From the response you quoted, bolding mine:
I find that interesting in argument against the vaccine mandate.
For the first part, if everyone (or at least almost everyone, really almost not what we have today) was vaccinated, it would be much easier to sustain commerce. There would be less people out sick, and it should end the worldwide pandemic (at least locally) faster, also making commerce easier. Which makes it feel like the response is saying we want to do this the hard way.
For the second part, are they saying it would be fine if the states did it instead of the feds? Do they really want 50 different vaccination rules that are all slightly different in the nuances but each need to be followed. Reading that I see them saying there really should be a public health solution, just not this one even though this one is the only one that will actually work.
This should be interesting.
If they had argued that the infrastructure doesn't exist for them to do the validation in a quality way that matches the rule, that would feel like a better reason, at least short term. I've heard that one from the airline industry. That the airline front line workers don't want to be responsible for validating vaccine status without a system that supports that. They don't want to look at some card or picture of a card and need to decide if it's good enough or not. But, that if there was a system they could use to validate, where the system handled those details, then they would like a vaccine mandate for air travel.
COVID-19 is a general, society-wide public health issue for the appropriate federal, state, and local public health agencies to address. It is not a distinctly occupational issue, and OSHA may not pass the buck to America’s private employers. The federal Government instead should allow businesses to focus on doing their jobs: sustaining commerce during a worldwide pandemic for the benefit of all Americans. At the same time, state and local health officials can continue performing their jobs at finding public health solutions, with the support of the crucial federal resources offered by the President.
I find that interesting in argument against the vaccine mandate.
For the first part, if everyone (or at least almost everyone, really almost not what we have today) was vaccinated, it would be much easier to sustain commerce. There would be less people out sick, and it should end the worldwide pandemic (at least locally) faster, also making commerce easier. Which makes it feel like the response is saying we want to do this the hard way.
For the second part, are they saying it would be fine if the states did it instead of the feds? Do they really want 50 different vaccination rules that are all slightly different in the nuances but each need to be followed. Reading that I see them saying there really should be a public health solution, just not this one even though this one is the only one that will actually work.
This should be interesting.
If they had argued that the infrastructure doesn't exist for them to do the validation in a quality way that matches the rule, that would feel like a better reason, at least short term. I've heard that one from the airline industry. That the airline front line workers don't want to be responsible for validating vaccine status without a system that supports that. They don't want to look at some card or picture of a card and need to decide if it's good enough or not. But, that if there was a system they could use to validate, where the system handled those details, then they would like a vaccine mandate for air travel.