I guess to me the difference is this:

A) Governors are using incomplete data because we don't have enough = they are doing the best that they can with what they've got and the data will continue to improve, which should improve decision making.

B) Governors are not using ANY data at all in their decision making, in spite of the fact that some data is available and the available data is improving every single day that this goes on - but none of that matters because they won't consider any of the data and are just pulling random decisions out of their backsides.

The original post in this thread said "why aren't they talking about this" and went on to state that NO data was being used for ANY decision making. I'll accept that data is limited and weighted differently by different people. I reject the premise that NO data is being used for ANY decision making.