I issued an Executive Order prohibiting vaccine mandates by ANY entity in Texas.
— Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) October 11, 2021
I also added the issue to the Special Session agenda.
The COVID-19 vaccine is safe, effective, & our best defense against the virus, but should always remain voluntary & never forced. pic.twitter.com/8hHHLyebCk
Executive Order prohibiting vaccine mandates by ANY entity in Texas
11,594 Views |
99 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by petebaker
https://gov.texas.gov/uploads/files/press/EO-GA-40_prohibiting_vaccine_mandates_legislative_action_IMAGE_10-11-2021.pdf
GOVERNOR GREG ABBOTT
Mr. Joe A. Esparza
Deputy Secretary of State
State Capitol Room 1E.8
Austin, Texas 78701
Dear Deputy Secretary Esparza:
Pursuant to his powers as Governor of the State of Texas, Greg Abbott has issued the following:
Executive Order No. GA-40 relating to prohibiting vaccine mandates, subject to
legislative action.
The original executive order is attached to this letter of transmittal.
Respectfully submitted,
October 11, 2021 FILED IN TH UFF ICE OF THESECRETARY OF STATE
-_4O'CLOCK
2O2i
the Governor
Attachment
POST OFFICE Box 12428 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 512-463-2000 (VOICE) DIAL 7-1-1 FOR RELAY SERVICESxrcuthr 1rirrBY THEGOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF TEXAS
Executive Department
Austin, Texas
October 11, 2021
EXECUTIVE ORDER
GA4O
Relating to prohibiting vaccine mandates,
subject to legislative action.
WHEREAS, I, Greg Abbott, Governor of Texas, issued a disaster proclamation on March
13 , 2020, certifying under Section 4 1 8.014 of the Texas Government Code that the
novel coronavirus (COVID- 19) poses an imminent threat of disaster for all Texas
counties; and
WHEREAS, in each subsequent month effective through today, I have renewed the
COVID-19 disaster declaration for all Texas counties; and
WHEREAS, I have issued a series of executive orders aimed at protecting the health and
safety of Texans, ensuring uniformity throughout Texas, and achieving the least
restrictive means of combatting the evolving threat to public health; and
WHEREAS, COVID-19 vaccines are strongly encouraged for those eligible to receive
one, but must always be voluntary for Texans; and
WHEREAS, I issued Executive Orders GA-35, GA-38, and GA-39 to prohibit
governmental entities and certain others from imposing COVID- 19 vaccine mandates or
requiring vaccine passports; and
WHEREAS, in yet another instance of federal overreach, the Biden Administration is
now bullying many private entities into imposing COVID-19 vaccine mandates, causing
workforce disruptions that threaten Texas' s continued recovery from the COVID- 19
disaster; and
WHEREAS, countless Texans fear losing their livelihoods because they object to
receiving a COVID- 1 9 vaccination for reasons of personal conscience, based on a
religious belief, or for medical reasons, including prior recovery from COVID-19; and
WHEREAS , through Chapter 16 1 of the Texas Health and Safety Code, as well as other
laws including Chapters 38 and 5 1 of the Texas Education Code, the legislature has
established its primary role over immunizations, and all immunization laws and
regulations in Texas stem from the laws established by the legislature; and
WHEREAS, the legislature has taken care to provide exemptions that allow people to opt
out of being forced to take a vaccine for reasons of conscience or medical reasons; and
WHEREAS, I am adding this issue to the agenda for the Third Called Session of the
legislature that is currently convened so that the legislature has the opportunity to
consider this issue through legislation; and
WHEREAS, I will rescind this executive order upon the effective date of such legislation;
FILED IN THE OFFiCE OF ThS,... SECRETARY OF STATE4 :
OCT 1 1 2021Governor Greg Abbott Executive Order GA-40
October 1 1 , 202 1 Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Greg Abbott, Governor of Texas, by virtue of the power and
authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas, do hereby order
the following on a statewide basis effective immediately:
1. No entity in Texas can compel receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine by any
individual, including an employee or a consumer, who objects to such
vaccination for any reason of personal conscience, based on a religious
belief, or for medical reasons, including prior recovery from COVID-19.
I hereby suspend all relevant statutes to the extent necessary to enforce
this prohibition.
2. The maximum fine allowed under Section 4 1 8. 173 of the Texas
Government Code and the State' s emergency management plan shall
apply to any "failure to comply with" this executive order. Confinement
in jail is not an available penalty for violating this executive order.
3. This executive order shall supersede any conflicting order issued by
local officials in response to the COVID-19 disaster. Pursuant to
Section 418.016(a) of the Texas Government Code, I hereby suspend
Sections 418.1015(b) and 418.108 of the Texas Government Code,
Chapter 8 1 , Subchapter E of the Texas Health and Safety Code, and any
other relevant statutes, to the extent necessary to ensure that local
officials do not impose restrictions in response to the COVID-19 disaster
that are inconsistent with this executive order.
This executive order does not supersede Executive Orders GA-13, GA-37, GA-38, or GA-
39. This executive order shall remain in effect and in full force unless it is modified,
amended, rescinded, or superseded by the governor. This executive order may also be
amended by proclamation of the governor.
Given under my hand this the 1 ith
day of October, 2021.
GREG ABBOTT
Governor
ATTESTED BY:
Deputy ecretary of State
FILED IN THE ONL.SECRETARY OF STATE
O'CLOCK
OCT 1 1 2021
GOVERNOR GREG ABBOTT
Mr. Joe A. Esparza
Deputy Secretary of State
State Capitol Room 1E.8
Austin, Texas 78701
Dear Deputy Secretary Esparza:
Pursuant to his powers as Governor of the State of Texas, Greg Abbott has issued the following:
Executive Order No. GA-40 relating to prohibiting vaccine mandates, subject to
legislative action.
The original executive order is attached to this letter of transmittal.
Respectfully submitted,
October 11, 2021 FILED IN TH UFF ICE OF THESECRETARY OF STATE
-_4O'CLOCK
2O2i
the Governor
Attachment
POST OFFICE Box 12428 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 512-463-2000 (VOICE) DIAL 7-1-1 FOR RELAY SERVICESxrcuthr 1rirrBY THEGOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF TEXAS
Executive Department
Austin, Texas
October 11, 2021
EXECUTIVE ORDER
GA4O
Relating to prohibiting vaccine mandates,
subject to legislative action.
WHEREAS, I, Greg Abbott, Governor of Texas, issued a disaster proclamation on March
13 , 2020, certifying under Section 4 1 8.014 of the Texas Government Code that the
novel coronavirus (COVID- 19) poses an imminent threat of disaster for all Texas
counties; and
WHEREAS, in each subsequent month effective through today, I have renewed the
COVID-19 disaster declaration for all Texas counties; and
WHEREAS, I have issued a series of executive orders aimed at protecting the health and
safety of Texans, ensuring uniformity throughout Texas, and achieving the least
restrictive means of combatting the evolving threat to public health; and
WHEREAS, COVID-19 vaccines are strongly encouraged for those eligible to receive
one, but must always be voluntary for Texans; and
WHEREAS, I issued Executive Orders GA-35, GA-38, and GA-39 to prohibit
governmental entities and certain others from imposing COVID- 19 vaccine mandates or
requiring vaccine passports; and
WHEREAS, in yet another instance of federal overreach, the Biden Administration is
now bullying many private entities into imposing COVID-19 vaccine mandates, causing
workforce disruptions that threaten Texas' s continued recovery from the COVID- 19
disaster; and
WHEREAS, countless Texans fear losing their livelihoods because they object to
receiving a COVID- 1 9 vaccination for reasons of personal conscience, based on a
religious belief, or for medical reasons, including prior recovery from COVID-19; and
WHEREAS , through Chapter 16 1 of the Texas Health and Safety Code, as well as other
laws including Chapters 38 and 5 1 of the Texas Education Code, the legislature has
established its primary role over immunizations, and all immunization laws and
regulations in Texas stem from the laws established by the legislature; and
WHEREAS, the legislature has taken care to provide exemptions that allow people to opt
out of being forced to take a vaccine for reasons of conscience or medical reasons; and
WHEREAS, I am adding this issue to the agenda for the Third Called Session of the
legislature that is currently convened so that the legislature has the opportunity to
consider this issue through legislation; and
WHEREAS, I will rescind this executive order upon the effective date of such legislation;
FILED IN THE OFFiCE OF ThS,... SECRETARY OF STATE4 :
OCT 1 1 2021Governor Greg Abbott Executive Order GA-40
October 1 1 , 202 1 Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Greg Abbott, Governor of Texas, by virtue of the power and
authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas, do hereby order
the following on a statewide basis effective immediately:
1. No entity in Texas can compel receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine by any
individual, including an employee or a consumer, who objects to such
vaccination for any reason of personal conscience, based on a religious
belief, or for medical reasons, including prior recovery from COVID-19.
I hereby suspend all relevant statutes to the extent necessary to enforce
this prohibition.
2. The maximum fine allowed under Section 4 1 8. 173 of the Texas
Government Code and the State' s emergency management plan shall
apply to any "failure to comply with" this executive order. Confinement
in jail is not an available penalty for violating this executive order.
3. This executive order shall supersede any conflicting order issued by
local officials in response to the COVID-19 disaster. Pursuant to
Section 418.016(a) of the Texas Government Code, I hereby suspend
Sections 418.1015(b) and 418.108 of the Texas Government Code,
Chapter 8 1 , Subchapter E of the Texas Health and Safety Code, and any
other relevant statutes, to the extent necessary to ensure that local
officials do not impose restrictions in response to the COVID-19 disaster
that are inconsistent with this executive order.
This executive order does not supersede Executive Orders GA-13, GA-37, GA-38, or GA-
39. This executive order shall remain in effect and in full force unless it is modified,
amended, rescinded, or superseded by the governor. This executive order may also be
amended by proclamation of the governor.
Given under my hand this the 1 ith
day of October, 2021.
GREG ABBOTT
Governor
ATTESTED BY:
Deputy ecretary of State
FILED IN THE ONL.SECRETARY OF STATE
O'CLOCK
OCT 1 1 2021
Great news. Give everyone the choice they want to make.
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
When did businesses start mandating abortions? No one ever asked me for my polio records.SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
Not the businesses' choice. This was just a way to make businesses do the government's work.
Why does Texas still have other vaccine requirements as written law??
https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/education-code/educ-sect-51-9192.html
https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/education-code/educ-sect-51-9192.html
Bacterial Meningitis is a legitimate threat to all so I doubt anyone is against that mandate.
SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
You do realize what it is in response to, right?
yes, you said the right word, "legitimate" threat, Covid is 99.9 plus percent survivable by the population, Im not sure thats a real legitimate threat to our society... if this was Ebola spreading like wild fire I dont think we would be arguing who should or should not get jabbed, people wouldnt have to be told to get a shot, they would be lining up to get the shot... thats not the case for Covid and these vaccines..texan12 said:
Bacterial Meningitis is a legitimate threat to all so I doubt anyone is against that mandate.
The EO by the state of Texas just confirms this, its needs to be no different than the flu vaccine.. which by the way I believe 40% of the population take if Im not mistaken, mostly the elderly who are more at risk take the flu shots
SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Hospitals and LTCs should absolutely be able to mandate. Most people like big government when its their type of big government.
usename checks out.Forum Troll said:
Hospitals and LTCs should absolutely be able to mandate. Most people like big government when its their type of big government.
fullback44 said:yes, you said the right word, "legitimate" threat, Covid is 99.9 plus percent survivable by the population, Im not sure thats a real legitimate threat to our society...texan12 said:
Bacterial Meningitis is a legitimate threat to all so I doubt anyone is against that mandate.
Covid has killed 68,154 Texas. This divided by population of 28,995,880 equals 0.23% of total Texans.
Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
Does a governor's executive order not going though the legislation overrule the president's executive order not going through legislation? supremacy clause in play?
nhamp07 said:planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
Does a governor's executive order not going though the legislation overrule the president's executive order not going through legislation?
When one adds mandates and impacts people's lives....and one wipes it off....I go with the second which removes mandates and puts us back at zero.
Math.
planoaggie123 said:nhamp07 said:planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
Does a governor's executive order not going though the legislation overrule the president's executive order not going through legislation?
When one adds mandates and impacts people's lives....and one wipes it off....I go with the second which removes mandates and puts us back at zero.
Math.
Well you go with the 2nd but where does the maw go? There's the supremacy clause right?
I like where this is headed. What other government controls would we like the governor to remove (or impose) unilaterally? Personally, I find speed limits to be tiresome and unfair (to me when I'm in a hurry).planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
nhamp07 said:planoaggie123 said:nhamp07 said:planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
Does a governor's executive order not going though the legislation overrule the president's executive order not going through legislation?
When one adds mandates and impacts people's lives....and one wipes it off....I go with the second which removes mandates and puts us back at zero.
Math.
Well you go with the 2nd but where does the maw go? There's the supremacy clause right?
There is nothing in the constitution about requiring vaccines.
There is no federal law requiring.
To go with the supremacy clause, the conflict must be with Federal Law.
You might want to run your calculation again. The governor (like the President) removed the right of businesses (which are owned and operated by people) to choose as well.planoaggie123 said:nhamp07 said:planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
Does a governor's executive order not going though the legislation overrule the president's executive order not going through legislation?
When one adds mandates and impacts people's lives....and one wipes it off....I go with the second which removes mandates and puts us back at zero.
Math.
Wakesurfer817 said:I like where this is headed. What other government controls would we like the governor to remove (or impose) unilaterally? Personally, I find speed limits to be tiresome and unfair (to me when I'm in a hurry).planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
If you don't like speed limits then I guess you can just find somewhere else to work.
Wakesurfer817 said:I like where this is headed. What other government controls would we like the governor to remove (or impose) unilaterally? Personally, I find speed limits to be tiresome and unfair (to me when I'm in a hurry).planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
People are being fired for not getting a jab and losing means to support their family due to these unconstitutional mandates.
If you speed, you *might* get a ticket.
Different. Nice try though.
Wakesurfer817 said:You might want to run your calculation again. The governor (like the President) removed the right of businesses (which are owned and operated by people) to choose as well.planoaggie123 said:nhamp07 said:planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
Does a governor's executive order not going though the legislation overrule the president's executive order not going through legislation?
When one adds mandates and impacts people's lives....and one wipes it off....I go with the second which removes mandates and puts us back at zero.
Math.
You don't get it.
Most of these businesses are not CHOOSING to do this. This "firing for no vax" was not a thing until Biden mandated for Federal employees and for people who get Federal Govt contracts. Companies are being forced to make decisions as not not impact their bottom line as it relates to Federal requirements (from an EO none-the-less).
Ah - ok, sorry. I lost the plot there for a minute. So this is just about money.planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:I like where this is headed. What other government controls would we like the governor to remove (or impose) unilaterally? Personally, I find speed limits to be tiresome and unfair (to me when I'm in a hurry).planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
People are being fired for not getting a jab and losing means to support their family due to these unconstitutional mandates.
If you speed, you *might* get a ticket.
Different. Nice try though.
Silly me. I thought we were talking about liberty and freedom being squelched. Like when a governor unilaterally creates a law (issues an edict - like a king would), exactly like the president did. My bad.
Carry on.
Now no business can CHOOSE to do this. An edict you agree with is still an edict.planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:You might want to run your calculation again. The governor (like the President) removed the right of businesses (which are owned and operated by people) to choose as well.planoaggie123 said:nhamp07 said:planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
Does a governor's executive order not going though the legislation overrule the president's executive order not going through legislation?
When one adds mandates and impacts people's lives....and one wipes it off....I go with the second which removes mandates and puts us back at zero.
Math.
You don't get it.
Most of these businesses are not CHOOSING to do this. This "firing for no vax" was not a thing until Biden mandated for Federal employees and for people who get Federal Govt contracts. Companies are being forced to make decisions as not not impact their bottom line as it relates to Federal requirements (from an EO none-the-less)
Wakesurfer817 said:Ah - ok, sorry. I lost the plot there for a minute. So this is just about money.planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:I like where this is headed. What other government controls would we like the governor to remove (or impose) unilaterally? Personally, I find speed limits to be tiresome and unfair (to me when I'm in a hurry).planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
People are being fired for not getting a jab and losing means to support their family due to these unconstitutional mandates.
If you speed, you *might* get a ticket.
Different. Nice try though.
Silly me. I thought we were talking about liberty and freedom being squelched. Like when a governor unilaterally creates a law (issues an edict - like a king would), exactly like the president did. My bad.
Carry on.
Absolutely about money and ability of citizens to provide for their family....American dream and all.
That is a big part of the freedom and beauty of America.
When Biden MANDATED vaccines for federal employees and companies that have federal contracts and started pushing OSHA to find ways to mandates...that sorta started a ripple effect. Prior to that, Companies were not trying to figure out how to fire employees...conversely...they were trying to figure out how to hire.
Move along.
Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Exec order preserving personal freedom > greater than exec order crapping on personal freedom
Did you people always crave power and control over others or did it just start after Covid became a thing?
Here is the SWA CEO stating the mandates are due to Federal Government Directives...
"Southwest Airlines must join our industry peers in complying with the federal government's COVID-19 vaccination directive," Southwest Airlines Chairman and CEO Gary Kelly said in a written statement. "I encourage all Southwest Employees to meet the federal directive, as quickly as possible, since we value every individual and want to ensure job security for all."
https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/coronavirus/southwest-airlines-to-require-employees-to-be-vaccinated-against-covid-19/2758081/
"Southwest Airlines must join our industry peers in complying with the federal government's COVID-19 vaccination directive," Southwest Airlines Chairman and CEO Gary Kelly said in a written statement. "I encourage all Southwest Employees to meet the federal directive, as quickly as possible, since we value every individual and want to ensure job security for all."
https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/coronavirus/southwest-airlines-to-require-employees-to-be-vaccinated-against-covid-19/2758081/
....but these companies are doing it on their own....
PLEASE
PLEASE
Does my personal freedom end at the front door of the business I own and operate?Ol_Ag_02 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Exec order preserving personal freedom > greater than exec order crapping on personal freedom
Did you people always crave power and control over others or did it just start after Covid became a thing?
Biden's order was an overreach. A broad, unconstitutional, politically motivated one. So is the governor's. To say anything else is based on personal preference.
Wakesurfer817 said:Now no business can CHOOSE to do this. An edict you agree with is still an edict.planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:You might want to run your calculation again. The governor (like the President) removed the right of businesses (which are owned and operated by people) to choose as well.planoaggie123 said:nhamp07 said:planoaggie123 said:Wakesurfer817 said:But when a governor issues edicts it's ok (as long as I agree with them). Makes sense.Ol_Ag_02 said:SamHou said:
Except businesses. It seems like if choice is the goal, then allow businesses to set their rules (eg, shirt and shoes required). If an employee doesn't like it, they can go work elsewhere.
It's not a businesses choice when in response to a "president" issuing edicts using the threat of OSHA fines.
How do people not understand this.
Our governor is simply wiping out government control. Removing restrictions / unfair mandates from our president. By issuing this Abbott is actually removing government interference. Logic is tough.
Does a governor's executive order not going though the legislation overrule the president's executive order not going through legislation?
When one adds mandates and impacts people's lives....and one wipes it off....I go with the second which removes mandates and puts us back at zero.
Math.
You don't get it.
Most of these businesses are not CHOOSING to do this. This "firing for no vax" was not a thing until Biden mandated for Federal employees and for people who get Federal Govt contracts. Companies are being forced to make decisions as not not impact their bottom line as it relates to Federal requirements (from an EO none-the-less)
His was still a reaction. If there was no first move eliminating business's rights to choose there'd be no response to it.
Wakesurfer817 said:Does my personal freedom end at the front door of the business I own and operate?Ol_Ag_02 said:
Exec order preserving personal freedom > greater than exec order crapping on personal freedom
Did you people always crave power and control over others or did it just start after Covid became a thing?
Biden's order was an overreach. A broad, unconstitutional, politically motivated one. So is the governor's. To say anything else is based on personal preference.
If Biden had done NOTHING at all then Abbott's order would not have been required.
Look at CEO statements everywhere. The reason they are firing for vaxxxxx is not personal belief in the vaxxxxx but because of federal mandates.
Abbott is stopping that.
We have a worker shortage. We need people working. Not being fired.
I showed Southwest statement....
Here is American Airlines:
"While we are still working through the details of the federal requirements, it is clear that team members who choose to remain unvaccinated will not be able to work at American Airlines," Parker and Isom said in the letter, obtained by the Observer on Monday.
2 wrongs don't make a right.
We have a way of handling executive overreach in our country. We use the courts. And we abide by their decisions even when - especially when - we disagree with them.
Edicts and counter edicts are so very…feudal.
We have a way of handling executive overreach in our country. We use the courts. And we abide by their decisions even when - especially when - we disagree with them.
Edicts and counter edicts are so very…feudal.
Featured Stories
See All
Phelps' career night wills Taylor-less Aggies to improbable comeback
by Olin Buchanan
5 Thoughts: No. 10 Texas A&M 80, No. 17 Oklahoma 78
by Luke Evangelist
13:45
29m ago
451
25:46
22h ago
10k