Lets get back to cruising from Florida!

[not-enough-cruising]

13 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

You seem to be presuming that the CDC would never modify it's thinking on the CSO. Since it already has, I find the thinking odd.

 

I don't think the CSO requires a single hospital or hospital system keep sufficient beds empty 24x7 for all ships at sea. It's a ridiculous argument.

I am not presuming anything, my original

post states “until injunction is granted OR until CDC modifies”

 

Read the CSO with regards to “shoreside accommodations”. Hospital beds available and pre arranged, hotel rooms available and pre arranged. A commitment that total number of passengers on any line, embarking from any one port, will not exceed the available capacity of local healthcare facilities ; available capacity means “empty beds”. Also, each cruiseline MUST make independent arrangements, they are not permitted to make “group arrangements” to be shared amongst different lines. 
 

The only thing ridiculous is that the CDC has made this a requirement to sail. 
 

 

Edited May 16, 2021 by not-enough-cruising

[PhillyFan33579]

4 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

You may be right -- he has changed his tune on some things in the past -- hard to know if he will on this issue or not.  If he does, it will have to be in a way he saves face, and that would be rather difficult at this point.  

 

In an article I posted on another thread, he states that if he makes an exception for the cruise lines, other businesses will take that as a cue that they can as well and that's not at all what he wants.  However, in an interview on GMA this past Friday, NCL stated they are working with the governor on this since their ultimate goal of restarting cruising is in alignment for both. 

 

For now, things are on hold until the decision from the judge on the May 12th hearing to lift the CSO.  Hoping something will be announced next week.  

I think one way that he could save face is if the CDC provides updated guidance that allows cruises to resume from US ports but mandates some type of vaccination requirement similar to the current 98/95 guidance.  I am not a politician or speech writer, but he could possibly spin it along the lines of the vaccine law is still in place however we (Florida) do not have the authority to over  rule federal mandates (or something similar but stated way better than what I just typed). 

[livingonthebeach]

Just now, PhillyFan33579 said:

I think one way that he could save face is if the CDC provides updated guidance that allows cruises to resume from US ports but mandates some type of vaccination requirement similar to the current 98/95 guidance.  I am not a politician or speech writer, but he could possibly spin it along the lines of the vaccine law is still in place however we (Florida) do not have the authority to over  rule federal mandates (or something similar but stated way better than what I just typed). 

 

Yes, that's a good one --- he may be waiting to blame it on the CDC.  Which makes more even more sense if the judge rules against Florida on the May 12th hearing. 

[harkinmr]

6 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

You may be right -- he has changed his tune on some things in the past -- hard to know if he will on this issue or not.  If he does, it will have to be in a way he saves face, and that would be rather difficult at this point.  

 

In an article I posted on another thread, he states that if he makes an exception for the cruise lines, other businesses will take that as a cue that they can as well and that's not at all what he wants.  However, in an interview on GMA this past Friday, NCL stated they are working with the governor on this since their ultimate goal of restarting cruising is in alignment for both. 

 

For now, things are on hold until the decision from the judge on the May 12th hearing to lift the CSO.  Hoping something will be announced next week.  

It's important to keep in mind that the decision being awaited is on the preliminary injunction only.  One of the elements that needed to be proven by the plaintiffs in their request for the injunction is a likelihood that they would be successful on the merits, but injunctive relief is not a decision on the merits.   IF the judge were to grant the injunction, there would most likely be an immediate appeal by the CDC with a stay of the injunction pending trial.  That trial would take months, again with corresponding appeals.  By the time the lawsuit sorts out, the cruise lines will be well on their way in their restart and the suit essentially moot.  

[harkinmr]

6 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

Yes, that's a good one --- he may be waiting to blame it on the CDC.  Which makes more even more sense if the judge rules against Florida on the May 12th hearing. 

The CDC has already said they will not be mandating vaccines for cruises.  The federal government has said numerous times that no agency will be mandating the vaccine.  The Governor will need to make this decision on his own and will have no one to blame but himself.  

[livingonthebeach]

1 minute ago, harkinmr said:

It's important to keep in mind that the decision being awaited is on the preliminary injunction only.  One of the elements that needed to be proven by the plaintiffs in their request for the injunction is a likelihood that they would be successful on the merits, but injunctive relief is not a decision on the merits.   IF the judge were to grant the injunction, there would most likely be an immediate appeal by the CDC with a stay of the injunction pending trial.  That trial would take months, again with corresponding appeals.  By the time the lawsuit sorts out, the cruise lines will be well on their way in their restart and the suit essentially moot.  

 

The way it has been posited is that the injunction is to lift the CSO.  If the judge rules against Florida then the lawsuit continues and at that point it will take a while to go to trial, but I'm not an attorney or an expert in jurisprudence.  Are you? 

[CruisingHogFan]

1 hour ago, Tree_skier said:

Reading through these various vaccine/CSO/restart threads shows me that no matter what evidence is presented, for some people, nothing will ever be enough. 97% efficacy of a vaccine that has 99.676 percent of people recover from and they still want to talk about mass ship 2 week quarantines.  In some peoples minds we are still living in April 2020, they are still standing in line for their Costco sized bundle of toilet paper desperately hoping the grocery store doesn't run out of canned food.  

 

I both had Covid and now vaccinated, I'm not worried. If Joe Bloggin's and his family of snotty kids is in the cabin down from me isn't vaccinated or lies about his vaccination or forges a vaccine card I don't care.  No ship is going to be mass quarantined. There are ships sailing now and the rare cases that crop up are dealt with without quarantining an entire ship and this all happens without requiring a vaccine.

 

I know the media has conditioned people to be afraid forever but at some point you've got to stick your head up out of your fox hole to see if the war has ended.

I agree with you since I have also had it (40 and had still have some issues after 4 months) and we are all now vaccinated. My issue is some of the anti-vaccine people will lie and think it’s no big deal to do so and put people at risk.
 

The current CDC rules also state if so many people test positive on a sailing it has to return to port immediately. I don’t think it’s fair to have our vacation ruined by someone who doesn’t want to agree or lie about being vaccinated. That’s their choice but they should chose a different type of vacation where they can’t affect others. 

[livingonthebeach]

5 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

The CDC has already said they will not be mandating vaccines for cruises.  The federal government has said numerous times that no agency will be mandating the vaccine.  The Governor will need to make this decision on his own and will have no one to blame but himself.  

 

They did issue the requirement that ships can bypass the required simulated test voyages carrying volunteers and jump to sailings with paying passengers if 98% of crew and 95% are vaccinated.  If they got rid of this requirement then I haven't heard. 

[harkinmr]

39 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

The way it has been posited is that the injunction is to lift the CSO.  If the judge rules against Florida then the lawsuit continues and at that point it will take a while to go to trial, but I'm not an attorney or an expert in jurisprudence.  Are you? 

I am an attorney.  I'm not an expert in this area of the law, but I do know what the burden of proof is for a preliminary injunction and that a trial on the merits will take place no matter whether the injunction is granted or not.  I also know that if the judge rules against the CDC and lifts the CSO, there will be an immediate appeal by the CDC and I believe that that appeal would likely be granted, which would leave the CSO in place until trial.  The preliminary injunction is not a decision by the court on the merits of a case.

[harkinmr]

39 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

They did issue the requirement that ships can bypass the required simulated test voyages carrying volunteers and jump to sailings with paying passengers if 98% of crew and 95% are vaccinated.  If they got rid of this requirement then I haven't heard. 

It was not a "requirement" that ships bypass the simulated voyages, it was simply a choice given to the cruise lines if they mandate vaccines.  It's up to them.

[livingonthebeach]

18 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

It was not a "requirement" that ships bypass the simulated voyages, it was simply a choice given to the cruise lines if they mandate vaccines.  It's up to them.

 

No of course not, they did not require that ships bypass the test voyages what I stated was IF they wanted to bypass simulated test voyages then the alternative was a requirement to have 98 per cent of crew and 95 of passengers vaccinated.  I think you misread my post.  What area of law do you practice?

[harkinmr]

10 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

No of course not, they did not require that ships bypass the test voyages what I stated was IF they wanted to bypass simulated test voyages then the alternative was a requirement to have 98 per cent of crew and 95 of passengers vaccinated.  I think you misread my post.  What area of law do you practice?

I guess I got confused with your word "requirement".  Apologies.  I am retired now, but practiced for about 30 years in the area of commercial real estate and development.

[jrapps]

Several people now have suggested that the governor of FL will eventually back down as long as he can do so and "save face". Why do people believe this? I have seen no indication that this is part of his strategy. Every press conference he has had, he dig in deeper. That is not a sign of someone looking for a way out. He truly believes that what he is doing is the right thing. Doesn't matter if we agree or not, or if it is ultimately legal or not. For now, this is the way it is and until a court gets a chance to weigh in, that will not change.

 

At this moment in time (in addition to all the other CSO stuff the cruises need to do no matter what), cruise lines only have 2 options. Test Cruises or vaccine requirements. As far as I am concerned, any cruise line that wishes to skip test cruises must either sail from a different state, or knowingly defy the law and call Desantis's bluff (if it even is one). I am not sure any cruise line is willing to try.

 

We are going to see vaccine required cruises outside of FL, and test cruises and then sailings with no vaccine mandate from inside FL. We can argue till blue in the face how much we like it or don't, but there really is not a way around this.

[coldflame]

18 hours ago, coffeebean said:

So..... Is DeSantis willing to do away with the jobs and ancillary businesses that support the cruise industry in Florida if he will not allow cruise lines to ask for proof of vaccination?

 

Yes, DeSantis and the state can absolutely lose all those jobs and remain mostly unscathed. The impact the cruise industry has in local economies -- here in FL -- is HIGHLY exaggerated. Many of those jobs are office jobs that can find jobs elsewhere and ports personnel are in part-time service workers which could find occupation elsewhere as well. 

 

But this is moot. Because whether in August or October cruising, in some capacity, will resume.

[sjb317]

3 hours ago, jonbgd said:

When and if it gets read by a human it will most likely be some executive assistant intern🤔

 

I sent emails to the last administration  regarding an issue and received a thank you, then got put on a list to donate money to conservative issues that I am still trying to get off of.  Never had any further response from the WH.

 

Sherri 🙂

[cruise wizard]

On 5/15/2021 at 7:32 AM, livingonthebeach said:

 

 

LOL — let’s make it a status symbol instead of a scarlet..uhm lime green letter — sort of like a Pinn pin.  If they give the lime green light, I’ll crowdfund the initiative.  I’ve even developed some prototypes.

 

 

We were given yellow band at the vaccination site after we had gotten our second shot. The problem is that they are sized for really small wrists..............way to tight.

[Seville2Cabo]

14 minutes ago, coldflame said:

 

Yes, DeSantis and the state can absolutely lose all those jobs and remain mostly unscathed. The impact the cruise industry has in local economies -- here in FL -- is HIGHLY exaggerated. Many of those jobs are office jobs that can find jobs elsewhere and ports personnel are in part-time service workers which could find occupation elsewhere as well. 

 

But this is moot. Because whether in August or October cruising, in some capacity, will resume.

Just curious, but if the cruise industry is so insignificant in Florida, why is DeSantis suing the CDC. Why waste the time and money?

[jrapps]

1 minute ago, Seville2Cabo said:

Just curious, but if the cruise industry is so insignificant in Florida, why is DeSantis suing the CDC. Why waste the time and money?

Because he gets to be on the news. It's all about image.

[coldflame]

53 minutes ago, Seville2Cabo said:

Just curious, but if the cruise industry is so insignificant in Florida, why is DeSantis suing the CDC. Why waste the time and money?

What jrapps said above + it really isn't that much money. It's a relatively inexpensive lawsuit for a state like FL. From DeSantis' calculus, this is a win-win. He can claim he fought hard for FL jobs, regardless whether the lawsuit fails or succeeds.

 

In addition to be super clear: saying "Florida can do without the cruise industry" is not the same as "the cruise industry is insignificant to FL" -- maybe in tax revenue. There's an important but subtle difference. FL economy isn't dependent in any way on the cruise industry, so the state can easily do without it, but it's obviously nice to have.

Edited May 16, 2021 by coldflame

[RFerrington]

1 hour ago, sjb317 said:

I sent emails to the last administration  regarding an issue and received a thank you, then got put on a list to donate money to conservative issues that I am still trying to get off of.  Never had any further response from the WH.

 

Sherri 🙂

The same thing happened to me when I wrote to the Obama administration.  You will never get off of their distro list.  Believe me....I know.

[SRQbeachgirl]

6 hours ago, not-enough-cruising said:

Read the CSO with regards to “shoreside accommodations”. Hospital beds available and pre arranged, hotel rooms available and pre arranged. A commitment that total number of passengers on any line, embarking from any one port, will not exceed the available capacity of local healthcare facilities ; available capacity means “empty beds”. Also, each cruiseline MUST make independent arrangements, they are not permitted to make “group arrangements” to be shared amongst different lines. 
 

The only thing ridiculous is that the CDC has made this a requirement to sail. 
 

 

 

All the speculation about vax/no-vax, masks/ no-masks, and what DeSantis' passport law means or doesn't mean is irrelevant until/unless ^THIS^ requirement is removed. This is why NCL needs the CSO dropped for 100% vaccinated cruises, because even with 100% vaccinated passengers and crew they cannot meet this requirement. Everything else is just chatter until the CDC drops this.

Edited May 17, 2021 by SRQbeachgirl

[not-enough-cruising]

1 minute ago, SRQbeachgirl said:

 

All the speculation about vax/no-vax, masks/ no-masks, and what DeSantis' passport law means or doesn't mean is irrelevant until/unless ^THIS^ requirement is removed. This is why NCL needs to CSO dropped for 100% vaccinated cruises, because even with 100% vaccinated passengers and crew they cannot meet this requirement. Everything else is just chatter until the CDC drops this.

Exactly right, and they all know it. That’s why it’s been crickets from all sides, anxiously awaiting the court’s decision. 

[jrapps]

2 hours ago, coldflame said:

What jrapps said above + it really isn't that much money. It's a relatively inexpensive lawsuit for a state like FL. From DeSantis' calculus, this is a win-win. He can claim he fought hard for FL jobs, regardless whether the lawsuit fails or succeeds.

 

In addition to be super clear: saying "Florida can do without the cruise industry" is not the same as "the cruise industry is insignificant to FL" -- maybe in tax revenue. There's an important but subtle difference. FL economy isn't dependent in any way on the cruise industry, so the state can easily do without it, but it's obviously nice to have.

Yep.

 

Lets say FL wins the injunction. The message is now "FL Governor single handily restarts cruise industry, puts thousands back to work"

 

If FL wins, but then on appeal the CSO stays in place, the message is "The lower court recognized the strength of our case, the CDC is now playing games with our judicial system to keep the cruise line shut down"

 

If FL loses, message is Governor continues to work hard to put FL families first and will continue to fight to restart the cruise industry and put thousands back to work. The CDC has shown it doesn't care about the economy. Meanwhile we will protect the rights and privacy of every American in preventing the CDC from requiring people to show proof of vaccination.

 

You can spin ANYTHING.

 

 

 

[Biker19]

8 hours ago, not-enough-cruising said:

The only thing ridiculous is that the CDC has made this a requirement to sail. 

Not if you want a de facto ban without calling it that.

[SRQbeachgirl]

5 minutes ago, Biker19 said:

Not if you want a de facto ban without calling it that.

 

Ding, ding, ding - we have a winner!