EDITORIAL: Extending Lamont's authority beyond Sept. 30 is prudent

Sep. 5—We had hoped not to say this, but Gov. Ned Lamont's emergency powers to respond to the ongoing COIVD-19 pandemic may well need to be extended beyond the existing Sept. 30 deadline.

The Connecticut governor has not formally made that request, but hinted at it during a discussion with reporters in Middletown on Thursday, saying "I think Sept. 30 is too short."

Unfortunately, the virus keeps throwing curves. Vaccines were supposed to move us past the need for masks, but vaccine participation did not reach hoped-for levels and the delta variant caused a spike in confirmed cases, hospitalizations, and deaths.

Given the continued unpredictability of how things will evolve — the delta variant could for instance become a greater problem as the cold weather pushes people indoors — it only seems prudent to continue the governor's ability to react quickly as events dictate.

But any extension, if the governor does seek one, should not come without legislative involvement and debate. The language must be narrowed as much as possible to matters of public health safety. Past emergency orders should be reviewed and those that make sense adopted by the legislature, such as vaccination requirements for long-term healthcare workers and state employees, rather than remain via executive edict.

There are no indications that Lamont is considering an extension as some sort of power grab. The public has grown weary of orders and the ongoing pandemic, so at this point being the guy giving orders is probably more of political liability than a plus. Instead, maintaining some emergency discretion is a matter of pragmatism.

For example, Lamont made the right call in ordering a continuation of last year's order mandating the wearing of masks as a precaution against the spread of COVID-19 in kindergarten through high school classes — for teachers and staff as well as students.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently pointed to a case study showing how real-life failures to wear masks resulted in a viral spread, not only within school, but to the broader community.

But what happens Sept. 30, just as the school year is getting underway in earnest, if the governor's authority to require the mask wearing expires? The result would be different rules in different schools and boards of education in the crosshairs as anti-mask advocates pressure them to end the mandate protection.

On that issue, we renew our request that the governor order universal mask-wearing in indoor public spaces such as stores, entertainment venues, restaurants and drinking establishments. We understand the governor's hesitancy given its potential to hurt business and the efforts to build back the economy and jobs, but the science suggests it is the right thing to do given the spread of the delta strain.

Instead, Lamont has left the decision up to local mayors and first selectmen, leading to different rules in different towns. The inconsistency is particularly evident in a place such as Mystic. The Town of Groton, on the western side of Mystic, has a mask mandate in place. But when visitors to downtown Mystic cross the historic Mystic Draw Bridge, they are in Stonington, which doesn't have an order in place.

Opposition to extending Lamont's emergency authority in any fashion will be significant, and we get it. But given the twist and turns of this saga so far, Connecticut has to be ready to nimbly respond to the next one.

The Day editorial board meets regularly with political, business and community leaders and convenes weekly to formulate editorial viewpoints. It is composed of President and Publisher Tim Dwyer, Editorial Page Editor Paul Choiniere, Managing Editor Izaskun E. Larrañeta, staff writer Erica Moser and retired deputy managing editor Lisa McGinley. However, only the publisher and editorial page editor are responsible for developing the editorial opinions. The board operates independently from the Day newsroom.