FLU EPIDEMICS TODAY AND YESTERDAY

I have been asked to write on two questions:

First, by what authority did Gov. J.B. Ptitzker issue his "Stay at Home" and "Close all Non-Essential Businesses" Coronavirus Executive Order?

Second, were quarantine and isolation used by public authorities during the 1918-19 Spanish Flu Epidemic?

(1) Governor's Powers

As early as 1824, the Supreme Court in Gibbons v. Ogden referred to a state’s authority to quarantine under its "police powers." Each State has "police powers" to protect the health, safety and welfare of those people in the State. Then, In 1902, the Court in Compagnie Francaise v. Louisiana State Board of Health, directly addressed a state’s power to quarantine an entire geographic area. In that case, both the State law and its implementation were upheld as valid exercises of the State’s "police powers."

So, where exactly does Gov. Pritzker get power to issue his Coronavirus Executive Orders?

The Illinois Legislature has "conferred upon the Governor" specific powers to deal with emergencies and disasters in the Illinois Emergency Management Act. That Act defines "disasters" to include "epidemics or public health emergencies." It authorizes the Governor by "proclamation to declare that a disaster exists."

Once he so declares, the Act gives him power to "To control ingress or egress to and from a disaster area, the movement of persons within the area, and the occupancy of premises therein."
It further give him power to "Control or restrict the sale or distribution of food, materials, goods or services; and to exercise ... any other powers ... as may be necessary to promote and secure safety and protection of the civilian population.

Clearly under these two grants of power, the Governor has power to order people to "stay at home," to "close non-essential business," and to order quarantine or isolation.

(2) Spanish Flu Quarentines

So what did Chicago authorities do when the Spanish Flu struck in 1918?

By 1918, Chicago had 2.7 million residents. The Flu arrived on September 18. It seemingly first showed at Great Lakes Naval Training Station when a few sailors got sick. Naval officials acted quickly in an attempt to contain the disease there by instituting isolation and quarantine of some 50,000 sailors.

By late-September, it appeared that the epidemic at Great Lakes station had crested. New cases were decreasing.

In Chicago, Health Commissioner Dr. John Dill Robertson announced that officials had “the Spanish influenza situation well in hand now.” To monitor the situation, Robertson made influenza a "reportable disease" on September 16, but took no further action.

Robertson guessed wrong. Chicago's epidemic was just beginning. By September 21, Chicago experienced a sudden marked rise in the number of deaths due to acute respiratory diseases. By September 30, there were 260 cases in the city. Robertson told residents to prepare to isolate themselves should they become sick. “Every victim of the disease is commanded to go to his home and stay there.” And he did ask the Chief of Police to have his officers stop all persistent sneezers and coughers who did not cover their faces with handkerchiefs. Churches, schools, theaters, restaurants, streetcars, and other places where people congregated were were allowed to remain open, but ordered to maintain proper ventilation.

As the flu worsened, Illinois Influenza Advisory Commission intervened. Its first step was to pass a binding resolution on October 11 banning public dancing in all clubs, cabarets, and halls and to prohibit all public funerals across the state. By then, Chicago physicians were reporting as many as 1200 new cases a day, and climbing.

On October 15, the IIAC closed all theaters, movie houses, night schools, and “all other places of public amusement.” Public schools were not closed, but attendance dropped 50%.

By October 29, new cases in Illinois were on the decline. The epidemic was abating.

The Spanish Flu Epidemic of 1918-19 is thought to be the third worst pandemic in recorded history. It took between 40 and 50 million lives. The New World Smallpox Pandemic of 1520 is estimated to have killed 56 million. The Black Death from 1347-51 killed 200 million. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/history-of-pandemics-deadliest/


The Spanish Flu affected by my family. My grandmother died in 1919 in a rural area of Canada of complications from the Flu. Her obituary notice reads,

"One of the saddest deaths which has occurred for a long time, happened, on Wednesday, from the effects of influenza followed by pneumonia, when Mary L. died in her 41st year. ... The news of her death has cast a gloom over the countryside. A very sad feature in connection with her illness was that twin babies were born on Monday, and lived only long enough to be baptized. Besides her husband, 12 children, 5 girls and 7 boys are left motherless ...."

This piece was published originally in the Moline Dispatch and Rock Island Argus on March 31, 2020

Copyright 2020, John Donald O'Shea

How We Live our Lives

Around the the beginning of the second century, an unknown teacher penned the Didache, a tract teaching Christians how they should live their lives.

It begins ...

"There are two ways, one of life and one of death, and there is a great difference between the two ways.

"The way of life is this. First of all, you shall love the God who made you. Second, love your neighbor as yourself. And all things you would not want done to you, do not do to another person."

It then explains what "loving your neighbor as yourself" entails:

"Do not murder," do not murder a child by abortion or kill a newborn infant, do not bear false witness, do not slander, do not plot against your neighbor. Do not be a liar.


My ethical training began with my mother. "Do unto others as you would have them to unto you." "If Tommy eats worms, are you going to eat worms?" "Always tell the truth, or you will be forced to cover your lies with more lies."

My dad taught by words, and by the way he lived his life. "We don't use the "N- word;" it's meant to hurt. At the country club, when a a gentile member verbally publicly abused a new Jewish member, my dad intervened, "Stan, cut it out. He has as much right to be here as you do."

I first learned of the Didache from my second grade nun. The nuns continued to build on the foundation my parents were laying. They taught us from the old Baltimore Catechism. "Who is God?" Why did God make you?" "Why did Christ suffer and die?"

Then came my days in high school. The priests and lay teachers reinforced the gospel message that I had been given by my parents and the nuns, and provided the future tools needed for my entry and success at the University of Notre Dame, and its law school.

If I have succeeded in my profession, it is because I was carefully taught and was given the ethical and intellectual tools to succeed by my parents, and my teachers.

But today, almost everything I was taught by my parents, the nuns and the priests has come, or is coming, under assault in our country. I was consistently taught that we are not permitted to employ evil "means" to achieve a good "end." Today that principle is scoffed at by an ever-increasing segment of the American people and their elected officials. Today, if the "means" will work to achieve the "end," then they are acceptable and "good."

Libel, slander and character assassination have become an everyday political "means" choice. If a lie will achieve the political "end," then lie. And pander. Say, "I am personally opposed to abortion, but I believe that a woman has an absolute right to choose for whatever reason, even if that choice entails directing her doctor to kill the new-born child (a U.S. citizen) after a botched abortion."

Such things are permissible if "the ends indeed justify the means." Read what Saul Alinsky, the apostle of Radical Social Change, has written:

"Life and how you live it is the story of 'means' and 'ends.' The 'end' is what you want, and the 'means' is how you get it. ... The man of action views the issue of 'means' and 'ends' in pragmatic and strategic terms. He has no other problem; ... He asks of 'ends' only whether they are achievable and worth the cost; of 'means,' only whether they will work."

"We live in a world where 'good' is a value dependent on whether we want it. ... The Haves want to keep; the Have-Nots want to get."

For Alinsky, "good" is subjective. Whatever each of us wants becomes "good." But if each of us decide what is "good" and what is "evil," are we not all Gods? With the right to eat the fruit we desire from any tree in the garden? A good "end" is whatever we want. As to "means," the only question is "whether they will work."

But I was taught that "good" is objective. God is good. Therefore, his commands are good. They include that we love him, and that we love our neighbor as ourself.

When we compare Alinsky's way, and the way of the Didache, we find "a great difference between the two ways."

An election is coming. If a political party is willing to lie, and to falsely destroy reputations to

achieve its political ends, how can anybody trust them? How can you? Lies and character assassination extinguish political civility.

A jury can only guess at the proper verdict where all the witnesses are liars. The same is true of voters in a democracy beset by liars.

This piece was published originally in the Moline Dispatch and Rock Island Argus on March 27, 2020

Copyright 2020, John Donald O'Shea

Getting rid of Gerrymandering isn't easy

Imagine that a state had two congressional districts in 1960, which contained an equal number of voters. Imagine further that, owing to the state legislature's failure to redistrict over the ensuing 60 years, population growth and population shifts, that first district has 300,000 voters and the second has a million voters. Do you see a problem?

Does it bother you that the district with 300,000 voters gets one congressman, while the district with a million voters only gets one congressman, too?

In Baker v. Carr (1962), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a complaint alleging failure of the Tennessee Legislature to redraw legislative districts for a period of 60 years, which diminished the value of the vote in more populous districts, stated a "justiciable" cause of action for a denial of equal protection, as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. Baker v. Carr was followed by two related decisions.

In Reynolds v. Sims (1964), the Court ruled that the electoral districts of state legislative chambers must be roughly equal in population. In Wesberry v. Sanders (1964), the Court ruled that electoral districts for the U.S. House of Representatives must also be roughly equal in population.


The rule that emerged from this trio of cases was "one man-one vote!" State legislative and U.S. House districts must be roughly equal in population as a matter of equal protection. (Districts disenfranchising minorities have been barred by a second line of cases).

But "one man-one vote" does nothing to prevent gerrymandering. Gerrymandered districts have roughly equal populations, but with district lines drawn to include or exclude Republicans or Democrats in order to favor the party in power.


To prevent gerrymandering, Article IV of the Illinois Constitution provides that "Legislative Districts shall be compact ...."

It also provides that, "In the year following each Federal decennial census year, the General Assembly by law shall redistrict the Legislative and Representative Districts" by June 30. If it fails to do so, an 8-person commission is appointed by the Illinois House and Senate leaders. If that commission fails to get the job done, the Supreme Court nominates two persons, not of the same political party; one is drawn by lot by the Secretary of State to be the ninth member of the commission.

The official comments to Article IV, show that in 1971, 1981, 1991 and 2001, those procedures have failed.


Why? Because of the human element, the political element. Republicans want legislative districts that give them power; Democrats want the same. Therefore, since 1812, the gerrymander.


The solution is to remove the human element. Let the map be drawn by computers, programed (a) to make each district equal in population to within 1%, and (b) to draw no district with more than four sides, with all four sides joined at right angles.

In other words, make each district truly "compact" as is also required by the state constitution.

Why? As stated by the Illinois Supreme Court, in Schrage v. State Board of Elections (1981), "In addition to the necessity for complying with the requirements of the Constitution, there are pragmatic reasons for taking cognizance of compactness. As recognized in both the 1870 and 1970 constitutions, requiring compactness prevents gerrymandering. In fact, compactness is 'almost universally recognized' as an appropriate anti-gerrymandering standard."


So what's the problem? Simply this: We can't trust the Illinois Supreme Court to insist that districts be compact. History shows that rather than giving the word "compact" its common, ordinary meaning, the Illinois high court since 1870 has opted to be political and define the word "compact" to mean "not really compact." For example, in 1895, it defined "compact" to mean "closely united, territorially" — whatever that means. In 1971, the court held that "compactness" didn't require "perfect compactness." "Reasonable compactness" would be sufficient. This was a license to gerrymander. See the maps for Illinois' congressional districts from 1970 through 2010 for proof.


Can you sue in federal court to stop gerrymandering? Not really.

In 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court in Rucho v. Common Cause ruled that while partisan gerrymandering may be "incompatible with democratic principles," that the federal courts lack jurisdiction to consider such claims, because they present nonjusticiable, political questions.

The U.S. Constitution vests the states and Congress, and not the courts, with power or jurisdiction to decide "political questions" and to pass laws to curb excessive partisan gerrymandering.


So if you wish to stop gerrymandering in Illinois, it appears you have two options: (a) elect holy angels; or (b) amend the Illinois Constitution to provide:

All districts shall be compact squares, rectangles or triangles. No district shall have more than four sides. All sides shall be straight lines. No arcs, no curves, no squiggles. The only factor, beyond shape, that may be considered in drawing the district's lines is population equality.

This piece was published originally in the Moline Dispatch and Rock Island Argus on March 5, 2020

Copyright 2020, John Donald O'Shea