Falling commercial real estate prices are hitting local budgets
A couple of weeks ago I wrote about a new study which found that working from home is here to stay. I concluded by noting that: If this holds for…
On July 22nd, Gov. Walz signed Executive Order 20-81, which requires Minnesotans to wear a face covering in indoor businesses and indoor public settings. In September, he said:
“I’ve got to be honest with you, I would assume that one of the last things we’ll do is lose the masks”
Now, we know how serious he was about that. A bill – HF 604 – in the Minnesota House would make the mandate law.
The bill is much like the current mandate:
Face coverings required.
(a) An individual who is age five or older must wear
a face covering when the individual is:
(1) indoors at a business or public setting;
(2) waiting outdoors to enter an indoor business or indoor public setting;
(3) riding on public transportation, in a school transportation vehicle, in a ride-sharing
vehicle, or in a vehicle being used for a business purpose;
(4) outdoors when it is not possible to maintain social distancing from others who are
not members of the individual’s household; or
(5) in a common area of a multi-unit dwelling.
What is interesting is when the bill says face masks are not required:
Face coverings not required.
An individual is not required to wear a face
covering if the individual:
(1) has a medical condition, mental health condition, or disability that makes it
unreasonable for the individual to wear a face covering, including an individual with a
medical condition that compromises the ability to breathe or an individual who is
unconscious, incapacitated, or unable to remove a face covering without assistance;
(2) is age four or younger;
(3) is working in a job setting where wearing a face covering would create a job hazard
for the individual or others at the setting;
(4) is in a private living unit, except that a worker must wear a face covering when the
worker is in an individual’s private living unit for a business purpose;
(5) is in a private vehicle that is being used for a private purpose; or
(6) is a child care worker and is actively caring for children under age five at a child
care setting, except that a child care worker must wear a face covering when the child care
worker is in a child care setting other than a family or group family day care home or legal
nonlicensed child care provider and is in:
(i) an indoor common area, such as a hallway, lobby, or restroom; or
(ii) a break room and is not eating or drinking.
So, according to this bill, you will still have to wear a mask if you have had COVID-19 and recovered and you will still have to wear a mask if you have been vaccinated.
John Phelan is an economist at the Center of the American Experiment.
Several news organizations have identified the man who shot and killed two police officers and a firefighter yesterday in Burnsville as 38-year-old Shannon Cortez Gooden. One of Gooden’s children called…
Have you ever wanted to steal from the less fortunate without going to jail? Have we got a deal for you! Affluent households in California siphoned nearly $3.4 billion in 2021 from the pockets…
HF 2860, if passed into law, would make Minnesota the nation’s 13th sanctuary state. The bill was introduced by Rep. Sandra Feist (DFL-New Brighton), the Vice Chair of the House…
Yesterday, I wrote about a bill being pushed by three DFL Senators — McEwen, Seeberger, and Hoffman — which would erect a costly regulatory apparatus to govern who could buy, sell, or use…
There continues to be a great deal of effort by the media and political leadership in Minneapolis to either suggest crime is down or dismiss it by focusing on issues…