Speaker 1: All right, let's go next to Mike from Massachusetts, Mike. You're on the air.
Speaker 3: Eight on the day, David, I'm doing well. But here I got two questions if we can,
if we have the time, please first, and if you've already spoken about this on
your show and I missed it, I apologize for the repetition. What do you make of what's going on
in Austria with their nationwide mandate and that other countries in Europe are
starting to inch towards doing the same thing? Do you think a nationwide vaccine mandate? I mean, do
you see that as simply a step too far for Western democracy? Or is it kind of? Or do you feel like
maybe we reached a point where the extreme circumstances will require extreme solutions?
Speaker 1: Listen, here. Here's my view of dire circumstances require extreme solutions. My view
is as follows I'm trying to think about this as pragmatically as possible. My opinion on
this is heavily biased by the fact that it's not going to happen in the United States. So
when someone says to me, do you think it's too far or not, might it happen? The United States
is not going to have a literal vaccine mandate where the government says you must be vaccinated.
They're doing stuff through employers O-Shot. Employers must test or Viagra, but it's just
not going to happen. And so because I see that it's just kind of a nonstarter.
It's hard for me to say it would be the right or the wrong thing, necessarily,
I mean, I think it is morally defensible. At the same time, I think there are good arguments.
Legally speaking, for a while, it can be a work requirement. It can be a school requirement.
It can be a requirement to avail yourself of certain types of businesses, but just a straight
up mandate. I don't know legally whether it would stand in a completely broad based
federal way, although there's people on both sides of that. I think my issue at this point is
what is most likely to most quickly get us out of the pandemic. And by that, I mean, to an endemic
phase, it doesn't seem like it's going to go away, and it is about convincing the people we
can convince to go and get vaccinated. And also, to some degree, it's about the reality that we
don't interact with everyone like the fact that there is a big anti-vax community in Mississippi
is statistically very unlikely to affect my exposure to the virus. Sure,
I might be on a plane with folks, but for the most part, it's like what's going on in my kind
of more immediate community travel spreads, etc., etc. But I'm trying to focus more on sort of like
what can I do within my immediate community? And so to go back to your question, do I think it's
right or wrong with Austria's doing? I don't fully know everything that's taking place in Austria,
but it's not for me to say that they are right or wrong for doing it. This is what they're doing.
I don't think it's going to happen in the United States. So my concern is
how can we get beyond the pandemic phase? Given that there's not going to be a full on vaccine
mandate, that's I'm thinking pragmatically. Speaker 3: So I agree with you that it's
extremely unlikely to happen at the federal level. That would be a very big uphill battle for
any administration to take on. But do you see do you see a certain point where
maybe states might try to impose a statewide vaccine? I really don't. I really don't like,
you know, by the Supreme Court in the past. Speaker 1: Yeah, I know it has. And there's this
very important case from Cambridge, Massachusetts, and I think it was 1993 that people point to as
precedent. I think that Republican governors would never do it. And Democratic governors
realize it would be politically problematic. So I don't think we're even going to see a mandate
at the state level. I could be wrong. If I'm wrong, I'll eat my socks, you know?
Speaker 3: Fair enough. All right. Switching gears to a second question, I'll try to keep things
moving. Sure. So this is this might be purely opinion oriented at this point, but so the Supreme
Court is hearing the Missouri abortion case today released this hearing arguments on it. Yep,
and I've been here. I've been trying to do my own research and look into what certain experts think
about what is going to happen and the opinions are all over the map. You know, some people think that
this should be so obvious that it's unconstitutional, that the mere fact that they're
hearing it is a bad sign. Yes. But then there are, you know, there are conservatives who are like,
the Supreme Court always lets us down. It's not. It's going to be the same case this time. So.
And obviously, that's not me saying let down, but that's the conservatives saying
that they should get let down. I mean, do you what's your opinion on how this is all going to
shake out? I mean, are we looking at the end of Roe v. Wade or is this going to get shot
down? Conservatives are going to freak out again. Speaker 1: I have no idea. I really don't. It's
it's I've read some of the same stuff you've read, it sounds like, and I don't even bother making a
prediction because it's so unclear. It's sort of a wacky Supreme Court. It's strange times.
I think anything could happen. I do think that if one of these really strict laws
is upheld by the Supreme Court, it is the beginning of the end for Roe v. Wade. But
as far as what is going to happen, I have no idea we were going to have
to wait and see. Speaker 3: OK,
fair enough. Thank you for taking my call. Speaker 1: All right, Mike from Massachusetts.
Thank you so much for the call. Appreciate everybody we were able to speak to. That's going
to do it for today, but we will take calls again soon. And remember, December 14th at six p.m. will
be a wide open viewer town hall where everyone is welcome to call in more on that upcoming.