Chris Christie Hits One Out of the Ballpark

[BoSoxGal]

(CNN)The White House panel examining the nation's opioid epidemic has told President Trump to declare a national public health emergency to combat the ongoing crisis.

"Our citizens are dying. We must act boldly to stop it," the commission, headed by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, said in an interim report Monday. "The first and most urgent recommendation of this Commission is direct and completely within your control. Declare a national emergency."

In pushing for the emergency declaration, the commission said that Trump is the "only person who can bring this type of intensity to the emergency and we believe you have the will to do so and to do so immediately."

It is not often that a public health emergency is declared for something other than a natural disaster. The US Department of Health and Human Services declared one in Puerto Rico last year after more than 10,000 Zika cases were reported there. Before that, the last emergency declaration, unrelated to a natural disaster, was during the 2009-10 flu season, when there was widespread concern over a potential pandemic.

Citing the fact that 142 Americans die from drug overdoses every day, the commission said, "America is enduring a death toll equal to September 11th every three weeks."

"Your declaration would empower your cabinet to take bold steps and would force Congress to focus on funding and empowering the Executive Branch even further to deal with this loss of life," the commission said. "It would also awaken every American to this simple fact: If this scourge has not found you or your family yet, without bold action by everyone, it soon will."

The White House said it would "immediately" begin reviewing the commission's recommendations.
"The opioid crisis is a tragedy that has been harming America's communities for far too long," the White House said in a statement. "We appreciate the Commission's hard work on this important interim report. We will immediately begin reviewing its recommendations, and eagerly await its final report."

Since 1999, the number of American overdose deaths involving opioids quadrupled. From 2000 to 2015, more than 500,000 people died of drug overdoses, and opioids account for the majority of those. "The average American would likely be shocked to know that drug overdoses now kill more people than gun homicides and car crashes combined," the commission said.

The commission had faced sharp criticism for missing two deadlines to release this report, first in late June and again in mid-July.

Trump made fighting opioid abuse -- which the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention classifies as an epidemic -- a key platform in his 2016 campaign, especially in states ravaged by the issue. "I just want to let the people of New Hampshire know that I'm with you 1,000%. You really taught me a lot," Trump said in that state just before Election Day. He later promised to help people who "are so seriously addicted."

The executive order that formed the commission in March was meant to be the White House's main effort to make good on those promises. The President picked Christie, a longtime confidant and supporter, to lead the effort, while Democrats Gov. Roy Cooper of North Carolina, former Rep. Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island and Republican Gov. Charlie Baker of Massachusetts were also asked to serve.

Among the other recommendations in the interim report were to rapidly increase treatment capacity for those who need substance abuse help; to establish and fund better access to medication-assisted treatment programs; and to make sure that health care providers are aware of the potential for misuse and abuse of prescription opioids by enhancing prevention efforts at medical and dental schools.

"We must equip all law enforcement in the United States with naloxone to save lives," the commission added.
Naloxone is the opioid antidote used by first responders to save people who have overdosed.

The commission's final report is due in October.

[ex-khobar Andy]

There are police forces which refuse to carry naloxone.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states ... y-deputies

[Guinevere]

Christie is way late to the party. Massachusetts (Deval Patrick)declared an epidemic, a public health crisis, and issued emergency regulations for first responders to carry Narcan three years ago (June 2014). Baker has done well on this issue also - currently we allow civilians to carry and administer Narcan with some. minimal training and have laws on the books to protect from liability claims.

Andy, they aren't the only ones. I represent management in one of the towns where the officers refused to carry Narcan without compensation. They carry it now, but we had to force them to do so, and are still bargaining over the compensation issue.

[Sue U]

I represent management in one of the towns where the officers refused to carry Narcan without compensation. They carry it now, but we had to force them to do so, and are still bargaining over the compensation issue.

Why is there a compensation issue? Do these cops bill on a per-procedure basis?

[Bicycle Bill]

I represent management in one of the towns where the officers refused to carry Narcan without compensation. They carry it now, but we had to force them to do so, and are still bargaining over the compensation issue.

Why is there a compensation issue? Do these cops bill on a per-procedure basis?

It makes no difference whether it's in a restaurant, a factory, an office, or a patrol car, if you give someone more duties and responsibilities it's only fair that they get more money for taking on a larger workload.  And that's what unions, even public employee unions like those that include police, firemen, and government employees like the guy at the DMV counter, are for.

-"BB"-

[Scooter]

If cops are being asked to act like paramedics (i.e. administer drugs), then to me that would be outside the scope of policing duties and is a compensation (and training) issue. If they are just being asked to carry the nalaxone so it is on the scene for someone else to administer, that's a different story.

[Sue U]

If cops are being asked to act like paramedics (i.e. administer drugs), then to me that would be outside the scope of policing duties and is a compensation (and training) issue.

So if a cop arrives at the scene of an accident or other injury s/he doesn't administer any first aid while waiting for the paramedics? I would have thought first aid -- especially to stave off impending death -- is well within the scope of "protect and serve" policing duties.

[Big RR]

Ordinarily I would think any administration of drugs goes beyond first aid; and having participated in negotiating a union contract, adding a duty which was not previously part of the scope of duties ordinarily results in an upward pay adjustment. I'm sure this is where the local police unions are coming from.

FWIW, it is pretty easy to administer the drug with minimal training (I believe it is just an intramuscular injection), and training would be minimal, but contracts cut both ways.

[Guinevere]

It's a nasal spray and the training takes an hour, the administration, seconds. As I said above, even civilians do it now.

And cops are already first responders who carry AED devices, provide first aid, etc. Administering Narcan is not much different than putting on a bandage and part of the equipment that a modern police force should be carrying. Yet they still want even more $$ for saving lives. Police are nothing like paramedics and EMTs- who have hundreds of hours of training for what they do.

Under MA law, equipment is a management right and duty changes require collective bargaining. You can see the tension.

[Big RR]

Absolutely; are there any liability issues for the police due to improper administration? I would think that would be an issue brought up at negotiations.

[Guinevere]

No. They are specifically protected by statute and also if not, covered under the Town's insurance.

Is wielding Narcan more dangerous than wielding a gun? Those arguments just don't make sense in light of their overall duties and responsibilities.

[ex-khobar Andy]

I would hope that 'good Samaritan' laws would cover administration of life saving procedures - if I come across someone who needs help I hope I would give it to the limit of my skills without thinking I might get sued.

And this idea that added duties = additional pay rings very hollow with anyone who has worked in private industry in the last 20 or 30 years. I'd say it has worsened (for me personally, at any rate) in the last five years. Anyone in an operation which has been assimilated by a venture capital company has seen that trend up close and very personal.

[Scooter]

If cops are being asked to act like paramedics (i.e. administer drugs), then to me that would be outside the scope of policing duties and is a compensation (and training) issue.

So if a cop arrives at the scene of an accident or other injury s/he doesn't administer any first aid while waiting for the paramedics? I would have thought first aid -- especially to stave off impending death -- is well within the scope of "protect and serve" policing duties.

I'm not saying I agree they should be paid more, only that I can understand the perspective.

[Big RR]

I would hope that 'good Samaritan' laws would cover administration of life saving procedures - if I come across someone who needs help I hope I would give it to the limit of my skills without thinking I might get sued.

And this idea that added duties = additional pay rings very hollow with anyone who has worked in private industry in the last 20 or 30 years. I'd say it has worsened (for me personally, at any rate) in the last five years. Anyone in an operation which has been assimilated by a venture capital company has seen that trend up close and very personal.

Well, I don't think (but I haven't researched it) good Samaritan laws would protect people who are doing their jobs and do it negligently; and the police would be doing their jobs. But Guin indicates some laws do protect them as does the insurance.

As for the added duties/added pay, this is what happens when a contract controls what one does in their job; I have a friend who is a musician in a broadway show band, and he is paid extra for any extra duties, be it additional rehearsals or extra time if the show runs behind. I agree that private industry has changed with regard to this in many jobs, but this is how union contracts usually work (at least when there is a strong union).

[Joe Guy]

I can't quite understand the reasoning (other than easy money) for wanting more compensation for carrying something with you that is simple to use and could save lives.

Did they ask for more compensation when they were given tasers, stun guns, spike strips, batons, pepper spray and other weapons used to disable people?

[Scooter]

But those are things they wanted to have.

Something that could save an OD'ing addict from dying, not so much.

[rubato]

The commission hits one out of the park and Christie, as spokesman, gets to take credit for it.

yrs,
rubato

[Sue U]

Well, I don't think (but I haven't researched it) good Samaritan laws would protect people who are doing their jobs and do it negligently; and the police would be doing their jobs. But Guin indicates some laws do protect them as does the insurance.

As a general rule, municipal employees performing their jobs fall within the scope of sovereign immunity, so whatever liability there might be is going to be circumscribed by the specific provisions of the state's tort claims act; some provide for heightened liability standards (whether in severity of causally related injury or in showing something like "gross" rather than "ordinary" negligence), some require administrative rather than judicial resolution, etc. Whatever statutory exceptions there may be to the rule of immunity, they are invariably designed to make it more difficult both procedurally and substantively to bring a claim against a public entity actor.

[rubato]

There are police forces which refuse to carry naloxone.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states ... y-deputies

It is in their direct interest to carry naloxone to revive police officers who accidentally injest an overdose of fentanyl or its relatives (carfentanyl, methylfentanyl &c). They can be exposed to dust particles too small to see which can kill them by inhalation or absorption through the skin.



yrs,
rubato

[Joe Guy]

As a general rule, municipal employees performing their jobs fall within the scope of sovereign immunity, so whatever liability there might be is going to be circumscribed by the specific provisions of the state's tort claims act; some provide for heightened liability standards (whether in severity of causally related injury or in showing something like "gross" rather than "ordinary" negligence), some require administrative rather than judicial resolution, etc. Whatever statutory exceptions there may be to the rule of immunity, they are invariably designed to make it more difficult both procedurally and substantively to bring a claim against a public entity actor.

You could have just said, "It's almost impossible for a cop to get busted in that situation unless they cuff the guy and smash him over the head with a tire iron while giving him the antidote."