Print đź–¨

The House State Affairs Committee met on October 13th to discuss HB 155 (Oliverson) Relating to exemptions from COVID-19 vaccine requirements. HB 155 was left pending at the end of the hearing.

This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the discussions on the various topics taken up. It is not a verbatim transcript of the discussions but is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.

 

HB 155 (Oliverson) Relating to exemptions from COVID-19 vaccine requirements.

  • Oliverson – Lays out HB 155
  • Bill is in response to Gov. Abbott’s call on October 11th regarding COVID-19 vaccine mandates
  • Expects robust discussion of bill; policy is a work in progress
  • Patient autonomy is paramount to medical ethics; patients have right to choose to partake in medical treatment or not
  • Texans didn’t appreciate mask mandates, didn’t want rights as an individual to be taken away; mandates can result in stiffened opposition
  • Proposed legislation doesn’t take a position on legality of vaccine mandates, it just makes sure that entities who create mandates allow certain exemptions
  • Notion of exemptions not a new concept, Health and Safety Code already contains exemptions
  • Exemptions stated in bill are medical exemptions, conscience exemptions (including religious), and acquired immunity through natural infection
  • Conscience exemptions are already in statute, include religious reasoning; courts have history of upholding right to make decisions based on conscience
  • There is a belief that natural immunity from a previous COVID-19 infection is sufficient to prevent another; medical direction changes month to month, but have learned recently about long-lasting immunity from exposure to COVID-19
  • Mentions studies in Israel and Rockefeller University that support notion that natural immunity is “more adaptable, longer-lasting, and more robust than vaccine immunity”
  • Bill not taking a position on whether a mandate should or should not exist, just says that in the case of a mandate, exemptions should be offered
  • Goal of vaccinating 100% of population is most likely not an achievable goal; breakthrough cases mean that a vaccine cannot prevent every vaccinated person from missing work
  • Science isn’t fully settled, so a one-size-fits all federal policy that violates personal choice or decisions of conscience isn’t fair to population
  • Bill is drafted in this way in response to Governor’s call and instructions; bound by rules of chamber and legislature
  • Lucio – “Mandates are being forced upon small businesses and freedom is being taken away from small businesses”
  • “Taking away private business freedom and ability to run business for what is best for them,” free market works; employees hold all the cards as a result of pandemic, so a mandate could put business in jeopardy
  • Gives example of the recent cancellation of flights rooted in negotiation for rights, not vaccine arguments
  • “Why are we eliminating a small business’ right to do what they think is best so they can stay open?”
  • Breakthrough cases after vaccination seem to be mild cases, not the case for those who contract the Delta variant without vaccine immunity
  • Concerned that exemptions will be abused
  • Lucio – In healthcare facilities, someone can conscientiously reject the vaccine?
    • Oliverson – Need to answer question if medical autonomy is a right? Intercede in employer/employee relationships when there is a concern that their rights will be violated
    • There are certain things that an employer cannot require; there are protected characteristics; circumstances in certain industries where people can be employed elsewhere if they don’t want a vaccine, but many industries don’t have that option
    • Lucio – Haven’t done the extra hard work to see what industries have done this, legislation would be a blanket policy for every industry
  • Oliverson – Tells story about cancer patient being turned away from treatment after contracting COVID-19 due to lack of vaccination; decision to not get vaccinated was due to medical condition
  • Lucio – “So it’s horrible for that person to be turned away due to lack of vaccination, but it’s okay for someone to be turned away because they’re LGBTQ?”
    • Oliverson – Idea has swung too far in terms of requiring people to get vaccinated
  • King – Need to have deliberate, calm, intelligent discussion about this; issue not going away
  • Gives example of a federal contractor who had to enforce a vaccine mandate in industry where jobs cannot be replicated forcing hundreds of employees to find other employment
  • Issue will take a long time to resolve, will have to go to courts; need to understand if natural immunity should have a seat at the table
  • Understand that some jobs require a vaccine such as healthcare work, but natural immunity should be considered as well
  • There are already exemptions in law, medical autonomy in law, and the science is suggesting that natural immunity is as valuable as vaccine immunity
  • Tells personal story about natural immunity and multiple antibody level checks
  • Telling private business what to do is not ideal but there are people being forced out of jobs due to refusal of vaccines in jobs that cannot be replicated
  • Not sure how to frame natural immunity in argument, but need to try to find a way to approach this
  • Smithee – Bill has effective date of Feb. 2022, why this date?
    • Oliverson – Date is due to where we are in process; Senate version has language that if bill passed with 2/3 majority could be effective immediately
    • Smithee – Businesses having to make decisions now; if legislature decides to vote bill out, will it be too late; will bill be helpful to business now?
    • Oliverson – Can speed this up, also have Governor’s executive order
  • Smithee – All 3 exemptions a bit subjective; is there any objective standard to question exemption, conscience exemption for example? Adequate standard upon which a jury could apply damages?
    • Oliverson – Understanding is that courts have ruled that conscience extends beyond religious doctrine; need for proof of case for exemption is unreasonably high burden
    • Did not want to be overly prescriptive on what exactly conscience means in case of not getting it right or it evolving in the future
    • Smithee – Need to make sure there is definite standard of what that means
  • Smithee – Seems like bill needs some more work, is it the preference that the bill be voted out as quickly as possible or should committee try and get the bill a little closer to where we want to get it and then vote it out?
    • Oliverson – Wanted to hear what the conversation sounded like; get a sense for where people are, what tweaks could be made
    • Currently working on modification due to concerns from stakeholders
    • Want to avoid a pandemic of lawsuits
    • Wants committee to see if it’s ready, what needs to be changed, if committee feel comfortable voting it out
    • Happy to continue working on it
  • Howard – Appreciates mention of following the science; legislation should follow what the scientists say is happening; in terms of national immunity, CDC still recommends vaccines for everyone, that vaccines provide better immunity than natural immunity
  • Freedom of decisions important, but in this case, this decision has direct impact on others around due to nature of virus
  • Have limited time for something that will have a huge impact; don’t want to do something too quickly that will have unintended consequences; have a lot to discuss and think about
  • Guide should be what scientists say; there will be some debate about who appropriate source is; right now, in U.S., CDC is in charge of determining what is in best interest of public
  • Medical decisions not the purpose of legislators; public testimony will bring up what needs to be considered
  • Oliverson – Agrees that bill should follow science; some of the things we consider to be settled regarding COVID is in process of evolving; when talking about making permanent decisions for employees, need to make sure science is settled; CDC can be lagging indicator whose decisions evolve over time
  • Howard – Medicine and science are always evolving; will continue to change and evolve as we learn more; want to implement what we know is best at the time, can’t wait for certain decisions to be made because current information is important when it comes to public health
  • Lucio – Apologizes for initial approach; issue is with small business component, wants freedom in small business to navigate complicated times
  • Oliverson – Sympathetic to small businesses, but at same time people need ability to have their conscience and medical decisions
  • Lucio – Tells story about complexities of dealing with question of vaccines and masks in context of small businesses, employees, and customers
  • Paddie – Shares concern about time constraint; to the question of political expediency versus good policy, not going to rush this; will create good policy that falls within Governor’s call

 

The Committee recessed for the House floor and reconvened after to continue Rep. Oliverson’s layout

  • Paddie – In practice, what would happen with this legislation?
    • Oliverson – Let’s say Federal Government says you have to have vaccine mandate; in Texas, to have this mandate, you have to offer these three exemptions
    • Didn’t want to be overly prescriptive in bill because circumstances can vary
    • Assume that employer would want to keep a record of someone exercising choice of exemption
    • Business could require copy of a lab test showing prior positive test
    • There are best practices out there about exemptions
  • Paddie – Prepared to talk about potential changes to bill in regard to civil action, etc.?
    • Oliverson – There may be situations where someone ignores law and doesn’t offer exemption; bill works to ensure compliance with state law
    • Civil action issue means it’s easily accessible to employee; gives people a rapid remedy, can hire attorney and pursue justice; ability to have day in court is a long-standing tradition
    • The way bill is currently drafted creates some amount of anxiety, could dial it back to providing injunctive relief; open to suggestions as to how to handle this
    • Intention to pass legislation during regular session to prohibit vaccine passports
    • Talks about how Montana is handling any mandates regarding COVID-19
  • Raymond – Could work in an unemployment provision, ensure that they get their job back?
    • Oliverson – Yes, already in statute in another state
  • Raymond – How has business community responded to new legislation preventing COVID-19-related mandates in Montana?
    • Oliverson – Not sure, very new
    • Raymond – Have staff call author of that bill, find out
  • Raymond – Have you contemplated whether we should include any other kinds of vaccines in bill language?
    • Oliverson – Item on call is specific to COVID-19, probably can’t expand bill beyond COVID unless call changes
    • Health and Safety Code Chapter that concerns hospitals and healthcare facilities and contemplates exemptions
    • Raymond – Should see if Governor can expand this to other ones
  • Raymond – Is there intent to come back to discuss Committee Sub?
    • Oliverson – Wants to hear what committee has to say, wants input; collaborative process working in a compressed timetable
    • As soon as we can come to a consensus and have the votes, can be voted out; hopeful it will be within next 24 hours
  • Deshotel – Regarding exemptions in current health code about vaccines, what are they and are they being expanded?
    • Oliverson – A moving target as knowledge about virus changes and evolves; more and more research confirming that natural immunity is as strong as or stronger than vaccine immunity
    • Currently, exemptions in two areas dealing with issues of medical, conscience/religious beliefs; see it in healthcare and in regard to childhood vaccines in schools
    • Works well, use it for the flu issue; if someone doesn’t want a flu vaccine working in healthcare, you aren’t fired but reassigned or instructed not to work with immunocompromised people
  • Deshotel – Bill uses same language as current health code?
    • Oliverson – Not exact, but similar; added 3rd exemption
  • King – Wants people to consider if it is right or wrong for federal government to compel businesses to make employees get vaccine? Something that the AG’s office needs to take up
  • King – Not going to vote for anything that will make businesses go to court
  • King- Another thing, how do we get federal government to pay attention to natural immunity, which seems to be pretty solid? Want to hear testimony on this issue in particular
  • Howard – Wants to clarify in health and safety code that it only allows a medical exemption; accommodations are made for those healthcare employees who cannot medically take the vaccines, have to wear gloves/masks or are reassigned
  • Oliverson – Yes, but facilities often do accept reasons of conscience as reasons to not get a vaccine

 

Public Testimony

Jennifer Allmon, Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops – For

  • Tough issue, goes back and forth regarding opinion; “Bill attempts to strike a balance” between the challenges of this issue
  • Supports rights of individuals as well as public health professionals’ use of vaccines to protect public health
  • Catholic Church operates 235 schools across Texas, do not accept any vaccine exemptions; see vaccines as an act of community support and love; But, because COVID is so new, exemptions that are laid out in bill are important
  • Supports conscience exemptions at a higher degree than religious exemptions; conscience can be based on religion or sincere belief from the heart
  • Support public schools accepting conscience exemptions; kids are forced to go to school, and have no other option, should be able to have vaccine exemptions
  • Support for bill is tentative; want businesses to have freedom and don’t like civil action and list of damages within bill, but likes notion of injunctive relief
  • Important to respect independence of religious institutions to exercise their rights
  • Lucio – Is it your understanding that if a school wanted to require vaccines, bill would prevent them from doing this?
    • Bill allows mandate, but allows exemptions to be in place for those who are not comfortable with getting the vaccine
    • Longevity of mandates is the concern; 20 years from now, not sure what we will think of COVID vaccine
    • Catholic Church schools have flexibility, other entities don’t have this
  • Deshotel – Have you had any experience defining conscience reasons?
    • Conscience is a moral judgment made in heart and mind; well-formed conscience, “looking at science and praying about it, making a decision and judgment”
    • Delicate balance; Catholic Schools don’t accept them, but people don’t have a right to go to Catholic school but public schools, therefore public schools should accept them
    • Difficult to judge a reason of conscience
  • Raymond – If you work for public entity, can have that reason of conscience; if you work for a private business, could have own personal conscientious objection
    • Balancing conscience rights of individuals will be difficult
  • Raymond – Concerned that private business-owners will have own reasons of conscience; could give strong consideration to point that natural immunity means that you got COVID and survived; now thinking that should consider private business owners’ consciences
    • Difference between being required to be somewhere, like public school, and choosing to work somewhere
  • Lucio – You talk about contracts with federal government, this bill impacts private businesses; eliminates freedom as private employer
  • Paddie – You said several times, “if you’re going to do something,” what do you mean by this?
    • Due to timing of session, so much to unpack and so many rights to balance; bill has only been around for 48 hours
    • Ideally, more time to have philosophical discussions and hear from stakeholders
    • This bill does least potential harm; still evaluating if it does any good

 

John Zerwas, Self – Neutral

  • Will discuss current health and safety code
  • Code came about from H1N1 pandemic in 2009 in response to sense of concern regarding what next pandemic would look like; dictated vaccines for preventable disease policy
  • Hospitals have functioned very well since this implementation, now considered the standard of care
  • Consider keeping chapter 224 intact as much as possible, which allows hospitals to mandate some vaccines; M.D. Anderson, for example, works with immunocompromised individuals who need to be protected
  • Paddie – Can you speak to the exemptions themselves within the code?
    • Reasons of conscience and religion permissible
    • Can be exempt from vaccine requirements due to medical reasons
    • Doesn’t include natural immunity mention, but strong believer of natural immunity
  • Paddie – Suggestions regarding natural/acquired immunity?
    • May be specific to COVID-19 virus; not speaking on behalf of hospital industry, but “science is clear that natural immunity is effective, and sustained like vaccine immunity”
    • Needs to be recognition of acquired immunity when discussing disease; there are different antibodies that arise from natural immunity
  • Deshotel – In 2011 bill, regarding reasons of conscience, any experience in dealing with this?
    • Difficult topic; the reason for measles outbreaks is because there is a very “liberal” look at what reasons of conscience are; have lost herd immunity as result
    • Not sure what hospitals allow for this exemption
  • Deshotel – Regarding public health disaster provision, seems to indicate that even with exemptions hospitals could have greater hand in requiring vaccine during disasters
    • Common to see people moved out of patient-facing care depending on vaccination status; use of masks commonplace
    • Section about limiting risk to patients
    • Deshotel – Seems to indicate that healthcare facilities see some sort of perceived danger that a person possesses if they’re not vaccinated
    • Zerwas – Yes, before vaccines, only had PPE; vaccines are the most complete way to offer protection, but PPE will be commonplace in hospitals
  • Deshotel – So, not unreasonable for small business to make same perception of danger?
    • Up to small business to determine what is best for their clients, customers, and livelihood
  • Raymond – How many people in TX have died from COVID?
    • Don’t have number in front of me
  • Raymond – What % of Texans have received at least one or both vaccine doses?
    • 62% of Texans fully vaccinated among eligible population
    • Doesn’t pay much attention to just one dose due to Delta variant
  • Raymond – If vaccination rates were only at 30%, would the number of dead be higher?
    • I would think so; the people who get sick and die are 65+ or have comorbidities
    • When expert vaccine panel first met, veered away from what CDC said and made sure to give vaccine to oldest people first
    • More people would have died if vaccine wasn’t around
  • Raymond – Would still have had natural immunity going on around that time?
    • Difficult to corral virus; if you look at particular communities, hitting certain numbers can lead to herd immunity in certain places but not statewide
  • Raymond – “If we counted on herd immunity from natural immunity, we’d be worse off”; business with 100 employees with 80% immunity from vaccines and natural immunity should be okay; give business ability to work with this and have flexibility
  • Raymond – Vaccines have saved a lot of lives, employers want their employees to stay alive; if it worked for society, could work for individual businesses; not just relying on natural immunity to occur, but recognize that it is good; need to figure out how to help employer deal with all of this

 

Reagan DeMarines, Texans for Vaccine Choice – For

  • Have been fielding calls at an increased rate to deal with employers requiring vaccination
  • Many people experiencing hardships due to vaccine requirements
  • Tells anecdotal stories of those who have had to choose between their personal choice and employment
  • All of the exemptions stated in the bill respect and protect individual rights

 

Glenn Hammer, Texas Association of Business – Against

  • Thanks committee for thoughtful conversation, appreciates Rep. Raymond’s comment about finding a sweet spot
  • Strongly supports free market practices, vaccine has allowed us to comfortably meet today
  • Exceptions for religious & medical reasons could make sense, important for business and government to work together to create workable rules
  • Big concern is the cause of action, will follow lead of TLR in that area
  • Raymond – Do you have a solution? Have you spoken with Rep. Oliverson?
    • Rep. Oliverson mentioned a possible solution with injunctive relief
    • I think 99% of Texans will do the right thing and not abuse exemptions
  • Raymond – I think you’re wrong, but okay
    • Want to work with committee, want to see people get vaccinated, don’t want to see companies walloped for following rules
    • Federal government is going in the other direction, TAB against this, OSHA shouldn’t be involved
    • Federal rules billed as an emergency
  • Raymond – So if we took out liability provisions, you’d feel the bill is okay?
    • Would still need to evaluate
    • If that part went out and you had an enforcement provision that was supported by TLR, probably wouldn’t be up here right now
  • King – State has not mandated vaccines to anyone, have not put requirements on employers, all of this comes from the federal government
  • King – If we want to limit that in some way, we get into the issue of state and federal law, when we feel the federal government has overstepped authority there is a legal avenue through AG or private individuals
  • King – More we discuss, more I realize what a difficult situation we put businesses; if we create a law saying businesses cannot, and federal government says they must, what are they supposed to do; trying to find a way to get Texas into this discussion
  • King – Traditionally health care decisions are made by states and this has been taken away
  • King – Should push federal government to not compel businesses, but within this should try and get them to consider things like natural immunity; issues far beyond consideration of the bill
  • Lucio – Federal government is mandating for those with federal contracts
    • King – And medical facilities, those with over 100 employees
  • Lucio – Those with over 100, all employers?
    • King – My understanding is OSHA reqs will say over 100, medical facility, or federal contractor need to have everyone vaccinated
  • Lucio – Will read this; why don’t we limit our fight with this bill over that and not pass a blanket bill? Really want to stay out of it
  • Paddie – Sounded like if we could get rid of the cause of action, you were kind of okay; how do we reconcile opinion of TAB on employment practices?
    • Hammer, TAB – Believe very strongly that employers should set workplace policy, vaccinations fall under this
    • Guardrails exist at federal and state levels, we understand there are exemptions under current law, e.g. religious, health care, etc.
    • Natural immunity discussion is real, NIH or CDC says you shouldn’t get a vaccine within a period of time after
    • Employers are between a rock and a hard place, want to do the right thing, but don’t want to be in a situation where severe consequences exist on the state or federal level
    • Passed great COVID liability legislation in the past
    • We all want to get the community healthy, want to get the economy running
  • Paddie – Seemed like we had a lawsuit concern and seemed like a significant discussion about COVID
    • Would want any exemptions to be as narrowly and carefully tailored as possible
    • Way we read this is employers would be allowed to have vaccine mandates, then the question is what are those exemptions; e.g. acquired immunity should be recognized in certain cases
    • Federal requirements would be difficult on the economy, would definitely impact the supply chain
  • Paddie – Currently your members could choose to recognize or not recognize acquired immunity
    • This has not changed this is what we advocate for, but very likely to be at least one additional exemption for the novel coronavirus
    • Should look at science and should consider those who have contracted the disease
  • Paddie – Not here to debate the science
    • What has changed is the private cause of action, could definitely impact what has been the best business climate
    • Guardrails currently exist in law, COVID-19 does require even an additional layer of thought; open to compromise
  • Paddie – Also open to compromise, appreciate you being here today

 

Carmen Tilton, Texas Assisted Living Association – Against

  • Should amend bill to carve out senior services providers; most assisted living facilities are small, families and residents have strong vaccine preferences
  • If you had a bill mandating vaccines, would be here testifying against as well
  • COVID policy is a private business decision based on residents and families; industry is in a precarious place
  • Delta variant has shown COVID is still a danger, vaccine is the most effective defense option, need a multi-faceted infection control strategy, incl vaccines for those who can be
  • Raymond – Can you tell me what percentage of your employees are vaccinated?
    • Don’t have numbers, some communities have incredibly high vaccination rates, others have low vaccination rates
  • Raymond – So some members are at 30%?
    • Some are, some are at 100%
  • Raymond – Lower rates in really small facilities?
    • Pretty varied, HHSC keeps track of those numbers
  • Raymond – Opposition is that you want them to be able to make their own decisions?
    • Yes, please; if an employer has a policy that runs afoul of the bill, also face licensure actions

 

Lee Parsley, Texans for Lawsuit Reform – Against

  • No opinion with efficacy or necessity of vaccinations, concerned only about business liability
  • Texas is an employment at will state, believe this puts Texas in a competitive posture
  • HB 155 is an exception to the employment at will doctrine; there are good exceptions, but when you add more exceptions, it creates more litigation and richer lawyers
  • Has been said that employer only needs to recognize the exception, but it won’t work like that in reality; will see employees use the provision as a hammer to exploit the business and businesses will settle at cost
  • Problem that was created by Biden Administration, but concerned it can’t be fixed in this way
  • Shaheen – Already have exemptions that exist, this adds medical, is it the specific exemptions?
    • Problem is that you’re creating an exception to the employment at will doctrine, creating a way that this doctrine no longer applies
  • Shaheen – Employees are protected based on religion, sounds like this statute does the same?
    • Employees are entitled to reasonable accommodation for religious practices and beliefs
  • Shaheen – But you’re recognizing we have exemptions today, I’ve interpreted this bill to apply this to a vaccine mandate
    • Maybe if it included the reasonable accommodation language, but this is not phrased that way; exception is mandated, entitles employees to the exception and they become untouchable
  • Shaheen – I think this is providing clarity on the vaccine topic, situation where employees are more difficult to fire for decreased productivity; my understanding was that TLR was troubled with the remedies
    • We’re troubled by the remedies as well
  • Shaheen – If exemptions can be addressed in terms of how language is crafted, then there is the issue of what action the employee has if this is violated; are there other remedies possible?
    • Less threatening for employers is an injunction rather that the current compensatory and punitive damages
    • Would have something that gives both sides a reason not to go to court
  • Lucio – Suits for wrongful termination are no longer in insurance coverage, highly likely insurance will not cover; cost of suit, even in injunction will have to come out of pocket
  • King – If we pass this in any form, does this give employers a shield against the federal government mandate?
    • I doubt it does, regardless of what you pass, federal government pre-empts
  • Deshotel – Bill creates a new protected class; need to work on getting cause of action section out, need to allow businesses do what they believe is in their own best interest
  • Raymond – So if we took out liability stuff, heard someone say that 99% of employees wouldn’t take advantage; would you feel better if we tried to provide relief through unemployment?
    • Seems like a better solution than a lawsuit
  • Raymond – Have you worked on any language?
    • Spoke with chair yesterday, always want to be helpful and make language suggestions

 

George Linial, Leading Age Texas – Against

  • Residents and staff have borne the brunt of pandemic, vaccines have turned the tide
  • HB 155 ties hands of members in terms of exemptions
  • Not all members want to use these policies, but members want access to all options
  • Also runs against vaccine requirements coming soon from CMS; risk either funding or lawsuits
  • Asking that aging services providers somehow be exempted
  • Howard – Do you have ballpark on loss of CMS funding?
    • Would be devastating, 2 out 3 nursing homes rely heavily on Medicaid for reimbursement

 

Steve Wohleb, Texas Hospital Association – Against

  • Appreciates Rep. Oliverson’s willingness to speak on the bill
  • Concerned about HB 155 modifies existing law giving hospitals ability to determine best practices for patient health
  • Chapter 224 directing hospitals to develop plan is the right policy
  • Conscience exemption essentially makes infection policy meaningless and unenforceable
  • Should allow hospitals to use every tool at their disposal to protect patients and workforce; also agree with financial implications
  • Howard – Need to be aware of the huge potential fiscal implications; if Chapter 224 was maintained as is, would you be supportive?
    • Yes, policy has worked well
  • Howard – Requires exemptions for medical reasons, but permissive on religious or conscience; what would impact on hospitals be if these exemptions were mandatory
    • Would render vaccine policies meaningless
  • Howard – Could you speak to impact on staffing?
    • Something that could be a dilemma, reason why hospitals need to have the flexibility to implement or not implement
  • Howard – Do you think broad array of exemptions impacts vaccination message?
    • I think it could, hospitals were heroes of vaccine roll out
  • Paddie – With federal mandate, if we pass a law saying you can’t, what are you going to do?
    • Puts us in a hard place, have to consider federal law as superior to state law, anticipate it will mostly be CMS and OSHA rule that businesses will follow

 

Gavin Gadberry, Texas Health Care Association – Against

  • 3 federal mandates: federal contractors, OSHA over 100, and CMS funding requirements
  • Not meeting the CMS requirements means Medicaid and Medicare funding is cut off
  • Hospitals will have to represent that staff is vaccinated; assisted living relies on federal funding, have no choice between lawsuits and CMS funding
  • If you need a reasonable accommodation, testing via antigen costs money & will need many testing factors; will also need to test and provide PPE for the safety of the rest of the facility
  • Need to think about exemption health care providers, have a clean definition and easy to do
  • Raymond – What percentage of your employees have gotten the vaccine? Smaller facilities getting it less?
    • Depends on size of facility, THCA membership is reporting about 60% employee vaccination

 

Robert Simmons, Council Member City of St. Paul, Self – For

  • Defense contractor industries are being negatively affected by federal vaccine mandates, timelines are very quick and many feeling pressure
  • Difficult to find those willing to work and be face to face
  • Small business subcontractors can’t sustain losing 2-3 employees
  • Many employees worked onsite through 2020, seeing more impact through 2021 even in employees who are vaccinated
  • A lot of data is being suppressed by media and social media, Dr. Malone has spoken against use of mRNA
  • Federal mandate could set contractors up to lose significant portions of their workforce
  • Paddie – Do you disagree with some of the conversation earlier about lack of effect of state action? DO you think if we pass this it cures federal problem?
    • It does, Montana law preventing mandates is being respected by contracting companies
  • Paddie – You’re saying the federal government will respect Montana’s decision?
    • From what I’m seeing contractors are respecting the law

 

Johanna McCreary, Self – For

  • Best that we have right now to help employers and employees, but there will be ramifications
  • Employees should not get fired if they use exceptions; will be difficult to make these decisions, but concerned about federal government mandating employers ask about medical records

 

Tom Glass, Texas Constitutional Enforcement – For

  • Federal government is trying to stop Texas from running Texas; no one has ability to make you choose to do something bad to your body, right to deny vaccination is an inalienable right
  • Federal government and President Biden are damaging businesses with unconstitutional actions
  • Official oppression act guards against actions by government officials

 

Dr. Lauren Gamble, Texas Pediatric Society – Against

  • Have concerns about severe negative consequences bill could have on public health; vaccines are safe & the reason we are making progress in fighting pandemic
  • Any effort to undermine confidence puts health at risk, public health response has been done for many diseases in the past
  • Putting restrictions on public entity vaccine policies damages health response
  • Howard – In your setting, you have even more vulnerable patients in that they can’t get vaccinated yet, you need flexibility to be able to mandate to protect patient health?
    • Absolutely, need all the help we can get until approved for children
  • Howard – Would you support keeping Chapter 224?
    • Not sure, don’t believe we need any additional legislation in this area

 

Annie Spilman, National Federation of Independent Business – Against

  • Last thing needed for small business is additional uncertainty through potential legal cost
  • Part of the concern is licensure, also could impact ability to be a grant recipient like small business recovery grants; cause of action is concerning
  • Don’t hold position on vaccination itself, but government
  • King – Are you involved at the federal level in trying to stop OSHA regulations?
    • Yes, lawyers issued letter to Labor Secretary on concern of potential jail time and extreme fines
    • That is not standing law yet, so other states would not be dealing with this
  • King – One concern is Medicaid funding cut for hospitals, but there is a current active federal contractor order mandating vaccines, are you lobbying on this?
    • We are, leave this to DC staff
  • King – How you taken a formal position against?
    • Yes, mainly against extreme penalties for any violation
    • Issue is the government coming in and telling businesses what to do
  • Paddie – Something a lot of people are struggling with, some businesses are mandating vaccines or not, some employees get sick and it gets tough, but dealing with government coming in to tell us how to run business
    • 51% of small business owners we’ve polled cannot fill jobs, 48 year high and only getting worse
    • Employers need ability to work with employees on a case-by-case basis
  • Lucio – Curious if there would be a growing number of lawsuits for those that contracted COVID at work and how this bill would affect that? If you conscientiously object, there should be a waiver you sign that you won’t sue for contracting COVID at work
    • Open door for liability on both sides
  • Paddie – Difficult part with blanket mandate is that different parts of the state will react positively or negatively to mandates; unless we’re involved businesses will make their own decisions
    • Exactly, business decision

 

Dan Thomas, Self – For

  • Fired for not having COVID-19 vaccine; bill is common sense and something Texas needs
  • Contracted and recovered, worked for Gray Television, CBS affiliate in Sherman, TX; attempted to file exemption before President’s mandate came out
  • OSHA fines for missing tests are huge, will bankrupt businesses
  • Something needs to be done, Texas needs to make a stand, is working in Montana
  • Raymond – Asks about Gray Television
    • Company from Atlanta, second largest owner of TV stations in the US
  • Raymond – And this is their policy?
    • Not very clear on how many got accommodation denials
  • Raymond – When did this happen?
    • October 1st; several people in the station lost their jobs
  • Raymond – Did you talk to HR?
    • Yes
  • Raymond – Concerned about spreading it?
    • Gave a boilerplate explanation, did not contest the accommodation, just said it would be a burden to keep me employed
  • King – Termination date was subsequent to President’s order? What was the impetus?
    • Not privy to that
  • King – Company policy decision? Trying to decide if they did this or if they were under federal pressure? Have a feeling? Sounds like a policy decision, already passed the company liability
    • ARPA put for billions for education, not sure how much they qualified for
  • King – So you think if we had a bill like this it would give you something to push back with?
    • Correct
  • Metcalf – Sorry for what happened to you
  • Lucio – What happened to you was wrong, hope it gets rectified

 

Maureen Milligan, Teaching Hospitals of Texas – Against

  • Asking that hospitals be exempted and confirmed to continue operating under Chapter 224
  • Typically, mandates are not preferable, but mandates make sense in the case of COVID-19; patients do not choose to be in hospitals, high-risk people who expect to be kept safe
  • Supplemental payment to hospital payments under DSH are $7b
  • Howard – Do hospitals currently have vaccine requirements for employees?
    • They do, flu vaccine is mandated, also by Joint Commission
  • Howard – So currently already doing this under Chapter 224 as the medical exemption?
    • Yes
  • Howard – Already have mandates and exemption and that is working?
    • Yes, hearing from members that this is working, especially in the face of evolving science

 

Ernest Ramirez, Self – For

  • Shares experience of son who had heart condition after vaccination, friend of son removed from school

 

Leanne Messer, Texas Private Schools Association – For

  • This is the lesser of the evils of the vaccine bills
  • Will probably be subject to federal mandate, represent essentially small businesses, 70% of whom fall into the 100 employee category
  • King – If you come under the federal mandate, do you expect that you’ll have a lot of employees that resign?
    • There will be resignations, will negatively impact a good number of schools

 

Wroe Jackson, Texas Association of Manufacturers – Against

  • Vaccine policy being effective should be beneficial to a business and thus to society; disease can significantly impact business and supply operations
  • Decisions of conscience are not well defined under bill; would be difficult to defend against administrative processes
  • Seems ideologically inconsistent to create cause of action against employers adopting policies to keep employees safe
  • Not clear if out-of-state employees are subject to bill
  • Departure from Texas’ protection of businesses

 

Chase Bearden, Coalition of Texans with Disabilities – Against

  • See this negatively impacting consumer directed services/attendant care
  • Very important for patients as employers to be able to say attendants are vaccinated

 

Jonathan Covey, Texas Values Action – For

  • Highlights legal precedent for exemptions, probably best not to be too prescriptive with conscience protections, Texas Values Action open to work with author

 

Lindsey Gremont, Self – Against

  • Exemption process gives authority to mandates in place, very egregious & important to think through these issues

 

Sheila Hemphill, Texas Right to Know – On

  • Staffing problems will get worse, coronavirus relief funds require compliance with federal executive orders; anyone signing will be considered a federal contractor
  • High number of adverse vaccine effects, can’t mandate EUA vaccines

 

Dawn Richardson, National Vaccine Information Center – Against

  • Opposed to bill, but supportive of the concept; idea is too little too late, many have already been fired
  • Bill is an endorsement of mandates, will have to prove exemption
  • Individuals will not be able to gather funds to bring a lawsuit
  • Wrote model language for Montana bill and SB 1669

 

Josh Houston, Texas Impact – Against

  • Would remove ability to set employment policies to protect health and religious position of workers
  • HB 155 makes vaccination policies unenforceable, e.g. could not require vaccinations of childcare workers, those going on trips
  • No compelling state interest in such a regulation

 

Dr. John Carlo, Texas Medical Association – On

  • Presents statement from Board of Trustees, consideration of patient safety, doesn’t support mandates, but does support local intervention allowing physicians to treat patients
  • HB 155 would impact ability of outreach activities where PPE is less effective, antibody tests are not reliable & provider says it should not be indication of or lack of immunity
  • US would not have existed without vaccine mandates, George Washington issued the first one for smallpox
  • Howard – Can you tell me why you are neutral?
    • Neutral because we’re looking specifically at the patient safety issue; hope there is a solution that speaks to specialized patients were there is no other solution than vaccines
  • Howard – So Chapter 224 would not apply to outreach activities?
    • No, would play into how you organize your workforce, would look for other alternatives for those with exemptions
  • Howard – If we had accurate antibody tests it could be an option, but don’t have those now?
    • Correct

 

Michelle Evans, Moms for Liberty – For

  • Have had several people in circle of relations who have been negatively impacted by federal mandate
  • Dell announced employees will have by December 8 to provide proof, no testing opt-out
  • Many workers will lose their jobs once the federal mandate goes into place
  • Live in Round Rock, have a rogue school board wanting to implement their own vaccine policy for the ISD
  • Paddie – This bill is specific to COVID vaccine, but are you opposed to all vaccine mandates?
    • Opposed to any mandate imposing a medical procedure on anyone
  • Paddie – So you don’t think any mandate is appropriate
    • Any reason they have is good enough

 

Rafael Pardeiro, Self – For

  • Bodily autonomy is sacrosanct
  • Runs a PT staffing pool in rural areas where employees are rare
  • Vaccine does not prevent transmission, logic of mandate is lacking
  • Staffing issues are not being properly considered

 

Cindy Phillips, Self – For

  • Originally registered against because bill wasn’t strong enough, would like to see strong amendments
  • Concerned about possibility of adverse events, not job of employers to protect health of employees

 

Dawn Bednars, Self – For

  • Changing registration to for in hopes of strong amendments
  • US government can’t force citizens to submit to medical treatment, especially vaccines under EUA; can still get COVID with the vaccine

 

Louise Joy, Health Care Attorney, Self – Against

  • COVID-19 is unprecedented, HB 155 would be imposing a restriction on a business and making decision about how businesses protect health & safety
  • Position of those wishing to protect health & safety is not being considered; if the legislature will not protect people, let businesses do this

 

James Gray, American Cancer Society – Against

  • Opposing for a number of reasons, primary concern is protection of cancer patients
  • Operate hotels for cancer patients across the state, serve 53k beds and needed to stop this during the pandemic
  • Put very strict vaccine requirements in place for these hotels to protect patients, HB 155 would hamper ability to provide for patients

 

Richard McKenzie, Self – For

  • No business recognizing validity of mandates, but this is the best we can do
  • Exploration of early treatments for COVID-19 like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin has been suppressed
  • Need to respect liberty of individuals, not seeing compelling reason for mandates

 

Gregory Porter, Self – For

  • Not seeing discussion of risks of vaccine, vaccine was not properly studied, no study on collective effect of vaccines on children
  • Seeing evidence of spread by those vaccinated, CDC is ignoring natural immunity; pharmaceutical companies want everyone to think they have the same risk
  • Need to say no to global corporations, federal government

 

Rep. Oliverson closes

  • Disappointing that COVID happened in an election year, issue has gotten politicized and science is not being recognized
  • Everyone who wants to be vaccinated probably has been, coercing rest of population by prohibiting participation in society and economy
  • Wonders how many companies would be willing to accept liability if they impose vaccine mandates
  • Florida is developing legislation, Arkansas just passed legislation allowing antibody exemptions, Montana has a prohibition, others are looking at this; need to do something
  • Will revise the penalty section and bring back scaled back or different enforcement mechanism, will work with stakeholders to clarify conscience exemption, will work with health care industry particularly with vulnerable populations
  • Howard – Is it not the case that the Senate still requires proof of vaccination?
    • Not sure, testing, but not vaccination
  • Howard – They’ve asked me for verification
  • Paddie – Thanks Rep. Oliverson, heard from diverse group of witnesses; not trying to figure out good and bad of vaccine, obviously legal issues will be worked on
  • Paddie – No solution to federal vs. state issue, having mandate for private business is troublesome; personally pro-vaccine for those that want it, but don’t want government telling businesses what to do, struggle with how to balance this

 

HB 155 left pending