Speaker of the House Spencer Gosch has announced his support of a special session for COVID legislation, and is proposing his own measure to place before the legislature, one which would apparently hide COVID vaccination status from employers.
Rep. Gosch’s bill seeks to make one’s vaccine status “confidential” under any and all circumstances, except for in rare circumstances as determined by the South Dakota Department of Health.
State legislators seeking to force a special session on the issue of vaccine mandate bans face an uphill battle. To get a special session, 2/3rds of state legislators in each chamber would have to agree to it, or Governor Kristi Noem could call one herself. The State Senate likely would not have the votes to bring legislators back for a special session, and Governor Noem has already signaled her opposition to a more extensive COVID-19 vaccine mandate ban.
So, as I’m reading this, I have to think that we’re hearing a lot of political posturing that has little basis in the real world.
Nevermind the fact that a special session won’t be happening, as they’ll probably find it challenging to get 2/3 of the House to agree, much less the Senate.
S.D. banana republic-ans—
Just when you think SD republicans can’t be any stupider…
Don’t lump them all together.
No way are there 2/3 of BOTH chambers for a special session. Don’t special sessions cost like $100,000 a day?
That’s why I call it posturing. The house will be tough to get 2/3, the Senate I think that’s impossible. Even on the outside chance they get both of them, the governor has stated her position very clearly and would likely veto any legislation of this nature.
Conditions are changing. The data in inflecting. The governor’s office is ready to be questioned on the efficacy of the vaccines (Forbes recently reported it’s 39%, not enough to avoid a murder charge after a mandate).
And he became speaker of the house how???? Idiocy!
DANGER WILL ROBINSON.
Call your Senators and Representatives.
Ask them to find a solution to this difficult and pressing issue.
We’ve got Bernie Sanders stampeding Congress towards creating a Socialist America and these guys are obsessed with nonsense issues that will not exist a year from now. They’re children, mesmerized by a backyard magician’s sleight of hand while his partners steal the parents blind.
Jimmy Carter 2.0 is running America and there’s not a Reagan in sight.
Obviously HIPPA rules only matter until they don’t. Sort of like Marijuana on the Schedule “1” list until States say screw the Federal Government!
I’m thinking we the people rule just starting meaning something again.
Charlie, the Privacy Rule under HIPAA applies to the disclosures made by your health care provider, not the questions your employer may ask.
Do we really need a new law or code to govern the when, what, and where we wish to govern vaccines? I have thought long and hard about this subject over the past year, as a business minded person my self, I would not want more regulations on the business community.
However, whether it is allowing businesses to force vaccines on others, or giving the citizens the free choice to get the vaccine or not, truth be told, the people have the guaranteed right to work in this state as protected by Article 6, Section 2 of the South Dakota Constitution.
What the section really says in so many words, is that “you” the Citizen of this Great State, have the right to contract to any individual, company, organization you wish to contract with regardless of the opinion of any labor union, organization, or association. You have the right to ‘reserve’ your right to manage your healthcare, medical care, lifestyle as freely as you wish regardless of what your employer may believe.
Anyone who has ever written a contract knows that you may at anytime put in ‘reserve’ clauses in the contract making known to the other side of your concerns, your rights, your notices of how you expect to perform your job, yet alone manage your personal medical care.
You also have Article 6, Section 1 – which basically says All men and women are equal, and all have the right to their inherent rights regardless of the opinions of others, and all rights shall be protected by the S.D Constitution at all times where you wish to reserve your right to enforce them, meaning you place on notice you intend to do so.
Do we really need a need a state law to enforce this? No, do we need a state law to reserve rights where we need extra enforcement? No, but at what cost are we willing to stand on your rights to make sure, that we shall at all costs. If we are not willing to protect those rights, then government may at anytime attempt to take those rights away.
I have always defended an Americans right to place any law on the agenda for public discussion, and I respect the House Speaker’s attempt to place this on the agenda, its an important topic to many people, and for that, we owe it as a Sovereign People to honor the wishes of those who wish to make this a public discussion.
Whether or not we hold a Special Legislative session or not, I proudly honor the request to place this item on the legislative docket for the very least, the Regular Session.
Always stand up for your rights, cause one day, you may find yourselves losing those rights, cause government will always attempt to steal them, take them away, let alone become to tyrannical.
We got to honor the Founding Fathers wisdom, words, and beliefs if we are to Make America Great Again, and yes, that means going against the establishment by all means.
Traditions are made to be broken, they are not guaranteed, as a proud supporter of both the U.S Constitution, and the State Constitution, I simply place my “Rights” above any Political Party that may attempt to come between Myself, My God, My Liberty.
Sincerely,
Mike Zitterich
Conservative
employers also have the right to surprise you with drug tests, you know.
of course you can refuse but they’ll fire you
Drug tests are typically not lethal, and they function as claimed/intended.
The shots are lethal to thousands, and cause severe harm in many others.
The CEO is Pfizer has stated that he will not take his own shot.
They are not vaccines.
They are experiments.
Nuremberg applies.
If we wish.
“Do we really need a new law or code to govern the when, what, and where we wish to govern vaccines?”
Did we need one for murder?
Fraud?
Extortion?
When one successfully questions the justification for the shots and the origins of the virus, it implores the deep thinking person toward conservatism on this issue.
This should already be covered by HIPPA.
It’s an act of violence against the body to force a shot, anyway, of any kind.
Dear Mike;
Very thoughtful piece.
Thank you.
If we assume these experimental genetic therapies work as stated, you are correct.
But an employer cannot assault or kill an employee as a condition of employment.
Firefighters wear PPE, but their PPE works.
Vaccines are used by the medical industry as easy money to recoup lost investment in expensive therapies and equipment.
At the same time, they generally don’t seem to recommend that works; health measures like vitamins, exercise, good water, and nature. This works for the vast majority of ailments emanating from poor food/nutrition and sedentary lifestyle.
The medical industry has earned the mistrust.
Sincerely,
John
I think a debate would be appropriate but during the regular session, not a special session.
The Senate does not appear to be on board and neither is the Governor….but maybe after some debate an acceptable form could be found over time.
Special sessions should be emergency and widely popular not controversial measures.
It is hard to say something nice about this idea and its advocates and it is Sunday so I am not going to say anything.
What qualifies as controversial? Are people calling their representatives? Is the public more informed than politicians in the bubble?
What is the relationship between controversial and justified in this case?
Why wouldn’t controversial issues specifically be the scope of the special session?
If this is a bioweapon (it is) that was released and needs time to work (it does) and we can stop it with a special session (we can), why not?
you have advanced every lunatic idea one can find in a google search, and seem to have come up with a few nobody else has ever thought of.
Did you know you can protect yourself from coronavirus by wearing your raincoat inside out and eating newspapers? the ink has antiviral properties.
What happened to the crazy claims by New Approach South Dakota and potheads that smoking weed will make one immune to COVID or lesson the effects of COVID?
Has anyone considered it may not be the business owner deciding weather or not to mandate vaccinations, but rather their insurance companies, or their legal team?
***the owner decides major issues with counsel from those listed and many others every day, but I don’t think an insurance company or lawyer can go rouge without the owners consent. Just saying
****rogue