http://www.politico.com/story/2014/10/travel-ban-flights-ebola-111961.html?hp=f1"Why a travel ban wouldn't work"
A breathtakingly shortsighted article.
Let me break each one down:
1. It would choke off aid and could worsen the outbreak
Travel goes both ways, and cutting off transport from West Africa would hamper the flow of medical supplies and aid workers into the afflicted region. That could allow the disease to spread further, allowing more cases to crop up around the world, including the United States.
Flights can still go IN. We're just stopping the out. You are concerned about aid? PROVIDE it with military planes. (Also you can have complete separation of the workers on the plane and the ground. Plane drops the stuff off, workers come get it after they taxi away.) And the workers? It's now part of the cost of providing the aid. If you want to come back, you go through a 21 day quarantine before getting on said military planes.
2. It would make it harder to track infected people
Experts say a travel ban would make people less likely to seek treatment or be honest about any contacts they have had with Ebola patients. And it could encourage people to leave West Africa in other ways before heading to the U.S., making them harder to track.
I am absolutely astounded by this one. We can't track an individual's origin? The nearby countries aren't already banning travel? We can't check someone's passport? We can't check a travel itinerary.
Yes, people will lie and people will get false travel documents. Those things take TIME and will make the symptoms more likely to appear before boarding. I honestly cannot believe these hacks are trying this as an excuse.
3. Lawmakers are long on opinions, short on practical ideas
Several lawmakers, mostly Republicans, have suggested the administration impose travel restrictions but have offered little in the way of how to implement a ban.
I'm sorry, a travel ban ISN'T HARD. Several other countries have already implemented one. How is "OH YEAH, HOW'S IT GOING TO WORK!!!???" an argument?
4. The math doesn’t add up
Health officials say the best way to control the outbreak is to stop the disease at its source. The methods employed to stop it from spreading elsewhere involve conducting airport screenings for West African travelers, both when they leave the area and when they land at their final destination.
So, this is one is saying the costs outweigh the benefits. As I've noted, they have inflated the costs and downplayed the benefits. This one (like the one before it) isn't really a new argument. It's just basically saying that the first two arguments mean we can't do it.
Honestly, this is the best the weasels can come up with?