Forgive me if I’ve missed it elsewhere but I think that there’s an important question that journalists haven’t asked Gov. Walz. Specifically, why hasn’t anyone asked him, the U of M and the Minnesota Department of Health a third alternative. In this video, Gov. Walz opens by talking about 2 scenarios: no mitigation and significant mitigation:

Apparently and based on his actions, significant mitigation meant shutting everything except grocery stores and pharmacies down. I’d argue that there’s a third option that wasn’t considered. Specifically, I’m talking about practicing proper social distancing, frequently washing your hands and limiting crowd size without shutting down stores. How many lives might’ve been saved had that option been picked? Might it have saved as many lives as option 2, aka the significant mitigation option?

State Sen. Andrew Mathews thinks it’s more than possible. Sen. Mathews thinks it should be happening:

Most people are still shopping at major stores like Walmart during this time, showing there’s no reason more businesses can’t safely re-open to help employees, families, and small business owners stay afloat. Several small business owners have already described to me the safety plans they will implement if they’re allowed to re-open. It matches point-by-point to Governor Walz’s description of what he wants to see before opening other businesses.

Sen. Mathews’ plan is filled with common sense. Perhaps, that’s why Gov. Walz didn’t think of it? It would take integrity to admit that he’d made a mistake. Is that why Gov. Walz hasn’t admitted that?

It’s time that Gov. Walz starts thinking this crisis through. This crisis won’t be solved with Gov. Walz’s cookie-cutter approach. Gov. Walz’s approach has cost too many small businesses their livelihoods. We can’t afford smooth-sounding idiots running the state. We need people who think things through and nail the solution the first time. That isn’t Gov. Walz.

Leave a Reply