In last night’s debate, Michelle Bachmann criticized Gov. Rick Perry for his very flawed decision to order all 6th grade girls in Texas to receive a vaccine for a sexually transmitted disease. Good.
But she accused him of doing it as a favor to a political friend and the drug company. Bad.
Michele Bachmann accused Rick Perry of using sixth-grade girls as profit engines for a drug company at the CNN/Tea Party Express debate, lacing into the Texas governor for having attempted to mandate the HPV vaccine for young teenagers.
“To have innocent little 12-year-old girls be forced to have a government injection through an executive order is just wrong,” Bachmann said. “Little girls who have a negative reaction to this potentially dangerous drug don’t get a mulligan.”
The Minnesota congresswoman went even further, accusing Perry of handing out favors to a company, Merck, represented by his former top aide, Mike Toomey.
“There was a big drug company that made millions of dollars because of this mandate,” Bachmann said. “The governor’s former chief of staff was the chief lobbyist for this drug company.”
Perry rightfully should be criticized for this horrible decision. But accusing him of doing it as a political favor is almost certainly untrue and misses the mark. The real issue is the morality of what he did and Perry’s view on the role and rights of government and executive power. The fact that Perry thinks that it is proper for government to to such a thing, even over the objections of parents is the real issue. Somebody ought to call him on it.
September 13, 2011 at 11:24 am
Didn't Perry say back in August that he regrets the decision to enact that mandate, and admitted the debacle taught him to be less hasty in wielding executive power? Does anyone else remember that?
September 13, 2011 at 12:40 pm
Perry ought to be praised for attempting to eliminate cancers caused by HPV. Vaccine-phobic parents have always been able to opt out of any vaccine, even the vaccine for the sexually transmitted disease routinely given to newborns.
September 13, 2011 at 12:48 pm
HPV is not caught or communicated casually, so why give everybody a vaccine that only sexually active individuals MIGHT need? It is making sexual activity by teens ordinary behavior.
September 13, 2011 at 1:06 pm
Brian – I remember – everyone should because he continues to tell us so.
September 13, 2011 at 1:43 pm
HPV causes many cancers including those of the mouth and throat. Since 1981 a vaccine for a sexually transmitted disease has been routinely given to all newborns throughout the land. This despite the fact that newborns are not at risk for contracting sexually transmitted diseases.
Vaccines are never brought to the voters for approval. Elimination of disease is a matter of public health and a main purpose of our government. The morality of the elimination of disease by government is praiseworthy.
September 13, 2011 at 2:58 pm
I think you're stealing a base there, Gil. While public health is a duty of government, that doesn't make the eradication of every disease the responsibility of government. The Gardasil vaccine is almost (if not entirely) geared only toward sexually transmitted disease that should not fall within such sweeping powers of the government.
September 13, 2011 at 3:01 pm
I reject the Hep B vaccine for my children, precisely because it is entirely unnecessary for newborns. STD's are not rampant contagions that cannot be contained, like airborne infections and diseases. They are avoidable through behavioral choices. That being the case, individuals should have the right to choose whether or not they wish to be vaccinated, particularly considering the fact that the Hep B vaccine is far from being without potentially devastating side effects.
From the CDC's own website:
Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS)
Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) has been reported after vaccination with Gardasil® . GBS is a rare neurologic disorder that causes muscle weakness. It occurs in 1-2 out of every 100,000 people in their teens. A number of infections have been associated with GBS. There has been no indication that Gardasil® increases the rate of GBS above the rate expected in the general population, whether or not they were vaccinated.
Blood Clots
There have been some reports of blood clots in females after receiving Gardasil®. These clots have occurred in the heart, lungs, and legs. Most of these people had a risk of getting blood clots, such as taking oral contraceptives (the birth control pill), smoking, obesity, and other risk factors.
Deaths
As of June 22, 2011 there have been a total 68 VAERS reports of death among those who have received Gardasil® . There were 54 reports among females, 3 were among males, and 11 were reports of unknown gender. Thirty two of the total death reports have been confirmed and 36 remain unconfirmed due to no identifiable patient information in the report such as a name and contact information to confirm the report. A death report is confirmed (verified) after a medical doctor reviews the report and any associated records. In the 32 reports confirmed, there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine and some reports indicated a cause of death unrelated to vaccination.
September 13, 2011 at 3:02 pm
I'm sorry, the above should read: "particularly considering the fact that the HPV vaccine…" not "Hep B".
September 13, 2011 at 3:06 pm
"Somebody ought to call him on it." Santorum did. In case you missed it: http://youtu.be/4Zf_LAvD7_M
September 13, 2011 at 3:16 pm
Mr. Garza is channeling Slick Rick from four years ago. We've heard it all before, but with better hair.
September 13, 2011 at 4:01 pm
Gil Garza; I think the risk of newborns is in the process of getting born, not in sexual activity. "Sexually transmitted disease" confuses matters. Silver nitrate used to be used regularly in the eyes of newborns to prevent them from getting gonorrhea from their mothers.
September 13, 2011 at 4:53 pm
I agree that Perry ought to be called on this, but his opponents really need to be careful how they go about doing it and who may be most helped by their doing it.
Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum provide a much-needed voice in this GOP nomination process – a voice that was heard loud and clear last night, if perhaps a bit too shrill at times in the case of Bachmann. Because of that, I hope they stay in throughout the primary season to continue to hold the frontrunners accountable, but the reality is that this is pretty much what their role is going to be limited to because neither of them are likely to win the nomination.
That leaves us with either Perry or Romney as the most likely (at least of the announced candidates) to face off against Obama. My fear is that if Bachmann and Santorum focus all of their fire on Perry, and continue to go after him as relentlessly as they did last night, they will ensure Romney's nomination. And, as I've stated on many previous occasions, Romney is the one candidate in the GOP field for whom I will never vote in a general election.
September 13, 2011 at 5:11 pm
Good grief, I just read about Bachmann's claiming that Gardasil causes "mental retardation" (I thought that term had fallen into disuse).
I take back everything I just wrote about her being a welcome voice in the primaries. She has turned what was a legitimate line of attack on Perry's misuse of his executive order power into a crusade against vaccination, pushing the discredited and debunked notion that there is a link between vaccines and developmental disabilities:
“Congresswoman Bachmann’s decision to spread fear of vaccines is dangerous and irresponsible,” said Evan Siegfried, a spokesman for the Global and Regional Asperger Syndrome Partnership. “There is zero credible scientific evidence that vaccines cause mental retardation or autism. She should cease trying to foment fear in order to advance her political agenda.”
At least Santorum had the good sense to defend vaccines as necessary to protect public health, choosing to distinguish HPV from other types of highly communicable diseases for which vaccines are properly mandated.
September 13, 2011 at 5:53 pm
People may need to deepen their spiritualities. But then again, what is perfect is the enemy of what is good.
September 13, 2011 at 6:28 pm
1.)Something that should be noted here is this: HPV is not exclusively a sexually transmitted disease. Some 30-40 types are transmitted through sex but NOT ALWAYS! This comes from my OB/GYN of many years. My daughter has HPV and contracted it before she became sexually active.
2.)Gov. Perry's executive order contained an "opt out" clause. People seem to forget this small little detail. He was not forcing girls to get this vaccine. Having that "opt out" clause, in fact, made parents aware of this vaccine, its advantages and its disadvantages. (While I do not agree with Gov. Perry's actions on a procedural level, I do believe he was trying to promote the common good.) I live in TX so I am very aware of the controversy. His actions have raised awareness of this horrible disease and that there is a vaccine that can help prevent its spread.
September 13, 2011 at 6:39 pm
Help me here: I am someone who has no education on this subject. But as one with a science-y background, I am a believer in vaccines.
I don't like the mandate, but the opt out clause covers that for me. If you can opt-out, then you are respecting the wishes of the parents. Excellent!
On the other hand, I have young kids and b/c I myself was raised by devout and strict Catholic parents, yet "snuck around" and did the exact oppososite of what I was told, I think I will want to make sure that my kids get this vaccine.
What if they disobey me? I don't want them to get a disease.
Besides, that list of of side effects, above, is NOT compelling at all. In fact, it seems to me that aspirin is more dangerous that this drug. None of the side-effects seem to be linked to the drug conclusively and 2 in 100,000? Those odds are great! Better than the odds that my children will not some day make a regretful mistake.
Someone tell where I am wrong, though, please because I want to see all sides to this and make a good choice. Thanks
September 13, 2011 at 7:59 pm
Hep B is a sexually transmitted disease that infants are at no risk of contracting and yet folks are fine with that vaccine. HPV causes many types of cancers and may be contracted without any sexual contact as has been pointed out but somehow the vaccine is pure evil.
If you think your child will never ever get Hep B or diphtheria or rubella or HPV you can opt out. That is your right as a parent. Nothing Rick Perry did put parental rights in danger or put parental morals in danger (unless your argument is that giving children the Hep B vaccine takes away parental rights and makes their children more likely to be sexually active). On the contrary, Perry to a huge step to eliminate many forms of cancers effecting millions of people.
Regarding the safety of HPV vaccine, I would encourage anyone interested to read the statement from the FDA, which can be found here: http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/ucm179549.htm
September 13, 2011 at 8:33 pm
I disagree. When your campaign manager heads to Merck (who gave 5k, the max, to your campaign) to work as a lobbyist and you're the first state in the nation to mandate this vaccine how could anyone not see the connection? Sarah Palin also commented on this crony capitalism.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/09/12/palin_perry_has_been_a_participant_in_government_waste.html
September 13, 2011 at 11:39 pm
If you're going to malign Perry's intentions because he had a staffer leave to become a lobbyist then you're gonna have a long list of politicians that you would similarly disqualify as a result. Since 2006, 41 state legislatures have introduced laws promoting or requiring insurance coverage for HPV vaccination. Virginia and DC have required it. Texas is certainly not alone in that regard. With 20 million people in the US infected with HPV, the trend seems to be for vaccination, not away from it.