Will the Idaho Legislature convene over vaccine mandates? That may rest with senators
“Devastating” and “terrible” — that’s how critics described the impacts on businesses if a ban were enacted on vaccine mandates in Idaho.
But pressure from Lt. Gov. Janice McGeachin and some lawmakers has prompted leaders to consider reconvening the legislative session to bar employers from requiring vaccines. And the decision likely will rest with senators as they meet on Friday.
McGeachin last week issued a letter to House Speaker Scott Bedke, an Oakley Republican, urging him to reconvene the session after three large health care systems in Idaho announced COVID-19 vaccine requirements for their employees — to go along with other mandated immunizations.
In a press release Wednesday, McGeachin said the Legislature should reconvene to “protect Idahoans from medical tyranny.” She brought up an Oregon law that exempts some employees from vaccine requirements.
“Thousands of Idahoans are about to have their jobs and paychecks used as leverage to coerce them into making a medical decision that violates their conscience,” McGeachin said. “This idea of discriminating against and firing employees based on private and personal health decisions flies in the face of the principles of liberty and justice.”
The Idaho House already passed a milder bill earlier this year that would have barred companies with state contracts from vaccine mandates. That bill, sponsored by Rep. Priscilla Giddings, didn’t get a hearing in the Senate.
Another resolution, stating the Legislature’s opposition to vaccine mandates, also passed the House and not the Senate.
“We didn’t get consensus when we were in session,” Bedke said. “Looking out for the taxpayer, there should be consensus before we move forward. And that’s what we’re doing right now.”
Senate President Pro Tem Chuck Winder first told Idaho Reports that the Senate would caucus on Friday to discuss reconvening over vaccine mandates.
The regular legislative session ended in May on a questionable note — the House chose to recess, meaning legislators would return sometime before the end of the year, without needing Gov. Brad Little to call them back. But the Senate voted to end the session.
Winder told the Statesman on Tuesday that if the Senate does choose to reconvene, he wants the session to be limited to the issue at hand. But resuming the regular session likely would mean that legislators could introduce new bills and address whatever they wanted.
Bedke said that if legislators do reconvene, he expects them to try to pass other bills that don’t involve vaccine mandates. Some legislators feel that they left the property tax bill undone, he said.
The shorter a session can be, the better, Bedke said. That will rely on whether senators want to, “and that only happens when there’s a general consensus.”
In a response to emailed questions, McGeachin wrote that it’s up to legislators to decide what issues they want to address.
“Neither the Legislature nor I have any desire for it to become a full-time body,” McGeachin wrote.
Why senators opposed Giddings’ bill on vaccine mandates
A bill by Giddings, who is running for lieutenant governor, would have prevented companies with state contracts from firing, demoting, or refusing to hire or promote employees over whether they’re unvaccinated. The legislation would have applied to any vaccines, not just COVID-19 shots.
The House supported the bill in a 49-21 vote. It didn’t get a hearing in the Senate Commerce and Human Resources Committee.
Sen. Jim Patrick, a Twin Falls Republican and chairman of the committee, said the bill would have prevented companies from continuing policies that had been in place for years. Patrick also said he opposes “big government” and doesn’t believe the state should interfere with businesses.
“As a conservative, why would I want to tell businesses what to do?” Patrick told the Statesman. “If they decide that you should wear shoes and socks, OK. That should be their prerogative.”
Patrick said Giddings’ bill was “really bad” in the way it was written, and could have been modified to focus on COVID-19 or vaccines that had been approved by the Food and Drug Administration beyond emergency use.
Hospitals have required vaccines for public safety, Patrick said, but other businesses also mandate them for a variety of reasons. An activist group has been placing pressure on lawmakers to address such mandates, Patrick said, and a rally is scheduled at the Capitol on Thursday morning.
“Some of the legislators are saying, we don’t want to fight this group,” Patrick said. “Well, I’m going to do what’s right.”
McGeachin wrote that the bill “did not fail in the Senate.”
“It was put in a drawer by a committee chair who made the personal decision to ignore a bill that passed the House by more than a two-thirds majority,” McGeachin wrote. “Perhaps bills that pass one chamber by a significant majority should receive a hearing in the other chamber regardless of the chair’s personal feelings on the matter.”
Federal court poses challenge in banning vaccine requirements
Sen. Fred Martin, a Boise Republican who chairs the Senate Health and Welfare Committee, said the bill would have been “devastating” in its impacts by jeopardizing Medicaid and Medicare throughout the state and affecting hospital state contracts.
Martin also questions whether the Legislature can return to session or ban such business mandates. A recent federal court ruling in Texas was clear that hospitals have a right to mandate vaccines, he pointed out.
“I don’t see a path forward,” Martin said. “Our ability to come into session is definitely a question in my mind. And if we do go in and pass something, I see it being challenged immediately in the courts. And the state would lose.”
A federal judge last month tossed out a lawsuit against Houston Methodist Hospital and ruled that it had a right to require the COVID-19 vaccine of employees — a decision that attorneys have said is significant for cases across the country. The plaintiffs have appealed the ruling.
Bedke said that while “I don’t like mandates,” he doesn’t believe government should get involved in contracts between employees and employers.
“More government intervention is not the answer,” Bedke told the Statesman on Tuesday. “And I’m frankly surprised the champions of less government through the years are now advocating for a more-government solution.”
IACI opposes ban on vaccine mandates
The Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry, an influential business group, sent out a letter Tuesday opposing the Legislature’s effort to reconvene over vaccine mandates and commending Bedke, who is running for lieutenant governor.
Alex LaBeau, IACI president, wrote that requiring vaccines has been “a long, common and necessary practice ... for the safe operation of commerce.”
“Unfortunately, erroneous information continues to be pushed by those who would seek political gain at the expense of saving lives,” LaBeau wrote after criticizing McGeachin, who is running for governor. “They would even go so far as to create new government regulation on businesses to suit their personal ambitions.”
LaBeau told the Statesman that IACI’s members unanimously supported the letter. He said banning vaccine requirements would be “terrible” for businesses, which rely on such measures to prevent liability and conduct their work. Some employees may have to travel overseas, LaBeau said, where many countries require vaccinations.
House Majority Caucus Chair Megan Blanksma, a Hammett Republican, agreed with Bedke. She said she doesn’t believe the Legislature should reconvene at the moment.
“I’m hopeful that we have better solutions, and that we can deal with it in the private sector,” Blanksma told the Statesman on Tuesday, “and that we don’t have to insert government into the issue.”
House Majority Leader Mike Moyle, a Star Republican, told the Statesman that he supports returning to session to address vaccine requirements.
“Now are vaccines good? Absolutely. Are they important? Absolutely. But you ought to be able to decide,” Moyle said. “This is America. There ought to be freedom to choose.”
House Minority Leader Ilana Rubel, a Boise Democrat, said the message from some Republicans about protecting employees is “a complete flip” from what has been a years-long argument against adding nondiscrimination protection for LGBTQ employees in Idaho.
“It seems like a really startling about-face from what had always been put forth as the conservative principles of this state,” Rubel said. “I’m a little puzzled on how they reconcile that.”
