaccinations.

 

CDC: For those who do cruise, testing before and after, even if vaccinated

 

People who decide to cruise should get tested one to three days before travel and after their trip, even if they are fully vaccinated.

 

In addition to testing, passengers who are unvaccinated should self-quarantine for seven days after cruise travel, even if they test negative. If they do not get tested, they should self-quarantine for 10 days. 

 

Passengers who are fully vaccinated with an FDA-authorized vaccine do not need to self-quarantine after cruise travel.

 

FMC's Sola suggests Port Canaveral for crew vaccinations (seatrade-cruise.com)

 

CDC urges against cruising, advises testing and more for those who go (seatrade-cruise.com)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Commissioner Sola seems intent on going alone with things regarding the cruise industry, as none of the other Commissioners seem to be interested in announcing things without the full report available.

 

As for designating one port where foreign crew could obtain vaccinations, from ships calling all over Florida, Mr. Sola demonstrates a lack of understanding regarding maritime work and operations where it would be difficult to get a crew member from a container ship in Tampa to PEV and back while maintaining the vessel's schedule.

His proposal for a "passenger bill of rights" also does not show much knowledge of international shipping, as even the US Senate acknowledged when passing the Cruise Vessel Safety and Security Act, that any such "bill of rights" would have to be voluntary on the part of the cruise lines, as it was when adopted.

And, his statements that "that they have protocols and plans in place to evacuate, isolate and treat passengers in need of medical assistance; and that they have coordinated with appropriate authorities and partners to provide vaccinations." is at best disingenuous, in that in their interim reports, while some ports have worked to get their terminal operations in line with CDC, I see no indication of contractual agreements with health care providers, medical transport providers, or accommodation services suitable for quarantine as required by the CDC.  While in my opinion these contracts are outside of the FMC's purview, they would be required to get to the stated goal of the FMC of restarting cruises, and should have at least garnered some mention in the reports.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Sola is a fairly recent political appointment with absolutely zero operational or management experience in the shipping or cruising  industry.

 

Why on earth would anyone be encouraged by his comments, or even place any degree of validity in them????

 

I suspect that his expertise lies in either political fundraising or in political organizing.

 

 

Edited by iancal
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because to be honest for me any news regarding any person in a position of authority making at least an effort right now to move us closer to cruising is fine with me. Whether they are successful or not is immaterial. At least they are making an effort. As they say there is power in numbers!  
 

As I said I’m an optimist. But I also very well know talk is cheap. But in these times I’ll go with positive news anytime I can get it. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many people 'in authority' who are saying very foolish things that they know to be untrue or not within their purview.   

 

This does not give me any hope whatsoever.  Quite the opposite.  It simply convinces me that the whole business is nothing but a self serving gong show.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ontheweb said:

No cosponsors from the party in the majority. This does not get out of committee, if it even gets that far.

 

An interesting point.  My memory is that some 50/50 Committee votes on a variety of issues in many other Congresses did reach the floor of the respective House of our Congress.  Has my memory failed me again?  

 

Regarding the proposed CRUISE Act that was introduced, .....

 

13 hours ago, Reagan0712 said:

These clowns haven’t a clue.  

 

Senator Murkowski is "no clown".  The lack of her endorsement of this proposed Bill speaks loudly--as I stated in a prior post--"it's titling at windmills".  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

Senator Murkowski is "no clown".  The lack of her endorsement of this proposed Bill speaks loudly--as I stated in a prior post--"it's titling at windmills".  

The fact the Murkowski’s name is not on the bill would be a strong indication that I was not referring to her.  And for all the reasons I stated in my previous post it would appear that I was agreeing with you that the proposed bill was, as you say, “tilting at windmills”.

However, if still wish to take umbrage with my remarks 🤷‍♀️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

 

An interesting point.  My memory is that some 50/50 Committee votes on a variety of issues in many other Congresses did reach the floor of the respective House of our Congress.  Has my memory failed me again?  

  

The committees are not split 50/50. The party with a majority because of the potential tie breaking vote by the Vice President has the majority and the chairman. And they also have the majority leader who can control what goes to the floor for a vote.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ontheweb said:

The committees are not split 50/50. The party with a majority because of the potential tie breaking vote by the Vice President has the majority and the chairman. And they also have the majority leader who can control what goes to the floor for a vote.

 

But, the Vice-President is not a member of any Committee.  I just looked at the membership of the U. S. Senate's Foreign Relations Committee as an example.  22 members; 11 of the Majority Party; 11 of the Minority Party.  The Chairperson is of the Majority Party because the Vice-President's vote as President of the Senate allows the Senate's Majority to be D and not R.  

 

It appears to me that there could be a Committee vote on a Bill where the vote would be tied in the Committee.  Would it then be the decision of the Majority Leader to bring that Bill to the floor of the Senate?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

 

But, the Vice-President is not a member of any Committee.  I just looked at the membership of the U. S. Senate's Foreign Relations Committee as an example.  22 members; 11 of the Majority Party; 11 of the Minority Party.  The Chairperson is of the Majority Party because the Vice-President's vote as President of the Senate allows the Senate's Majority to be D and not R.  

 

It appears to me that there could be a Committee vote on a Bill where the vote would be tied in the Committee.  Would it then be the decision of the Majority Leader to bring that Bill to the floor of the Senate?  

I stand corrected the Senate committees are presently evenly divided, though the chairman of each is from the party in the majority.

 

And yes, the Senate majority leader controls what bills go to the floor for debate and to be voted on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

 

But, the Vice-President is not a member of any Committee.  I just looked at the membership of the U. S. Senate's Foreign Relations Committee as an example.  22 members; 11 of the Majority Party; 11 of the Minority Party.  The Chairperson is of the Majority Party because the Vice-President's vote as President of the Senate allows the Senate's Majority to be D and not R.  

 

It appears to me that there could be a Committee vote on a Bill where the vote would be tied in the Committee.  Would it then be the decision of the Majority Leader to bring that Bill to the floor of the Senate?  

If there is a tie in a Senate Committee, it goes automatically to the Floor.

 

Keep in mind there are also committees in the House, and all are created proportionally to House membership, with the Chair being a member of the majority. There won't be any ties in the House. 

 

Any proposed laws here need to go through the House as well.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/13/2021 at 6:23 PM, KroozNut said:

 

Yes, if you're referring to cruises sailing out of their ports..

Not necessarily.  Maritime legal experts that have commented on this say no, that he does not.  He might be able to block florida residents from having their vaccination status confirmed by preventing institutions in the state for doing so.  But not so much when it comes to the cruise lines from requiring it.

 

Of course the cruise lines could always point to the Governor's order and use that as an excuse for not requiring it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/14/2021 at 8:12 AM, Homosassa said:

According to a blurb on a cruise confirmation I have received for an MSC cruise, MSC is actively engaged with the CDC using data from their effective procedures in use for their European cruises. 

They do seem to be the one major cruise company that is actively engaged.  Wish RCL, CCL and NCL would also do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...