The Tyranny of the Mandate, One Jab at a Time
The Biden Administration's New OSHA's Vaccine Mandate
Over the last several months the Biden Administration has been a broken record, using every selling point they can concoct to convince individuals that are eligible to be vaccinated. While it has been a priority to get people vaccinated, the Biden Administration has stopped short of issuing mandates requiring people to be vaccinated. In December of 2020, President Biden even went on the record opposing vaccine mandates by stating: “I don’t think it should be mandatory. I wouldn’t demand it to be mandatory.” While President Biden is not known for being the most truthful politician, it at least gave all of us some comfort in knowing that the Federal government was not going to step in and require vaccinations.
Those words, however, ring hollow now that we have seen the actions that took place in September when the Biden Administration called on the Labor Department to develop a rule for employers with 100+ employees that requires their employees to receive the vaccine or be tested weekly. The result of the directive from the Biden Administration was an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) developed by OSHA which the following data is taken from.
I am vaccinated myself; it seems in the current political climate surrounding vaccines it is required to inform the reader of that before stating my reasons for going against the official pro-vaccine narrative. While I am obviously not anti-vaccine, I am strongly anti-vaccine mandate of any kind, especially OSHA’s ETS which was released last week. While this article does not go through all 154 pages (that I painstakingly read), it does highlight what I see as the most important parts that show the power that the government is wielding and the coercion that they are using to get individuals to do what they feel is best for them, even against their will.
GRAVE DANGER
The premise for why OSHA believes that they must act and has the authority to do so is that they believe that COVID causes a “grave danger” in the workplace. By designating COVID as a “grave danger” OSHA has the authority to make rules to protect workplaces from the threat. However, COVID is not listed as a “grave danger” for all employees, “OSHA has determined that many employees in the U.S. who are not full vaccinated against COVID-19 face grave danger from exposure.” Because only unvaccinated employees are in “grave danger” of COVID, OSHA sees it as their responsibility to mandate the vaccine which will move those unvaccinated workers out of the “grave danger” category.
According to the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, OSHA is tasked “to assure so far as possible every working man and woman in the Nation safe and healthful working conditions and to preserve our human resources.” It goes on to say that the task is to “reduce a significant risk of material health impairment, or a grave danger to employee health.” According to the ETS once COVID has been classified as a “grave danger” “the Act gives the Secretary “almost unlimited discretion to devise means to achieve the congressionally mandated goal.””
Once it is established that COVID is a “grave danger”, the Secretary of Labor is given leeway on the rules that can be implemented. According to the Court’s interpretation on the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, “A standard’s individual requirements need only be “reasonably related” to the purpose of ensuring a safe and healthful working environment.”
When you put the fact that the Secretary has “almost unlimited discretion” to make rules if the rule is “reasonably related” to the threat once it has been deemed a “grave danger” the power granted is nearly unlimited. When powers granted are nearly unlimited, we start to see, as with this mandate, the beginning of tyranny.
WHY 100 EMPLOYEES
According to the ETS, the new OSHA rule only applies to employers with over 100 employees because “OSHA is confident that employers with 100 or more employees have the administrative capacity to implement the standard’s requirements promptly.” Essentially OSHA started with employers with greater than 100 employees because it was low hanging fruit. These are the businesses that have the administrative capacity to push through the objective as quickly as possible.
While the standard has started with employers with over 100 employees, the ETS does give us a glimpse into the Administrations ultimate desires. In the request for comment section of the ETS, one of the questions that is asked is “should OSHA impose a strict vaccination mandate (i.e., all employers required to implement mandatory vaccination policies as defined in the ETS) with no alternative compliance option?” With that, not only are they signaling that they have the intention of requiring this for all employers, but they are also signaling their desire to eliminate the weekly testing option in lieu of vaccination.
The reasoning behind the 100-employee limit is logical when you are trying to push a directive through as fast as possible. Like the ETS says they wanted organizations that have the infrastructure in place to implement the new rule as quickly as possible. However, does this mean that unvaccinated workers in workplaces that have under 100 employees are not in “grave danger” of COVID? The whole premise of the ETS is that COVID is a “grave danger” to unvaccinated employees in the workplace, does the “grave danger” disappear when an office has 99 employees working in it?
A new rule like this cannot lack an enforcement mechanism necessary to coerce individuals and businesses to comply. According to an article from FOX News, fines for companies that are not complying with the ETS “could be as high as $14,000 per violation.” However, the Biden Administration and members of Congress are looking to drastically increase these fines in their $1.75 trillion Build Back Better plan. In the proposed legislation an employer would be fined “$70,000 for “serious violations” and $700,000 for willful and repeated violations.” With these increased fines, it leaves businesses no choice but to comply with the ETS or risk being shuttered.
SCIENCE?
The most eye-opening statements in the ETS come from the section on the Pertinent Legal Authority. One would assume when making such drastic rules which impact the incomes of millions of Americans, that clear scientific justification would need to be provided for doing so. However, the ETS states that: “the agency is not required to support its conclusions “with anything approaching scientific certainty,” and has the “prerogative to choose between conflicting evidence.”” The ETS goes on to say that “The Court also noted that “the possibility of drawing two inconsistent conclusions from the evidence does not prevent administrative agency’s finding from being supported by substantial evidence.””
This gives administrative bodies within the Executive Branch, not only OSHA, the ability to pick and choose which scientific evidence they want to use for their standards and throw out any conflicting evidence that goes against their opinions. The Biden Administration wants all citizens to be vaccinated, by using OSHA they have been given essentially unlimited power to force regulations on employers as long as it can be shown in their chosen scientific evidence to be “reasonably related” to stop the spread, even if conflicting evidence is present.
THERE IS HOPE
There was glimmer of hope over the weekend regarding the new OSHA mandate. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, based out of New Orleans, Louisiana has put a temporary stay on the OSHA vaccine mandate. While this is only a temporary stay, it does provide some hope that the courts will rule that OSHA’s ETS is unconstitutional.
MY TAKE
When this ETS is pieced together in its entirety, essentially what we have learned is that; the Secretary of Labor has unlimited discretion to create an ETS through OSHA that impacts the livelihood of millions of families if they deem it a “grave danger” and that the rules created are “reasonably related” to minimizing that danger. Along with that the Courts have also stated that the agency can use whatever scientific evidence they choose to show it is a “grave danger” and can choose whichever scientific evidence they wish if there are conflicting reports, regardless of how flawed it could potentially be.
While there has been a temporary stay by the Courts, I am not confident that if this arrives at the Supreme Court that the correct decision will be made to overturn the rule. If the Supreme Court rubber stamps this ETS we have all but lost the checks and balances that were created to stop one branch of government from having unlimited power.
Even if the ETS is struck down by the Courts, how many people will get the vaccine and how many businesses will implement the mandate earlier than the January 4th deadline against their will? These people and businesses are being coerced into doing things against their will which results in a loss of their Liberty. Even if the Courts rule against the mandates once you receive the vaccine there is no going back, you cannot reverse course at that point regardless of a Court’s decision.
If the ETS is not stuck down by the courts what is our recourse? For people to quit their jobs? For employers that are against this mandate to refuse to comply? At the risk of employees not being able feed their families or a business owner not being able to stay open while paying massive fines, there is nothing these individuals can do but accept tyranny.
What we can do is reach out to our Representatives to show our disapproval of the actions of the Biden Administration in hopes of them taking action to stop the tyranny from taking place. Also, we must get out to vote to send a clear signal to the Biden Administration and Congress in the mid-term elections in 2022 that we will not sit idly by as they strip our freedom away.