Legislative Blog
J.B. Williams, J.D.
No Vaccine Passports Act
A Blog about No Vaccine Passports
A Bit of Background
The following backgrounds help summarize the author's views on both the general topic: Federal and more specifically No Vaccine Passports as it relates to that topic.
Brief Summary of Federal
This should be a fairly limited bills area for management the overall structures like highways, military, federal buildings, federal laws, and the like. However it has become the micro manager of all micro managers. They get involved in areas that no federal government should be involved in, and shift more power upward. This has led to each party trying to run over the other party in the eyes of the voters, all the while doing everything possible to maintain their power. They do this by holding onto all of the money, and claiming they know best how it should be spent. But they run debts so badly that no one should be looking to them as an example of anything other than the way to overspend and go further into debt.
Summary of No Vaccine Passports
This bill provides a background summary into the COVID-19 response. Providing a reason for having a no vaccine passport act.
Blog Summary
118S181 Introduced in 1/31/23 at 61 pages long. Passed in House on _________. Passed in Senate __________. Signed into law __________.
Sponsors:
- Ted Cruz, R, Texas, In Congress 2013 to Present
This bill begins going through COVID-19 information, vaccine development, responses across the country. While this may not be necessary, it does provide some useful background for understanding why COVID-19 passports should not exist. To me it provides why Vaccine passports should not exist. For me, it unfortunately goes off the rails in a few areas. Specifically protecting against discrimination for COVID-19 vaccination, which I find unnecessary. It provides some exemptions, including permitting the request and collection of this data on those entering the US as foreign aliens. Which is where the Act completely failed in my opinion. Permitting this as a requirement for entering the US means that other countries will have no issue requiring it for entering their country. So our government, and theirs, can claim they are not mandating or forcing vaccination; but it is required to go to other countries. It's all just lip service, they know requiring it for entry here will lead to others requiring it; thereby forcing an unstated mandate on US citizens. They are leading the lie by example.
No Vaccine Passports Act
Published: 2023-11-01
This bill begins by going over the history of COVID-19 and the vaccine development. It then mentions the WHO draft recommendations from March 19, 2021 to create a form of a 'vaccine passport' that would support COVID-19 vaccine delivery and monitoring, and serve current and future requirements. This was adopted by the European Commission in July 2021. In April 2021 the State of New York launched a COVID-19 vaccine passport, known as Excelsior Pass. While the White House stated they would not create a vaccine passport, they worked to develop criteria and principles for one in the private sector. In fact 'During a March 2021, virtual meeting lead by the Federal Health IT Coordinating Council on behalf of the Biden Administration, a slide presentation included the following: Proof of individual COVID-related health status is likely to be an important component of pandemic response, proof of immunization will likely become a major, if not the primary, form of health status validation, and a unified Federal approach is required to ensure Federal activities are working toward the same common goals for vaccine [passports].' In addition, the presentation suggested the Biden Administration expected Federal entities to 'likely require vaccine verification for a variety of purposes' and the 'Federal government will inevitably be involved with vaccine credential solutions.'
It also lists the mandate information as follows:
- August 24, 2021: Secretary of Defense memorandum requiring all DOD service members to be vaccinated.
- September 9, 2021: Biden Administration executive order mandating all employees of Federal contractors be vaccinated
- September 14, 2021: Biden Administration executive order mandating all Federal employees be vaccinated
- November 4, 2021: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services interim final rule requiring employees of Medicare and Medicaid certified providers and suppliers be vaccinated
- November 4, 2021: Occupational Safety and Health Administration issued emergency temporary standard requiring private employers with 100 or more employees to either require employees to be vaccinated or require employees to provide regular proof of negative COVID-19 test
A number of cities implemented vaccine passports requiring proof of vaccination to enter establishments:
- August 16, 2021: New Orleans implement vaccination or negative test order to enter indoor establishments and venues
- August 20, 2021: San Francisco required proof of vaccination to enter indoor establishments and venues
- September 31, 2021: New York city required Excelsior Pass or Key-to-NYC COVID-19 vaccine passport to enter indoor establishments and venues
- October 1, 2021: Los Angeles required proof of vaccination to enter indoor establishments and venues
- October 25, 2021: Seattle required proof of vaccination or negative test to enter indoor establishments and venues
- January 2022: Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, Minneapolis, St Paul required proof of vaccination to enter indoor establishments and venues
- February 15, 2022: Washington, DC required proof of vaccination to enter indoor establishments and venues
'Throughout 2021 and 2022, a large number of private employers imposed a COVID-19 vaccine mandate on employees as a condition of employment. This has resulted in widespread discrimination based on vaccination status and loss of employment and employment opportunities. '
'The development, implementation, and utilization of vaccine passports, whether by Federal or State government, or the private sector, has led to significant misuse, abuse, and discrimination against the people of the United States. The use of such passports led to the denial of constitutionally protected freedoms, such as freedom of association and freedom of movement and allowed the government and corporations to track people's health status on a large-scale basis.' Their widespread use, or use of proof of vaccination in any form, has led to discrimination by business that provide public accommodations and have required customers to disclose their protected health information. Despite the uses of both vaccine passports and vaccine mandates leading to clear violations of constitutional rights, there are no clear regulatory framework to protect the privacy of US citizens and US nationals. Any person who has requested and received such information should be regarded as a 'covered entity' as defined under 246(c) of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.
'The policy of the United States is to recognize, defend, and protect the inherent rights of the individual, including the right to privacy, the right to liberty, the right to be secure in one's person, the right of the individual to be informed about any medical procedures, treatment or vaccination, and the right of the individual to provide or withhold consent to such procedures, treatment, or vaccination. Congress recognizes that special vigilance is required, especially in times of crisis or emergency to ensure that government agencies do not try to take advantage of, manipulate, or inflame public fear, stoke hatred of minority groups, or increase intolerance toward the diversity that builds our Nation.'
The bills goes on to talk about the need to increase vaccination rates in order to end the COVID-19 pandemic. In my opinion the pandemic is over, we are in endemic stage - which, because COVID-19 is a respiratory virus, I felt was where we would end up no matter what we did. I do agree that we need to start protecting people's rights to privacy, right to informed consent, and increase public trust in the medical field, including but not limited to the CDC.
No Federal funds may be used to create, establish or collaborate in the establishment of a Federal, State, private, or international vaccine passport system, vaccine tracking database, or similar system for tracking COVID-19 vaccination status. (I don't think they should have any system for any vaccines whatsoever.)There is also a requirement to destroy paper, or delete digital, copies of any such information collected or that was provided to the Federal government within 30 days of enactment. And any agency that destroys/deletes the information shall notify Congress under penalty of perjury that it has done so within 15 days. It does set out penalties for failure to do so.
It prohibits any Federal department or agency from issuing a vaccine passport, vaccine pass, or other standardized documentation for certifying COVID-19 vaccination status of a US citizen to a third party or to otherwise publish or share COVID-19 vaccination records of US citizens. It prohibits proof of COVID-19 vaccination to be used for access to Federal property or services, or access to congressional grounds or services. It does permit the collection of data that has been deidentified or anonymized to be used for health reporting or academic studies. There are also exceptions for tracking Federal government employees to permit traveling to foreign countries where COVID-19 vaccination may be required.
Some changes to the HIPAA privacy regulations are included. Prohibiting release of an individual's vaccination status even during a public health emergency, unless the patient consents. Any entity gathering this information is considered a covered entity, and shall comply if the 'patient' request the information be deleted.
Makes it unlawful to require a US person to receive a vaccine that has only received emergency use authorization. And it is unlawful to vaccine those under 18 or otherwise lacking capacity to consent with a vaccine that is only authorized under emergency use However, a parent, guardian, conservator or such may consent on their behalf. This subsection sunsets 5 years after it's enactment. In this case I do not understand why it would sunset. It should merely be written in such a way as to cover any vaccine that is developed in the future that is being granted emergency use authorization.
The next portion follows HR118 regarding informed consent and disclosure of information.
The bill goes on to prevent COVID-19 vaccination discrimination. Honestly I believe that this already exists as you are not suppose to use someone's medical or health records in the consideration of hiring unless it is a physical requirement of the job. I know of individuals that could not lift certain weights that were even hired by companies and permitted to not lift the heavier items. So this seems to be a not necessary, and possibly harmful section. Putting all the minute details in makes it seem like Congress would permit some to be used but not this one, which puts questions into future items and requirements that all future vaccines be provided a law to protect against discrimination. Very much overkill in my opinion. Even worse it provides for exceptions like requiring physical distancing being permitted, or symptom checking, or masking/protective equipment. I was liking this bill up until this point. Even though there were some issues I disagreed with but this permits people to continue going on and on about a virus that is now endemic. It merely is provided a legal means of future discrimination for COVID-19 and a multitude of other things. Especially since the serious injury and deaths have dropped significantly. In fact, I recently viewed several reviews where medical personnel stated that hospitalizations were nearly non-existent, yet alone deaths. Now that is not to say there are not individuals in a hospital with COVID-19, but that is not the reason they were being admitted.
Next the bill addresses public accommodations, and requires that no proof of COVID-19 vaccination status be required for a public accommodation. And it requires that vaccination status shall not provide different benefits. It does permit the requirement of masking, physical distancing, or personal protective equipment. This does not apply to private clubs or establishments exempt from coverage under title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or a religious organization.
Vaccination status cannot be used to impair a person's right to vote.
It exempts the Secretary of Homeland Security and permits their request and collection of vaccination records providing evidence of vaccination for COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, or any variant thereof from any alien seeking admission to the United States. I do not like this either. It ensures that other countries are likely to do this as well at their borders. It's like saying we won't make you but other countries may, so but it wasn't us requiring it. COVID-19 is endemic, just like the flu/flu like illnesses, and we do not (I sincerely hope) require flu shots before entering the country. We need to stop doing this, it is merely creating barriers and requirements of the citizens of your country by placing it on those wishing to enter your country. Because other countries will follow the US example and put it in place. If this or anything similar were passed, it means that our country wants to force you to get a vaccine that is only approved for emergency use but they just don't want you to blame them. Well I say blame them and call them out on it.
Webpage created by and for J.B. Williams, J.D. - all rights reserved