Posted on 06/19/2011 1:02:01 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
When Gov. Rick Perry issued an executive order in 2007 requiring all Texas girls to receive a vaccine against the human papillomavirus before entering the sixth grade, lawmakers balked and blocked it.
Critics said the vaccine, Merck & Co.'s Gardasil, was too new to declare safe. Some said too that Perry's order would infringe on parental rights or give girls a false sense of security, leading them to be sexually active too young.
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, one of Perry's opponents in the GOP gubernatorial primary, frequently slams Perry's stilled order.
Perry has stood by his action, most recently casting it as having created an optional vaccination requirement.
"That piece of legislation was not mandatory, in the sense of when you can say no, something's not mandatory," he said during the second Republican gubernatorial debate Jan. 29.
A just-say-no gubernatorial order? We decided to check.
What we found: On Feb. 2, 2007, Perry issued an executive order — not a piece of legislation, as he said — requiring the Texas Health and Human Services Commission to adopt rules mandating all girls entering sixth grade to receive a vaccination against the types of HPV, a sexually-transmitted virus, that causes most cases of cervical cancer and genital warts.
The order included an opt-out "in order to protect the right of parents to be the final authority on their children's health care." Perry ordered the Department of State Health Services to allow parents dissenting for philosophical or religious reasons to request a conscientious objection affidavit form. That form, which has been available since 2003, enables parents to enroll their children in public school even if they lack state-required immunizations. It's automatically granted as long as parents provide all required information.
According to the Department of State Health Service's 2008-09 immunization report, which uses data from kindergarten and seventh-grade students at 1,300 independent school districts and 800 private schools, 0.28 percent of the students filed conscientious objection forms.
Parents must renew exemption affidavits every two years to maintain their validity, according to Allison Lowery, assistant press officer at the Texas Department of State Health Services.
We thought the opt-out form for public-school students proved Perry correct until we learned that not all private schools accept the affidavit. That means some private schools may not allow their students to exempt themselves from any state-required vaccinations. Some 15 percent of more than 1 million Texas girls in fifth through 12th grade in 2008 were enrolled in private schools, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
According to a 2006 Texas Attorney General's opinion: "A private school that does not accept state tax funds is not required to accept for enrollment a child who has received an exemption from the immunizations required by the Texas Health and Safety Code."
In its policy for Catholic schools, the Catholic Diocese of Austin states: "Immunizations are not in conflict with the Catholic faith. Conscientious objections or waivers, which may be permissible for enrollment in public schools, do not qualify as an exception to this policy." Catholic schools in the diocese do accept medical exemptions, meaning if the immunization could somehow harm the child, it's not required to enroll.
We wondered if the diocese's policy in favor of requiring state-mandated immunizations would have extended to refusing the opt-out form for girls subject to the HPV vaccination.
Perry aides may have had the same question. According to internal e-mails published online by Hutchison's campaign (also obtained by the Austin American-Statesman under Texas open records laws in 2007), Brandon LeBlanc, then the governor's community affairs public liaison, wrote Feb. 6, 2007: "I don't have an answer for the questions I'm getting regarding private schools. Apparently Catholic schools in particular will require all state vaccines, but won't except (sic) the exemptions. My first inclination, assuming this is true, is that this is for the parents and the schools to sort out. Is there a better answer to this 'problem'?"
Nora Belcher, then assistant director at the Governor's Office of Budget, Planning and Policy, replied: "I believe in the short term your answer is the correct one, plus, enrolling in Catholic school is a CHOICE (for parents, anyway)."
In February 2007, the Roman Catholic Bishops of Texas came close to saying they wouldn't require the vaccine, issuing a statement recommending that "civil authorities should leave this decision to parents."
But would parochial schools absolutely have left that particular vaccination decision to parents? Margaret McGettrick, director of education at the Texas Catholic Conference, the statewide association of the Roman Catholic diocese in Texas, recently said the superintendents, bishops and accreditation commission at the association responsible for setting school policies never formulated policy specific to the HPV vaccine.
McGettrick said "it's a non-issue for us" because the HPV vaccine was never added to the state's list of required immunizations once lawmakers froze the order until the starting date of the 2011 regular legislative session.
Allison Castle, Perry's press secretary, said: "We consider (the order) null and void and (Perry) will not pursue it in the future."
En breve: Perry did issue an order requiring schoolgirls receive the HPV vaccine. In arguing that his order was not a mandate, Perry points to the Conscientious Objection to Immunization form that lets parents of public school students decline immunizations without consequence. The burden to file and refile the notarized forms on time falls on the parents.
However, our research determined that it's not certain the opt-out would have been accepted for the 15 percent of Texas girls attending private schools. Also unknown: Whether every Catholic school would have allowed students subject to Perry's order to abstain from the three HPV shots in the vaccination series.
Ultimately, the governor issued an order for the Health and Human Services Executive Commissioner to "adopt rules that mandate the age appropriate vaccination of all female children for HPV prior to admission to the sixth grade."
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, a mandate is "a clear instruction, authorization or direction." Perry says the executive order wasn't mandatory, which, according to Webster, means "demanded or required."
But that's what Perry's order did: it set up a requirement. Just because there's a loophole — a way to "say no," in the governor's parlance — doesn't mean the requirement doesn't exist. Physical education classes are also mandatory to graduate high school, but if you have any number of health conditions, you can skip the timed mile.
We rate Perry's claim Barely True.
Very interesting tidbit.
Politicheck belongs to Times Publishing Co. They also have a “journalist” school which is churning out journolist assistants. I think it’s called Poytner or something similar.
What I get from Perry. Here’s the picture I have.
Bilderberg loves Perry because he signed an executive order forcing girls to get vaccinations for STD’s. Bilderberg loves candidates with that dictatorial spirit, and loves that he’d do it to enrich big pharma. Add in big ol highway, the trans Texas corridor, owned by foreigners, and it’s globalist win win all around for Bilderberg.
I’d almost go as far as to say sinister for Perry. Might be worse than Romney, not on the known liberal scale, but on the sinister globalist NWO scale. Romney is pushing the Mormon agenda, on top of pure Big Government Liberal Republicanism, but Perry seems to have the globalist playbook and would move to implement NWO goals.
From Post #32: Just because obamacare can be waived makes it no less a mandate. What would have been the difference?
Having an optout makes it no less a mandate. Most people would not go to the trouble of seeking an optout because it is a hassle and believe it or not, there are still people who think the government knows best. That might be more of an indictment of parents, but the government should not be in the position of forcing parents to make uinformed choices about the health of their children. The fact remains that had he succeeded and the dangers of this vaccine had come to light AFTER these children had ben forced to submit to these shots, it would have been perry on the hook, not the parents who trusted him to do the right thing.
And I STILL wonder why perry would have done such a thing when so little was known about it. It never seemed quite right from the gitgo.
With all due respect cw, that argument about illegal is the very same one used by Clinton, Weiner etc and it’s a last resort to cover up rot.
It may not have been ‘illegal’ but, the appearance of impropriety is there (if the assertion is true) also it’s a conflict of interest. Elected officials have an obligation and responsibility to avoid both.
“But, could you please educate me on which politician deserves your vote based on the criteria you set regarding “backpedaling”?”
That he would try to order young girls and parents to do something that would be, in my opinion, very risky to their health tells me everything I need to know about him. It is the classical I-Know-Best mindset of a ruler.
Now that we wants the highest Rulership in the land he realizes that bullying families probably wasn’t the best idea.
If he would order girls to take a risky drug, then what other fun would he have with the Presidential executive order pen?
Money.
“I don’t, but I know my nephew, who was so severely damaged by a “mandated” DPT shot that at the age of 27, he functions at a 2 year old level.
Nobody’s doing that to my children.”
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This needs repeating! Any politician who would force this on little girls cannot be trusted.
There was also nothing illegal in Massachusetts adopting a health-insurance mandate either.
It just proves that neiter governor is a conservative.
I have a “conscientious objection” to nominating or electing Rick Perry to the POTUS for “philosophical or religious reasons” and I don’t need an “affidavit form”.
Is the Mass Insurance an opt-out one like the vaccine?
I am curious. Had this been attempted by a democrat governor in any state in the country, how would you feel about it then?
This was a conscious decision by perry. He only backed down because he had a HUGE fight on his hands, not for any other reason. But suppose he hadn’t? Suppose he was a dem in a state controlled by dems and this had gone into effect. Suppose you had a nine year old daughter. How would you defend it?
Anyone who so freely twists facts should be challenged "Pastor Brooks".
You are making up fairy tales.
How can I answer all those, “what ifs?”
Yup. You can apply for a waiver....just like you had to plead with Texas in order to "opt-out".
Just admit that what Perry did on this single issue was dangerous and not conservative.
Sounds an awful lot like this other dude I know who lives in TX and was Prez once upon a time. Maybe its true that everything is bigger in Texas.
Tricky, tricky. Nah. you can’t opt out of romneycare, BUT, you don’t need to because if you *can’t afford it,* the STATE, meaning the TAXPAYERS, *subsidize* it for you. Gee. How swell is that?
With all due respect ow, Rick Perry isn't Bill Clinton or Rep Weiner. To suggest a comparison is silly.
Would Sarah Palin endorse Clinton or Weiner for office?
You were checkmated but nice try.
But someone will still foot the bill and YOU still are in the program.
NOT the same.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.