New Travel Development going to Maui

[csodjd]

https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2020/...yrwzSD90oiF6SCRHUIKNz4hPZo919H2DJH3nHliauGWWk

Doesn't sound like they are planning on the 14-day quarantine ending soon.

Well, not before the end of the month, but since it is that 14-day quarantine that is effectively shutting Hawaii down to tourism, I suspect it'll be extended much longer.

At some point, however, one must wonder what the justification/rationale is or will be for continuing to ban tourists, especially US citizens. In a matter of weeks Hawaii will probably be free of any active cases of coronavirus. Let's assume at some point they have gone two weeks without a single known new infection. At that point barring or placing an undue burden on tourists (a burden not placed on residents) starts to raise constitutional questions -- the bar on a state imposing a law that prevents residents of other states from entering freely (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_United_States_law which explains the fundamental constitutional right to enter and leave a state freely). The argument that they are doing so to prevent risk of infection becomes questionable on multiple grounds. For one, they no longer have any health emergency if they have no COVID. Second, the ADA bars discriminating on the of an illness. And then there is the fact that people with contagious diseases have been coming freely into Hawaii for decades. Hawaii will have to square the Constitutional right with the public health concern, and that gets hard to do when they are virus-free and allow residents to move about without the quarantine.

 

[gln60]

Well, not before the end of the month, but since it is that 14-day quarantine that is effectively shutting Hawaii down to tourism, I suspect it'll be extended much longer.

At some point, however, one must wonder what the justification/rationale is or will be for continuing to ban tourists, especially US citizens. In a matter of weeks Hawaii will probably be free of any active cases of coronavirus. Let's assume at some point they have gone two weeks without a single known new infection. At that point barring or placing an undue burden on tourists (a burden not placed on residents) starts to raise constitutional questions -- the bar on a state imposing a law that prevents residents of other states from entering freely (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_United_States_law which explains the fundamental constitutional right to enter and leave a state freely). The argument that they are doing so to prevent risk of infection becomes questionable on multiple grounds. For one, they no longer have any health emergency if they have no COVID. Second, the ADA bars discriminating on the of an illness. And then there is the fact that people with contagious diseases have been coming freely into Hawaii for decades. Hawaii will have to square the Constitutional right with the public health concern, and that gets hard to do when they are virus-free and allow residents to move about without the quarantine.

Great point......I’m sure many will be watching

 

[Steve Fatula]

And then there is the fact that people with contagious diseases have been coming freely into Hawaii for decades.

I would disagree only with this part of your post. Otherwise, I agree with you. While the statement is true, it's misleading as this disease is more contagious (and deadly). But the logic is sound I believe. If they grant their own citizens the ability to do as they please or even close, it's going to be hard for them to restrict inbound traffic legally. Not addressing if the need is valid or not, just the legality.

 

[vol_90]

Well, not before the end of the month, but since it is that 14-day quarantine that is effectively shutting Hawaii down to tourism, I suspect it'll be extended much longer.

At some point, however, one must wonder what the justification/rationale is or will be for continuing to ban tourists, especially US citizens. In a matter of weeks Hawaii will probably be free of any active cases of coronavirus. Let's assume at some point they have gone two weeks without a single known new infection. At that point barring or placing an undue burden on tourists (a burden not placed on residents) starts to raise constitutional questions -- the bar on a state imposing a law that prevents residents of other states from entering freely (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_United_States_law which explains the fundamental constitutional right to enter and leave a state freely). The argument that they are doing so to prevent risk of infection becomes questionable on multiple grounds. For one, they no longer have any health emergency if they have no COVID. Second, the ADA bars discriminating on the of an illness. And then there is the fact that people with contagious diseases have been coming freely into Hawaii for decades. Hawaii will have to square the Constitutional right with the public health concern, and that gets hard to do when they are virus-free and allow residents to move about without the quarantine.

Just to clarify there is no "ban" on tourists only a mandatory 14 quarantine in place through May 31st and likely longer for all arrivals including residents and inter Island travel. Correct it is effectively shutting down tourism although ~220 non residents did arrive 2 days ago.

I believe we are down to 3 rooms occupied at the Marriott Ko Olina Beach Club

 

[frank808]

I would disagree only with this part of your post. Otherwise, I agree with you. While the statement is true, it's misleading as this disease is more contagious (and deadly). But the logic is sound I believe. If they grant their own citizens the ability to do as they please or even close, it's going to be hard for them to restrict inbound traffic legally. Not addressing if the need is valid or not, just the legality.

BOTH residents and non residents are subject to the same 14 day quarantine restrictions.

You can leave the state before 14 days quarantine is up. So no one is held hostage.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[cman]

At some point, however, one must wonder what the justification/rationale is or will be for continuing to ban tourists, especially US citizens. In a matter of weeks Hawaii will probably be free of any active cases of coronavirus.

The "justification/rationale", is that Hawaii simply does not have the healthcare infrastructure to handle a COVID-19 outbreak. They only have 45 available ICU beds for the entire state. An influx of tourist would cripple their healthcare system. Oh, and just for the sake of accuracy, Hawaii has did not "ban" tourists. They just require a 14 day quarantine. By the way, 16 other states, including my home state of Texas, have similar restrictions for domestic travelers.

Let's assume at some point they have gone two weeks without a single known new infection. At that point barring or placing an undue burden on tourists (a burden not placed on residents) starts to raise constitutional questions

That would be a "question" you'd be hard pressed to get any federal court to entertain. Governors have the right to exercise emergency powers. The 14 day quarantine was issued under those powers. 16 other state governors have implemented similar restrictions by invoking their emergency powers.[/QUOTE]

For one, they no longer have any health emergency if they have no COVID.

Addressed this above, but just to be clear. The, "health emergency", is the lack of healthcare infrastructure. Without adequate testing and contact tracing ability, an outbreak can't be detected or contained. Now, the good news is that Hawaii is making progress to put in place the things needed to open. They've spent $15.6 million to increase their testing capacity, and are doubling their contact tracing staff and are hiring and training them as fast as they can. But, until those things are in place, it would be suicide for Hawaii to open prematurely. If they don't do this right, who's going to come save them?

I can assure you that the Hawaiian government is not enjoying the 30% unemployment rate, or the destruction of their economy. They're motivated more than any of us to get things up and running as soon as possible. I'm missing out on a vacation. They're parked in a mile long food bank line, wondering how they're going to support their families. I can't imagine the anguish those government leaders are facing. But they're moving in the right direction, step one was to flatten the curve, and they exceeded all expectations in accomplishing that goal. Now it's on to increasing testing and contact tracing.

 

[csodjd]

Just to clarify there is no "ban" on tourists only a mandatory 14 quarantine in place through May 31st and likely longer for all arrivals including residents and inter Island travel. Correct it is effectively shutting down tourism although ~220 non residents did arrive 2 days ago.

I believe we are down to 3 rooms occupied at the Marriott Ko Olina Beach Club

With all due respect, when you are barred from leaving your room, tourism is banned. Tourism is not physical presence, it is an activity. Beyond that, the result is a ban. It would be akin to passing a $100,000/night tax on each room. You're free to come, so there is no "ban." Nonsense. It's like a facially neutral job requirement that has a discriminatory effect.

So, yes, tourism is, as a practical matter, banned.

 

[csodjd]

Governors have the right to exercise emergency powers. The 14 day quarantine was issued under those powers.

The right is not without limits. Governors, like Presidents, are not dictators. At some point the "necessary" exercise of that power becomes excessive and unnecessary. The balance is with a fundamental constitutional right. Not sure how familiar you are with constitutional law, but examine the issue of scrutiny where a "fundamental" right is affected. You will find that "laws" (orders) infringing fundamental constitutional rights have a very high bar to pass muster. (People are often surprised to learn that not all constitutional rights are created equally. Fundamental rights are treated very differently.)

 

[csodjd]

Addressed this above, but just to be clear. The, "health emergency", is the lack of healthcare infrastructure. Without adequate testing and contact tracing ability, an outbreak can't be detected or contained.

The question would be, is a total or near total bar to tourism necessary. Or should tourism be permitted to the extent the testing and tracing can reasonably deal with it? Again, examine the concept of "Strict Scrutiny" that is applied to infringements of fundamental rights (which includes the right of interstate travel). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_scrutiny
In American constitutional law, strict scrutiny is the highest and most stringent standard of judicial review, and results in a judge striking down a law unless the government can demonstrate in court that a law or regulation:

1. is necessary to a "compelling state interest";
2. that the law is "narrowly tailored" to achieving this compelling purpose;
3. and that the law uses the "least restrictive means" to achieve the purpose.

A law or order that effectively limits or bars ALL non-resident US Citizens from coming to Hawaii, and ends there, is not "narrowly tailored" or the "least restrictive means" of achieving the purpose of protecting the healthcare infrastructure. For instance, one can be required to be tested before coming and within 24 hours of arriving. That is tailored and not as restrictive. Thus, if that is feasible, the order would be unconstitutional.

 

[vol_90]

With all due respect, when you are barred from leaving your room, tourism is banned. Tourism is not physical presence, it is an activity. Beyond that, the result is a ban. It would be akin to passing a $100,000/night tax on each room. You're free to come, so there is no "ban." Nonsense. It's like a facially neutral job requirement that has a discriminatory effect.

So, yes, tourism is, as a practical matter, banned.

In a purely technical sense it is not banned. Come quarantine for 14 days "in your room" and enjoy the outdoors and scenery after that. Fortunately I arrived on March 24th but was prepared to quarantine for 14 days if my arrival was delayed on or after March 26th. For a temporary residence I couldn't ask for a safer place to ride out the virus until I'm allowed to return to my overseas location.

 

[cman]

With all due respect, when you are barred from leaving your room, tourism is banned. Tourism is not physical presence, it is an activity. Beyond that, the result is a ban. It would be akin to passing a $100,000/night tax on each room. You're free to come, so there is no "ban." Nonsense. It's like a facially neutral job requirement that has a discriminatory effect.

So, yes, tourism is, as a practical matter, banned.

Call it tourism, travel or whatever you want. The bottom line is that governors, have the right to exercise their emergency powers to limit either. Never heard of a "right of tourism", but in any event, governors have the right to restrict domestic travel into their states, and I am of the opinion that Governor Ige, acted in the best interest of his constituents.

 

[cman]

The right is not without limits. Governors, like Presidents, are not dictators.

Whoa...I don't think it's fair to compare Hawaii's governor to a "dictator". His mission is to ensure the health and safety of his citizens. So far, he's done an excellent job. His main concern is not ensuring that "I" have a wonderful vacation. His job is to ensure the health and safety of the state's residents. From what I've observed, his priorities are properly placed.

 

[frank808]

With all due respect, when you are barred from leaving your room, tourism is banned. Tourism is not physical presence, it is an activity. Beyond that, the result is a ban. It would be akin to passing a $100,000/night tax on each room. You're free to come, so there is no "ban." Nonsense. It's like a facially neutral job requirement that has a discriminatory effect.

So, yes, tourism is, as a practical matter, banned.

Legislators could introduce a bill with a $100,000 a night room tax. As long as it it applied to all rooms and does not discrimate.

A bill like that would ruin the economy here so would not be in the best interests of most here. If a politician Introduced a bill like that, it would most undoubtedly be political suicide.

Again everyone is placed under quarantine for 14 days. There is no discrimination between visitors and residents as everyone must endure it. On the 15th day, if you are well you are free to explore and enjoy any public venue you wish. Until those 14 days are up, you are in quarantine of your quarters.

Sent from my SM-T377P using Tapatalk

 

[StevenTing]

Hawai‘i Senate COVID-19 Committee Reports Travel Quarantine Will Likely be Extended | Maui Now

The Hawai‘i State Senate Special Committee on COVID-19 discussed CARES Act aid, the likely extension of the 14-day travel quarantine, and increased costs associated with airport operations amid the ongoing pandemic.

mauinow.com

Not happy about this either. Seems like we were making progress to remove the quarantine. Makes me bitter and spiteful.

Holding out one more week.

 

[mjm1]

Hawai‘i Senate COVID-19 Committee Reports Travel Quarantine Will Likely be Extended | Maui Now

The Hawai‘i State Senate Special Committee on COVID-19 discussed CARES Act aid, the likely extension of the 14-day travel quarantine, and increased costs associated with airport operations amid the ongoing pandemic.

mauinow.com

Not happy about this either. Seems like we were making progress to remove the quarantine. Makes me bitter and spiteful.

Holding out one more week.

Very sorry to hear that given Hawai’i’s cases and deaths are very low. Our daughter and her family are still hoping to go to Oahu and Maui starting June 20. I will share this update with them. I’m sure they will hold out as long as possible.

Best regards.

Mike

 

[CalGalTraveler]

Just to clarify there is no "ban" on tourists only a mandatory 14 quarantine in place through May 31st and likely longer for all arrivals including residents and inter Island travel. Correct it is effectively shutting down tourism although ~220 non residents did arrive 2 days ago.

I believe we are down to 3 rooms occupied at the Marriott Ko Olina Beach Club

I bet those non-residents have vacation homes or relatives in the area and plan to stay much longer than 2 weeks. Hawaii may be an attractive and safe place to SIP if this is all they are allowing into the state and the cases have declined.

The challenge is even if they open just to domestic, demand is so high it may end up like Marco Island. How do you manage the floodgates?

 

[Ken555]

I’m just happy Hawai’i seems to be under control. That is not the place I would want to be if it was spreading exponentially, as it’s still doing in parts of the States.

Not sure why anyone would blame them for protecting their residents, but whatever.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[DannyTS]

The "justification/rationale", is that Hawaii simply does not have the healthcare infrastructure to handle a COVID-19 outbreak. They only have 45 available ICU beds for the entire state.

Since they have no way of knowing if they would not need more than 45 in the future, I assume they are addressing this issue, they have had 2 months to prepare.

 

[dioxide45]

Since they have no way of knowing if they would not need more than 45 in the future, I assume they are addressing this issue, they have had 2 months to prepare.

I think the 45 is incorrect. According to this article it is 340;

Surge of coronavirus patients could cripple Oahu hospitals | Honolulu Star-Advertiser

Hawaii hospitals could be under tremendous strain as more patients diagnosed with the new coronavirus and other serious medical conditions inundate medical facilities.

www.staradvertiser.com

 

[cman]

I think the 45 is incorrect. According to this article it is 340;

Surge of coronavirus patients could cripple Oahu hospitals | Honolulu Star-Advertiser

Hawaii hospitals could be under tremendous strain as more patients diagnosed with the new coronavirus and other serious medical conditions inundate medical facilities.

www.staradvertiser.com

I got the number from the IMHE website and it corresponds to the data from the state health department. Remember, were talking about "available" ICU beds;
Scoll down to the "Hospital resource usage" section and select, "ICU Beds".

IHME | COVID-19 Projections

Explore forecasts of COVID-19 cases, deaths, and hospital resource use.

covid19.healthdata.org

 

[Pathways]

I got the number from the IMHE website and it corresponds to the data

DO NOT believe the IHME numbers without checking. The are frequently way off.

Indiana Numbers:

IHME says 806 ICU beds needed May 8, only 706 available, 706 vents needed.

State Dep of Health says 481 ICU beds in use, 2238 available, 218 vents in use, 2806 available.

And this is not an anomaly. Indiana has said the IHME models have been so far off that they are no longer paying any attention to them

 

[cman]

DO NOT believe the IHME numbers without checking. The are frequently way off.

Indiana Numbers:

IHME says 806 ICU beds needed May 8, only 706 available, 706 vents needed.

State Dep of Health says 481 ICU beds in use, 2238 available, 218 vents in use, 2806 available.

And this is not an anomaly. Indiana has said the IHME models have been so far off that they are no longer paying any attention to them

Do you believe the Hawaii State Department of Health? Here's a link to a list of the licensed acute care bed capacity. Notice that they have only 227 critical care beds. Historically, 75-80% of those beds are occupied (their ICU average occupancy is higher than average for the USA). Based on this, I can easily see them having only 45 "available" ICU beds. Here's a link to the data;

https://health.hawaii.gov/shpda/files/2019/11/Table-1-Licensed-Acute-Care-Bed-Capacity.pdf

 

[Pathways]

Do you believe the Hawaii State Department of Health? Here's a link to a list of the licensed acute care bed capacity. Notice that they have only 227 critical care beds. Historically, 75-80% of those beds are occupied (their ICU average occupancy is higher than average for the USA). Based on this, I can easily see them having only 45 "available" ICU beds. Here's a link to the data;

https://health.hawaii.gov/shpda/files/2019/11/Table-1-Licensed-Acute-Care-Bed-Capacity.pdf

Not sure your point. In your earlier post you already compared the data from both sources. My point was for anyone looking (in general) at the IHME numbers that they should check them, (as you did!!) before relying on them.

 

[cman]

Not sure your point. In your earlier post you already compared the data from both sources. My point was for anyone looking (in general) at the IHME numbers that they should check them, (as you did!!) before relying on them.

Now I see where you're coming from. I feel the same way, that's why I checked their numbers.

 

[csodjd]

Call it tourism, travel or whatever you want. The bottom line is that governors, have the right to exercise their emergency powers to limit either. Never heard of a "right of tourism", but in any event, governors have the right to restrict domestic travel into their states, and I am of the opinion that Governor Ige, acted in the best interest of his constituents.

Absolutely agree, provided there remains an emergency within their jurisdiction. But that's what I mean by their right is not unlimited. There has to be an emergency. My premise was that Hawaii is effectively clear of any COVID-19 virus, assuming they have gone several weeks without any new infection. Given the incubation period, one would then believe there is NO COVID causing agent in Hawaii.

In that scenario, what emergency exists? The question then becomes the balance of the fundamental Constitutional right of all US Citizens to travel freely between states versus the risk that someone might bring the infection into the state. And the "strict scrutiny" requirements that the "least restrictive" means be used. I suggest that a broad, 14-day quarantine, is not even close to the "least restrictive" means of addressing the concern of a possibly sick person coming to the island. It is using a sledge hammer on a thumbtack. It fails to take into account the actual risk at all. What if the traveler is coming from a state, or county, which itself has had no cases for 2+ weeks, and he/she was tested yesterday and was negative? Does that matter? Shouldn't it?

Look to Austria. It is basically open now. Foreign travelers can now fly into Vienna. They are tested for COVID at the airport upon arrival. Test results within 2 hours. If negative, receive an official "passport" type document and free to go. If positive, mandatory 14-day quarantine. Everyone flying in must be tested.