Terminating Cdc Requirement for Proof of Covid-19 Vaccination for Foreign Travelers
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, it is interesting to hear the other side of the aisle talk about logic. What we are talking about today is whether to repeal the vaccine mandate on international travelers. Well, what is the logic of having a vaccine mandate on legal international travelers but not on the millions of people who are pouring across our border? Where is the logic in that? I don't see any logic.
It is time for us to join the rest of the free world. You want a list of countries that don't have this mandate? Australia, Japan, Mexico, Canada, Spain, Germany, France, Ukraine. I could go on and on. Am I memorizing a list of countries? No. I am telling you basically all of the countries in the world. In fact, dictatorships have already gotten rid of this vaccine mandate: Russia, Syria, China. Cuba even doesn't have this draconian xenophobic measure at the border.
Let's talk about the State of the Union Address last night. The President said: Today COVID no longer controls our lives. Gee, I wish that were true. I wish that were true.
Here is a letter I received--now, it is from a foreigner who is related to Americans: Dear sir, I am an Australian. My daughter married an American in September of 2020. My wife and I were not allowed to visit for the wedding. Subsequently, due to the U.S. ban on unvaccinated arrivals, I have not seen my daughter in over 2 years. I appreciate your attempts at overturning this harsh rule. I am sure I speak for many separated families.
Yes, he does. He speaks for tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of people who have been separated at our border because of this ridiculous, illogical, unscientific policy.
What else did the President say in his State of the Union Address last night? ``We opened our country back up.'' Well, we need to tell all of the tourism industry that we have opened our country back up because the U.S. Travel Association has stated this week, just this week, that it cost over $90 billion. This one policy has cost over $90 billion of revenue, of income to this country in tourism, and that is why they support getting rid of this ridiculous mandate.
What is the Democrats' argument over there? I have heard it all already. I see they are very smug and smiling. They bleat about democracy. They bleat on and on about democracy. Is this democracy?
Their best argument--virtually their only argument--is right here in ``The Whip's Daily Preview'' on the Democrat side: ``House Democrats have been stalwart in their defense of following the science over playing politics with COVID-19. The decision to end vaccine requirements for global travelers should be made by public health experts with real-time understanding of the situation. Hamstringing agencies from responding to ongoing or future threats that could impact the health and economic stability of America undermines our Nation.''
They are arguing that they are not qualified to vote on laws that affect the most basic human rights of people in this country and people wishing to visit this country.
Imagine that. Working so hard to get elected, preaching about democracy, and then getting here and saying: Do you know what? I don't think we should be voting on this because, well, I think the bureaucrats are probably more qualified than we are. The science is hard.
Science is hard. That is basically their argument.
Let's take their argument. Let's listen to the scientists, the bureaucrats. What does the World Health Organization, what does this collection of global scientists, say about this policy? This is real- time because it was January 30, 2023. They had a meeting and said No. 6 in their recommendations: ``Continue to adjust any remaining international travel-related measures, based on risk assessment, and to not require proof of vaccination against COVID-19 as a prerequisite for international travel.''
They love global government. You think the science over there would appeal to the World Health Organization, but if that doesn't work, let's listen to our own CDC, which said in August of last year: If you are deciding to quarantine or mask or any of these other things, it shouldn't be done with respect to vaccination status.
In other words, there is enough natural immunity, and there was in August, for the CDC to say we shouldn't discriminate based on vaccination status when determining policy.
I will just close with this: Let's not be hypocrites. We were all in this room last night, hundreds of us, with hundreds of visitors, and none of us were under a vaccine mandate.
Repeal this vaccine mandate. Vote for H.R. 185 and support the bill.
Mr. Chair, I include in the Record a report from the WHO Director- General, and a recommendation from the CDC for managing SARS-CoV-2 exposure.
Mr. Chair, I enter into the Recrod two articles: Statement on the Fourteenth Meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee Regarding the Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Pandemic
The WHO Director-General has the pleasure of transmitting the Report of the fourteenth meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR) Emergency Committee regarding the coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19).
Continue to adjust any remaining international travel- related measures, based on risk assessment, and to not require proof of vaccination against COVID-19 as a prerequisite for international travel.
Continue to support research for improved vaccines that reduce transmission and have broad applicability, as well as research to understand the full spectrum, incidence and impact of post COVID-19 condition, and to develop relevant integrated care pathways. Managing SARS-CoV-2 Exposures
CDC now recommends case investigation and contact tracing only in health care settings and certain high-risk congregate settings. In all other circumstances, public health efforts can focus on case notification and provision of information and resource to exposed persons about access to testing. Persons who have had recent confirmed or suspected exposure to an infected person should wear a mask for 10 days around others when indoors in public and should receive testing 5 days after exposure (or sooner, if they are symptomatic), irrespective of their vaccination status. In light of high population levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence (7, 16), and to limit social and economic impacts, quarantine of exposed persons is no longer recommended, regardless of vaccination status.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Indiana for yielding.
I find it somewhat ironic that the other side is complaining about the process during the debate on the amendment that the other side gets to offer by virtue of a decision in the Rules Committee to open up this process. So this is the process.
The gentleman from Indiana is correct. It is not a given; it has not been established that the CDC has this authority. There is no need for us to legislate beyond the intent of this bill.
The intent of this bill is to eliminate a Presidential order about a COVID vaccine for international travelers. There is no need for us, in this bill, to try and give the CDC additional authority. In fact, the bill is quiet on whether they have this authority, and that is a subject that is being debated in the courts right now.
I also want to point out that the order, as well as the gentleman's amendment, doesn't apply to immigrants. The order that the President has put in place on visitors doesn't apply to illegal immigrants to this United States, and neither would this gentleman's amendment.
So I think when you talk about science and logic, why is it that somebody who is coming here legally would be more of a threat than somebody who is coming here illegally?
So I urge a ``no'' on the amendment, and a ``yes'' on the bill, but mostly, certainly a ``no'' on this amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source