Pete Ricketts shouldn’t be one among them.
The Nebraska Republican governor has repeatedly resisted requires obligatory mask-wearing in his state — most lately at a press convention on Tuesday.
Let’s keep in mind what we find out about mask-wearing: That is is our single finest instrument in the mean time to gradual the unfold of a virus that has killed greater than 250,000 Americans.
Ricketts’ argument seems to be that mandating mask-wearing would imply that individuals would not comply. (“They create resistance.”) But the entire cause we’re on this mess of a 3rd surge of the virus is BECAUSE folks do not put on masks when they need to. That’s the entire level!
So is Ricketts arguing that if he points a masks mandate much more folks wouldn’t put on masks? That appears, uh, unlikely? Since, in spite of everything, for those who had been already carrying a masks when applicable, it appears bizarre that you’d immediately cease doing it as a result of Ricketts points a masks mandate? And for those who weren’t carrying a masks earlier than, perhaps you would not put one on after a mandate? But some folks assuredly would — for concern of being penalized for not doing so, proper?
In brief: The “resistance” is already there in the case of mask-wearing. (That reality is at the least partly attributable to President Donald Trump turning mask-wearing right into a political subject quite than solely a public well being necessity.) The concept that extra folks wouldn’t put on a masks if Ricketts (or every other governor) stated they needed to is solely not borne out by information (or logic.)
And extra broadly, Ricketts’ logic as to why he’s immune to a masks mandate is totally illogical. At a second of disaster like this one, politics (and the need to be in step with previous positions) must exit the window. This is, fairly actually, about life and dying. Politicians like Ricketts must get that.