CDC's No-Sail Order Officially Extended Till Oct 31

[nmackovski]

source: AXIOS


Robert Redfield, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was overruled when he pushed to extend a "no-sail order" on passenger cruises into next year, according to two sources with direct knowledge of the conversation today in the White House Situation Room.

Why it matters: Cruise ships were the sites of some of the most severe early coronavirus outbreaks, before the industry shut down in March. And their future is just the latest disagreement between Redfield and members of President Trump's team.

The undermining of Redfield has been the source of much consternation among public health officials inside the administration, who argue that a politically motivated White House is ignoring the science and pushing too aggressively to reopen the economy and encourage large gatherings.

• Public health officials have privately complained that the thwarting of Redfield on the cruise ship ban is politically motivated because the industry is a major economic presence in Florida — a key battleground state where the polls are statistically tied.
• The White House denies politics played any role in the decision.

Behind the scenes: In a meeting of the Trump administration's coronavirus task force today in the Situation Room, Redfield argued that the government's ban on cruise ships, which expires on Wednesday, should be extended until February 2021 because of the virus' severity and the vulnerability for spread on cruises.

• Vice President Mike Pence, who chaired today's meeting, told Redfield that they would be proceeding with a different plan, according to two task force members.

What's next: Instead of following Redfield's desire — which a number of White House officials have argued is unreasonable — the Trump administration plans to extend the no-sail order for cruise ships until October 31. (That matches the endpoint of the cruise industry's self-imposed ban.)

• The administration hopes that between now and then, the cruise industry can demonstrate it has a plan to ensure "ships can sail in a safe and responsible manner and that the companies assume the burden of dealing with any possible outbreaks," said a task force member involved in the talks.
• Representatives of the cruise industry are set to meet with the Trump administration on Friday to "describe their transformation and dozens of ways that they will mitigate risk and ensure public health," according to a White House official.
• "And in that meeting there will be a discussion and afterwards a decision will need to be made about whether the order needs to be extended," the White House official added. "These things can be extended for a month and then we can reassess the conditions on an ongoing basis."

Between the lines: The White House has been at odds with Redfield for months now, and top officials including President Trump have been publicly dismissive of some of Redfield's statements about the coronavirus and the public health measures required.

• Privately, some White House officials describe Redfield with disdain and try to paint his agency as a hotbed of the "Deep State," full of career officials determined to thwart President Trump.
• One senior official added that the cruise ship decision "is an example of the task force weighing all the equities of the departments and agencies represented on the task force and making a decision that properly balances the public health impacts and the economic ramifications on the country."

The other side: White House deputy press secretary Brian Morgenstern rejected the officials' complaints that election year politics influenced the cruise ship decision.

• "The president, the vice president and the task force follow the science and data to implement policies that protect the public health and also facilitate the safe reopening of our country," he said. "It is not about politics. It is about saving lives."
• The CDC did not respond to requests for comment.

 

[Intr3pid]

This is just hitting the wire.

Apparently, CDC director was overruled today in the White House situation room on extending the no-sail order (NSO) to February 2021. The administration wants to extend the NSO only until Oct 31 for now - which will match what the cruise lines already have in place.

There is a meeting scheduled between the cruise industry and the administration on Friday.

https://www.axios.com/scoop-white-h...ida-91442136-1b8e-442e-a2a1-0b24e9a39fb6.html

 

[Intr3pid]

Looks like we have a couple of threads on this news. Pls merge one into the other.

 

[PrincessShmoo]

Looks like we have a couple of threads on this news. Pls merge one into the other.

The best way to get a moderators attention for such requests is to use the "report" function. They don't typically read all the threads and could miss such a request just posted in the thread.

 

[Intr3pid]

The official text goes like this:

On September 30, 2020, CDC extended the No Sail Order and Suspension of Further Embarkation; Third Modification and Extension of No Sail Order and Other Measures Related to Operations that was issued on July 16, 2020. The Order is effective upon signature and will be published in the Federal Register soon.

This Order is in effect until one of the following occurs:

• The expiration of the Secretary of Health and Human Services’ declaration that COVID-19 constitutes a public health emergency,
• The CDC Director rescinds or modifies the order based on specific public health or other considerations, or
• October 31, 2020.

https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/cruise/index.html

 

[Intr3pid]

Noteworthy excerpts from their updated documents:

------------------------------

Cumulative CDC data from March 1 through September 28, 2020, show a total of 3,689 confirmed cases of COVID-19 or COVID-like illness cases on cruise ships and 41 deaths. These data have also revealed a total of 102 outbreaks on 124 different cruise ships, meaning more than 82% of ships within U.S. jurisdiction were affected by COVID-19 during this time frame. In addition, four cruise ships still have ongoing or resolving COVID-19 outbreaks on board. Recent outbreaks on cruise ships overseas continue to demonstrate that reduced capacity alone has not diminished transmission.

------------------------------

Two specific cases help illustrate these challenges. In the first case, following a cruise ship operator’s policy to test all newly embarking crew prior joining a ship, a crew member was tested in his home country and found to be PCR-negative for COVID-19 prior to flying to the United States to board the ship. Pursuant to CDC recommendations, the crew member immediately began a 14-day quarantine in a private cabin, and other crew members sanitized his boarding pathway after embarkation. Approximately 9 hours later during a routine temperature check, the crew member was found dead in bed. The cruise line contacted the decedent’s family who reported that the crew member had a dry cough and itchy throat prior to traveling despite reporting no symptoms during the pre-boarding process. A postmortem nasopharyngeal swab was collected for PCR testing, and the result was positive for COVID-19.

In the second case, another crew member onboard the same ship was tested in his home country and was also PCR-negative for COVID-19 prior to flying to the United States to board the ship. Again, pursuant to CDC recommendations, the crew member immediately began a 14-day quarantine in a private cabin, and other crew members sanitized his boarding pathway after embarkation. During this quarantine period, the crew member developed symptoms of nasal congestion and upon examination was found to have a rapid heart rate without a fever. When the cruise ship performed PCR testing of all 174 crew, this crew member was the only one who tested positive for COVID-19, indicating that the crew member became infected in the crew member’s home country before travel.

These cases illustrate the importance of the 14-day quarantine period for embarking crew and how test results cannot eliminate the need for or reduce the length of quarantine.

------------------------------

Cruise ship operators have taken steps to advance their public health response to COVID-19, improve safety, and achieve readiness to safely resume passenger operations. Under the co-chairmanship of former Health and Human Services Secretary Michael O. Leavitt, two cruise lines, Royal Caribbean Group and Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings, assembled a “Healthy Sail Panel” of subject-matter experts from a variety of disciplines. The World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) and Carnival Corporation also recently hosted a global science summit on COVID-19 designed, “to inform practical, adaptable and science-based solutions for mitigating and living with COVID-19.” MSC Cruises further established its own industry-led panel with “competency to review policy initiatives, technical innovations, or operational measures related to COVID-19,” and will presumably implement these recommendations as its passenger operations continue to resume in the Mediterranean with residents of Schengen countries.

At the moment, however, it is too early to assess whether these initiatives will produce a viable set of policies and practices that will mitigate the transmission and spread of COVID-19 onboard cruise ships while minimizing the potential burden and need for public health response activities.

------------------------------

To gather more information regarding these industry-led efforts and solicit public input, on July 20, 2020, CDC published a Request for Information (RFI) in the Federal Register related to cruise ship planning and infrastructure, resumption of passenger operations, and additional summary questions. The document had a comment period that ended on September 21, 2020 and almost 13,000 comments were received.

In light of the number of submissions and high level of public interest, additional time is needed for CDC to review these comments, which may be used to inform future public health guidance and preventive measures relating to travel on cruise ships.

------------------------------

 

[Jim Libasci]

This is why no matter how much I want to cruise, I will not cruise until there are some adults in charge of the rules.

 

[tinkerone]

https://dclfan.com/latest/cdc-exten...PA8z0AFVTcrf4X08e2V8LVC6HmCYefdM7KPUJIz06DeQk

 

[TiggerBouncy]

Enough is enough already. The CDC needs to work with the industry and not against it. The cruise lines are doing their best to offer up a compromise.

I read through a random selection of about 40 comments. They were overwhelmingly positive that the industry should restart in some form. I do get there are 13,000 replies and probably one part time person assigned to review them all and sort them. However, the CDC doesn't have to take every piece of something that someone writes in response. Some of them are one line crazies and some of them are very thought out responses.

 

[TiggerBouncy]

Personally, although I prefer science over politics, in this case, I am glad that the Administration is pushing back on Redfield. The industry is bending over backwards to show that they are taking this very seriously. They are jumping through every hoop the CDC outlays. Of the 13,000 comments, they are overwhelmingly FOR the industry being allowed to open in various degrees. At this point the CDC has little justification for extending the no sail, or they should at least give the industry a goal post they need to hit to re-open.

Glad that someone in there is pushing back against Redfield.

 

[mousefan73]

Personally, although I prefer science over politics, in this case, I am glad that the Administration is pushing back on Redfield. The industry is bending over backwards to show that they are taking this very seriously. They are jumping through every hoop the CDC outlays. Of the 13,000 comments, they are overwhelmingly FOR the industry being allowed to open in various degrees. At this point the CDC has little justification for extending the no sail, or they should at least give the industry a goal post they need to hit to re-open.

Glad that someone in there is pushing back against Redfield.

I agree that there needs to be some open discussion on both sides even if that means push back. Push back can also looking at solutions to enable a "safe" sailing.

My feelings are at the beginning of the pandemic, cruises lines and infection were brought in from travelers so that "fear" is embedded. Its so easy for authorities to simply say ok we stop cruises and travel. It's also a very poplular opinion. you make the public AND voters happy. Its a way of looking good taking actions even if local actions are failing ( which BTW has more spread right now)

then the virus spread. Its EVERYWHERE including potential high spread places, like college dorms, schools, smaller events etc... here there are measures in place. If the idea is to start packing people in stadiums, movies, etc... then why can't there be a solution for cruise ships?
It angers me that cruises and traveling are simply getting the door slammed in their faces without coming up with solutions by now.

 

[Intr3pid]

Enough is enough already. The CDC needs to work with the industry and not against it. The cruise lines are doing their best to offer up a compromise.

To be fair, that's not their mandate.

As I have said it before, until Florida gets a grip over its virus spread, any cruising restart will just be a temporary experiment. The state is printing several thousand new cases every day - spiking up - and the industry has to process thousands of passengers passing through each of the state's ports every week. Any bubble you try and create under these conditions will burst within a couple of weeks.

 

[KMack]

... but who wants to travel to Florida to get on a cruise ship with the out of control transmission in the state?

Not me. Besides, I suspect the CAN-US border will remain closed for some time so it is unlikely we would even be able to go to Florida any time soon.

 

[TiggerBouncy]

To be fair, that's not their mandate.

As I have said it before, until Florida gets a grip over its virus spread, any cruising restart will just be a temporary experiment. The state is printing several thousand new cases every day - spiking up - and the industry has to process thousands of passengers passing through each of the state's ports every week. Any bubble you try and create under these conditions will burst within a couple of weeks.

I agree that is not their mandate. At the same time, Florida is not specifically their mandate either. They are setting policy for the country. Cases in MD are at under 5% and MD is in a stage 3 opening. Why can't ships leave out of Baltimore?

Washington / Seattle port too. This is not a no-sail for Florida. The CDC should lift the order and let the individual states set policy for the ports.

Again, if the CDC feels it's too risky to open up, at least engage with the industry and let them know why and what they need to do.

Why can I go to a stadium with 50% capacity, but not a cruise ship with 30%? It's not consistent. It's more like they just want to make a point out of the cruise industry with no rhyme or reason.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Why can I go to a stadium with 50% capacity, but not a cruise ship with 30%?

Not equivalent, honestly. Many stadiums are open air, or have a lot of airspace. Doesn't truly compare to the interior spaces of a ship.

 

[Intr3pid]

I agree that is not their mandate. At the same time, Florida is not specifically their mandate either. They are setting policy for the country. Cases in MD are at under 5% and MD is in a stage 3 opening. Why can't ships leave out of Baltimore?

Washington / Seattle port too. This is not a no-sail for Florida. The CDC should lift the order and let the individual states set policy for the ports.

Again, if the CDC feels it's too risky to open up, at least engage with the industry and let them know why and what they need to do.

Why can I go to a stadium with 50% capacity, but not a cruise ship with 30%? It's not consistent. It's more like they just want to make a point out of the cruise industry with no rhyme or reason.

CDC has no authority over stadiums, theme parks, bars, and all. Their authority rests at the border and in the movement between states. They can't control anything that happens inside a state.

You could bring up airlines, but the airlines aren't operating just for leisure travel - no matter how they might market their fares these days. Moreover, the time spent in a typical flight is mere hours versus days on a ship, so you have to factor that in.

CDC is also state-agnostic. They control the transmission of a disease at the US border - wherever that happens to be. Why should they have one set of rules for Florida and another set for Maryland? Is Baltimore not open to international or interstate travel?

My comment on Florida is about the cruising operations - not CDC's reach in the state.

 

[T & R]

Not equivalent, honestly. Many stadiums are open air, or have a lot of airspace. Doesn't truly compare to the interior spaces of a ship.

Agreed, not equivalent. Land businesses are way more dangerous hence the millions of Covid positive cases in the U.S. from non-cruise.

 

[T & R]

CDC has no authority over stadiums, theme parks, bars, and all.

The CDC absolutely has the authority to regulate any business in the U.S. that can spread Covid from within the U.S. states and not just at ports of entry.

Under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S. Code § 264), the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to take measures to prevent the entry and spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the United States and between states.

The authority for carrying out these functions on a daily basis has been delegated to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

 

[Intr3pid]

The CDC absolutely has the authority to regulate any business in the U.S. that can spread Covid from within the U.S. states and not just at ports of entry.

Under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S. Code § 264), the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to take measures to prevent the entry and spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the United States and between states.

The authority for carrying out these functions on a daily basis has been delegated to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

You should read what you are quoting.

'Between states' is NOT the same thing as inside or within a state.

A stadium operates wholly inside a state. A theme park operates wholly inside a state. CDC has no authority over any of it. Its a state matter.

 

[T & R]

You should read what you are quoting.

'Between states' is NOT the same thing as inside or within a state.

A stadium operates wholly inside a state. A theme park operates wholly inside a state. CDC has no authority over any of it. Its a state matter.

There are two ways this is incorrect. The first is that the venue has no way of showing that everyone within the stadium will not cross to or from state lines, that cannot be done without 50,000 babysitters, thus opening them up to CDC jurisdiction. It would not be difficult to show that people who visit Disney World cross state lines. The second is that the federal government (CDC in this case) has jurisdiction via the interstate commerce clause. Almost every company that has a bank account is subject to interstate commerce clause and thus subject to fed oversight. I have seen this before with bafoons trying to manufacture firearms without an ATF class 7 license and they claimed they didn't need one because they did not sell or transport their guns out of state, bank account got 'em.