A member of the Tennessee General Assembly Tuesday filed a bill that would criminalize COVID-19 mandates in the state, saying that he doesn’t think Tennessee has done enough to combat such mandates.
“I don’t feel that the legislature went far enough during October’s special legislative session on this issue. This is about protecting an individual’s freedom to make their own medical decisions and the freedom of parents to make healthcare decisions for their children,” State Representative Bruce Griffey (R-Paris) in a press release. “Those individuals who want to get vaccinated should be able to do so. However, those individuals, who have concerns about the vaccine, should not have to live in fear that they may lose their jobs or their children may not be able to attend school or they may not be able to enter a business to purchase groceries if they don’t get vaccinated.”
HB 2311 is headed to the Business & Utilities Subcommittee. Its sister bill in the state Senate, SB 2025, is sponsored by State Senator Joey Hensley (R-Hohenwald). That bill is headed for second consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee
The bill reads:
As introduced [SB 2025] creates an offense of requiring another to receive a COVID-19 vaccination or provide proof of vaccination as condition of employment or in order to enter any building, facility, or property that is generally open to the public; permits such a requirement as a condition of entry into a hospital or other healthcare facility that is being used for treatment of a person at high risk of death from exposure to a communicable disease.
“Liberty is one of the 3 innate rights given to us by God, our Father and Creator, and it is set forth in the Declaration of Independence. Tennessee law should reflect the value of liberty, and everyone should respect the right to live in freedom,” Griffey said in his press release.
Griffey’s office did not return a comment request.
The Tennessee Democratic Party (TNDP) referred The Tennessee Star to Chairman Hendrell Remus for comment, but Remus could not be reached.
_ _ _
Pete D’Abrosca is a reporter at The Tennessee Star and The Star News Network. Email tips to [email protected].
Photo “Bruce Griffey” by Tennessee General Assembly.
[…] TN State Rep. Wants to Criminalize COVID-19 Mandates […]
Should not pass on two counts: First, it’s limited to covid. IF such a law is needed, it should generally affirm individual choice in any healthcare matter and make illegal or criminal ANY attempt to impose ANY broad/general population mandate. Of course, that would eliminate a lot of good things (like vaccination requirements for school) but if this is true for a narrow case, why is it not true for the general case? If your doc can’t convince you that whooping cough vaccination is a good idea, why should a government bureaucrat or school get to overrule that?
Second, it still allows hospitals/healthcare to require vaccination. Again, inconsistent. A hospital now treats patients with all kinds of problematic infections (TB, diphtheria, measles, etc) and does not require that visitors or other patients must be vaccinated even though that might place such a person or another patient at higher risk. Allowing a healthcare exemption will simply encourage a two tiered approach and allow back-door enforcement. No covid vax? No ER for you; passport please! Same issue as above- hospital ER doesn’t check for a long list of required vaccinations now, and some of them (flu) can be fatal to other patients.
IF a law is needed, it should follow the rules that were in place: healthcare decisions are a matter between patient and physician, and NO THIRD PARTY (any employer, including a healthcare employer, educational institution, government agency, etc) may interfere or override a decision. If one does, create a civil cause of action with a bounty, and allow both the institution and the specific individuals at the institution to be sued. A few fast 10 grand payouts from individuals will eliminate the behavior quickly.
That is not to say that a third party (an insurance company, for example, or an employer) must treat individuals who make different decisions identically. Smokers have higher rates of some problems and insurance rates can be higher for them. Similarly, there’s no reason to have identical insurance rates for those who take the usual set of public-health recommended vaccinations and those who don’t. IF the refusal actually causes a different risk, then a different rate is justified – so there is at least a potential cost to the decision.
Whatever is done, if anything, at least be consistent and general. This proposed bill is neither.
GOOD!!
This bill is too specific in specifically naming COVID-19. Language should cover future illnesses/vaccines. It is far too easy for the state to take away our God-given rights.
[…] The Tennessee Star […]
I knew when I saw the title of the article that it was going to be Bruce Griffey! That is an excellent idea!
Agreed.