House Panel Approves Measure to Rehire Troops Fired for Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine

With the military facing a recruitment crisis, Rep. Nancy Mace called the Pentagon’s ‘failure’ to rehire these troops ‘unacceptable.’..

The House Armed Services Committee adopted an amendment in the annual defense policy bill on May 22 that, if cleared through Congress, would force the Pentagon to rehire U.S. troops who were fired for refusing a COVID-19 vaccine.

The measure was adopted late on May 22 by lawmakers on the panel, who marked up and advanced their version of the annual appropriations bill, authorizing a defense budget of $849.8 billion.

The 2025 bill, titled the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act, will serve as the base text for forthcoming debate as it makes its way through Congress.

On May 22, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), who offered the amendment on rehiring veterans separated under the vaccine mandate policy, confirmed its adoption. During the debate, she said the measure would direct the Pentagon to develop a strategy to recruit from among the thousands of servicemembers who “were made veterans overnight” under the COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

“This amendment seeks to address the loss of skilled, experienced personnel who were willing and able to serve their country and overcome the resistance of the Department in recruiting from this population,” Ms. Mace said ahead of a panel vote.

“The Department has so far failed to recruit a significant number of servicemembers separated under the COVID mandate. This is unacceptable.”

Congress ended the Pentagon’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate in 2022 and last year directed Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin to create a path back to service for those who were separated for refusing the vaccine.

On April 30, Mr. Austin told the panel that he didn’t know of any efforts to recruit servicemembers who had been previously let go under the mandates. Ms. Mace said on May 22 that this was “disappointing.”

The measure faces an uncertain future later this year when the committee meets with the Democrat-led Senate Armed Services Committee to reconcile differences in the National Defense Authorization Act before full passage in Congress.

According to the Pentagon, during fiscal year 2023, the military services collectively missed recruiting goals by about 41,000 recruits. This was attributed to a “smaller eligible population.”

Other reasons stated included the attractiveness of jobs in the private sector, younger generations having “low trust” in the military and following other career paths, and younger people having fewer families who served, decreasing their wish to follow suit.

House Armed Services Committee Chair Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) said the 2025 defense spending bill considers the quality of life for servicemembers, boosting compensation money, improving housing, expanding health care and child care access, and other issues that directly affect troops and their families. This is in addition to strengthening the military to face challenges posed by China, Iran, Russia, and North Korea, according to Mr. Rogers.

“Strengthening our military and investing in our defense is how we send our adversaries a message that we will not be intimidated,” he added.

The lawmakers authorized a defense budget of $849.8 billion in line with the debt ceiling agreement made earlier this year.

“The House Armed Services Committee adopted an amendment in the annual defense policy bill on May 22 that, if cleared through Congress, would force the Pentagon to rehire U.S. troops who were fired for refusing a COVID-19 vaccine.”

They weren’t discharged for refusing the injections, article 92, they were discharged for failure to obey a direct order. The original religious reason didn’t hold water because they were wrong in what they were complaining about. And that had nothing to do with the vaccine as it didn’t contain their supposed problem and hadn’t since 1985. They had a right to refuse the order if the vaccine contained the cells they professed, but it didn’t so they didn’t have a reason to refuse at that time.

If the public actually knew what the militay members were getting they’d be shocked anyway. But the claims made at that time were not valid. So the reason for refusal wasn’t either and still isn’t. Cells were not used to create the vaccine after 1985 as the vaccine itself was used. And military members that went after this religious excemption never saw any of the cell made products.

wy69

Sorry, not buying. The Injection was not good (preventive) medicine and those orders should not have been issued. This was experimental and informed consent did not take place, and right of refusal should have been allowed. I applaud the courage of those who refused.

The annual influenza vaccine was not held in much regard by healthcare professionals during my career. Common knowledge circulated how to evade it and I never saw any command response.

The religious exemptions should have been accepted, period. Certainly no inquisitions should have taken place. Frankly, there should have been a much broader exemption - “I choose not to.” The perceived risks to readiness were misperceptions - but now appear to have become real as one result of the orders and how they were executed.

It will be interesting to see how many return.

As for assurances that no abortive tissue was used in testing and development, the many violations of scientific principals and practices that have already taken place in this entire “COVID” phenomenon leave those assurances sounding both faint and futile.

A lot of things in your post.

“...informed consent did not take place...”

They were given the option of refusing the injection. But it would have constituted a bad conduct discharge. The troops signed the contract and refused an order, not the use of the vaccine.

Also, the information I gave you in the thread was truth. The original “religious” refusal was not part of the military system when the reason for refusal didn’t exist. Their complaint for refusal was based upon the use of cells in the vaccine which hadn’t been done for well over a 30 years.

“The annual influenza vaccine w2as a mixture of as many as 4 vaccines to cover what they thought would hit the next year in Febuary of the previous year. And they knew that over 200 were coming through so they guessed at the worst. As for the command response, numbers proved they should have.

The overall burden of influenza (flu) for the 2021-2022 season was an estimated 9.4 million flu illnesses, 4.3 million flu-related medical visits, 100,000 flu-related hospitalizations, and 4,900 flu deaths. The military mandated the vaccine for only 15 months from August 2021 through January 2023. COVID-19 was listed as the underlying cause in 415,399 deaths during 2021. But being a military troop, and having an understanding of bio warfare, (NBC), the intention of it is not neccessarily to kill, but to disable the fighting man/woman. And the unknowledgeable efforts of troops to misuse the religious angle accomplished that by increasing TDY’s and short moves downrange for some and others didn’t do their job.

“The religious exemptions should have been accepted, period.”

It was, and they were discharged. But no excemption should be accepted at face value. And this was one. It only became an inquisition when the vaccine was misidentified by someone and people were trying to take advantage of it to get out of trips downrange. And that made it harder for the troops that fullfilled their contracts, and had to go back far more than they would if the exemptors had done what they said they would do.

“As for assurances that no abortive tissue was used in testing and development, the many violations of scientific principals and practices that have already taken place in this entire “COVID” phenomenon leave those assurances sounding both faint and futile.”

Then prove them wrong. My info comes from numerous sources from the AMA and the CDC. You are working with conjecture, not fact or even an investigation for proof of the use of cells in the vaccines past 1985. Need more than that otherwise it is a rumor.

wy69

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.