Since the outbreak of Ebola in Africa, the worst ever, really started to hit the media airwaves, and especially since several Americans infected with Ebola, there has been a call for travel restrictions. Team Obama has refused, even as both Republicans and Democrats have called for them. Many pundits, public figures, and administration officials have gone Typical Nutso with their explanations as to why we shouldn’t enact any travel restrictions, including those that a travel ban would be raaaaacist. And, of course, to suggest a travel ban is stupid. You know what? The majority of Americans do not care. They think there should be way more restrictions on people traveling out of the Ebola area
(Washington Post) Nearly two-thirds of Americans are concerned about a widespread Ebola epidemic in the United States, despite repeated assurances from public officials that the country’s modern health-care and disease-surveillance systems will prevent the type of outbreak ravaging West Africa.
In a Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted in recent days, the number of Americans who say the government should be doing more to prevent additional Ebola cases in the United States is almost twice the number who believe the United States is doing all it can to control the spread of the virus. (note: since the article glosses over this, the numbers are 33% think US is doing all it can, 67% think US can do more)
That includes overwhelming support — 91 percent — in favor of stricter screening for people traveling to this country from West Africa. Such screening began this past weekend at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York and soon will begin at four other international airports in the country.
Two-thirds of those polled support travel restrictions on people entering the United States from the Ebola-stricken countries. Federal officials have rejected travel bans involving West Africa, saying such a move could make it more difficult to slow the outbreak at its source, hampering the movement of supplies and aid workers and ultimately putting the world more at risk.
The breakdown is 67 for more restrictions, 29% against. The question itself asks “would you support or oppose restricting entry to the US by people who have been in affected countries?” So, what 67% are saying is “nope, do not let them in”.
The chances of actually catching Ebola are slim. But, people are very concerned, because it is usually a death sentence in a horrible way. No one really wants their insides liquifying, do they? Bleeding out of every orifice?
Also, way down near the end of the article, we get to the question “Do you approve or disapprove of the way Obama is handling The federal government’s response to the outbreak of the Ebola virus?” 43% approve, 41% disapprove.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Hi 67% of Americans,
Q: In dealing with the Ebola outbreak, would you support or oppose restricting entry to the United States by people who have been in affected countries?
Yes: 67%
How would the thousands of aid workers and military get back home?
Would aid workers still travel there if they thought they’d be stranded?
How do you get supplies in if no one can leave?
Finally, do we just seal those nations up and let them die?
Teach typed:
“… there has been a call for travel restrictions. Team Obama has refused, even as both Republicans and Democrats have called for them.”
The devil is always in the details (except when you want to take a swipe at Obama). What travel restrictions do you favor? As in the Question above? Or just the heightened screening that the Obama administration has put in place?
There are currently no direct flights into the US from W African nations. The US airports where almost all the other international flights with stops in W Africa have enhanced screening in place. The W Afican airports already screen for symptomatic passengers and keep them grounded (Mr. Duncan was asymptomatic when he boarded).
What travel restrictions do you propose?
Jeff,
It is clear you have little education and travel experience. All we have to do is refuse passports and visas from Liberia and the other West African states. That is all it takes. That makes a heck more sense than allowing infected people into the US. If you want to help these people, then why don’t you volunteer. Personally, I know that no matter what we do, this current plague will take off as we have the worst leader ever.
Jeff,
It is clear you have little education and travel experience. All we have to do is refuse passports and visas from Liberia and the other West African states. That is all it takes. That makes a heck more sense than allowing infected people into the US. If you want to help these people, then why don’t you volunteer. Personally, I know that no matter what we do, this current plague will take off as we have the worst leader ever.
dave,
Your plan makes no sense. What about aid workers there who have been treating Ebola patients? You would accept them in the US even though they are much more likely to be infected than some Liberian businessman?
You are such an ignorant old racist.
[…] recent poll shows that a significant majority of Americans would like to see travel restrictions from countries at the center of the Ebola outbreak. This […]
Since all the US Ebola cases (and contacts) are in Texas, we should have a travel ban so that no one enters or leaves Texas until their outbreak is over.