RESPONSE TO: 'CALIFORNIA VACCINE BILL SB 277 SIGNED INTO LAW BY [JESUIT] GOV. JERRY BROWN'
Response by Rocky Montana
Tracy Seipel and Jessica Calefati Staff writers
SACRAMENTO -- In a historic decision that could reverberate nationwide, Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday signed a bill mandating that almost all California schoolchildren be fully vaccinated, regardless of their parents' personal or religious beliefs [or, plain old common sense based on 40 plus years of negative imperical data regarding vaccines].
By signing Senate Bill 277 into law, Brown pushed the Golden State -- long a bastion of liberal vaccine exemptions -- into an odd political alliance with two conservative states, Mississippi and West Virginia. Until Tuesday, they were the only states that permitted medical exemptions as the sole legitimate reasons to sidestep vaccinations.
But the governor also noted that the Legislature had specifically amended SB277 to exempt children from immunizations whenever their physicians conclude that there are "circumstances, including but not limited to, family medical history, for which the physician does not recommend immunization.'' [There will be a big jump in doctor visits this summer, I suspect, as frantic parents seek out physicians to exempt their children from this evil vaccination mandate. Pediatricians must be licking their chops for the business this will bring them. The alternatives for parents of conscience are to either fight this law in a multi-plaintiff lawsuit while home-schooling their children, or fleeing the state. If this evil law is not overthrown in the courts, it is likely to spread throughout the land, as it usually does. Unfortunately California has the unConstitutional Judges which are matched only by the U.S. Surpreme Court. Good luck California.]
Still, opponents who have rallied and railed against the bill at the state Capitol -- arguing vociferously that the legislation violates their parental rights -- vowed both to sue the state and take their case to California voters.
"We are going to have a referendum to ask the public to put a hold on the law," said Palo Alto resident Christina Hildebrand, president and co-founder of A Voice For Choice. "We will continue to fight this -- we are not going away," added the mother of two unvaccinated children.
Whether or not the remaining medical exemption will open the floodgates to parents seeking to get around the new vaccine requirements is up to their doctors, who will have enormous powers under the new law. But many physicians believe very few of their colleagues are likely to agree to medical exemptions unless they're truly necessary. [I am sure there are a handful of educated Pediatricians who KNOW the dangers associated with vaccines. Watch for those who speak out against this inhumane law; they may be the ones who could be the most helpful to parents in getting their children exempted.]
Among them is Sen. Richard Pan, D-Sacramento, a pediatrician who co-authored the legislation with Sen. Ben Allen, D-Santa Monica.
"We trust doctors' professional judgment," Pan said Tuesday after a news conference at a Sacramento elementary school where none of the students has skipped vaccines because of their parents' personal beliefs. [Trust doctors? The same doctors who routinely kill 150,000 plus patients per year? I think not! I recommend being very selective as to which doctors you trust with your health and your life. And do your own research.]
"Californians have spoken. The governor and Legislature have spoken," said Pan, surrounded by a crowd of several dozen beaming mothers and young children wearing "I (heart) immunity" stickers. "No more preventable contagions. No more outbreaks. No more hospitalizations. No more deaths. And no more fear," Pan said. The bill "is now law." [What a bunch of lies!]
The law doesn't take effect until July 1, 2016. But even then, parents will be required to show proof of vaccinations only when their children enter kindergarten, seventh grade or change school districts.
Political analysts on Tuesday were skeptical that opponents will be able to get a referendum on the November 2016 ballot.
If opponents succeed in placing a measure on the ballot, the law would not take effect until after the election. They have 90 days from Tuesday to collect 365,880 valid signatures.
"Any citizen can take advantage of the initiative process," said Dorit Reiss, a professor and vaccine law expert at UC Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco.
And anyone, she said, can sue for anything. But, Reiss noted, the nation's courts have consistently upheld immunization requirements because they protect such important public health interests.
"Opponents may not like that, but I doubt it will change," Reiss said.
The clamor around the elimination of California's "personal belief exemption" heated up after a measles outbreak started last December at Disneyland. By the time they declared the outbreak over in mid-April, state health officials confirmed 136 measles cases in California. Nearly 20 percent of those cases required hospitalization. [So what? 136 measles cases in 2014 compared to 38 million plus people living in California? That is a such a low ratio. It is not even 1/1000th of one percent and certainly is not worthy of mandating state-wide immunizations of all California children. So if it is not a REAL threat to the health of the population, what do you think this is really going on here? See map below:
The United States experienced 668 measles cases in the first half of 2015 from 27 states reported to CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD). 668 cases in a country of 320 million plus people is such a low ratio. It is not even 1/1000th of one percent. It is hardly worthy of comment.]
Opponents of the new law also have threatened to recall politicians. But some pundits on Tuesday scoffed at the notion.
"Any legislator, if he or she has any brains or political smarts, has already computed that risk" before they voted on the bill, said Sherry Bebitch Jeffe, a veteran political analyst at the University of Southern California.
Regarding the opponents' chances of a successful referendum that would repeal the law, she put it this way:
"How much money do they have? Will they qualify? What is their campaign organization? What will the other side look like? And how much money will the other side have?"
Unfortunately for the opponents, she said, polling shows the majority of Californians strongly support the get-tough vaccine legislation. [Don't trust statements from political analysts, particularly "vetran" political analysts! Everyone should know by now that pollsters control the outcome of their poles. In other words, THEY LIE!]
Whether or not California's law will prompt legislation in other states remains unclear.
"What we've found in general over time is that some states lead and others follow," said Dr. Walter Orenstein, president elect of the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases. "So having a big state like California make this policy means that other states will pay a lot more attention as they consider their own policies. That would be my guess."
But Jeffe isn't so sure.
Now that the Disneyland measles outbreak is history, "there won't be the kind of pressure there was in California to move on this in other states," she said. "It's totally off the radar screen now nationally."
[The best defense for disease is a strong immune system. Vaccines damage the immune system and make the body susceptible to more disease. Furthermore, vaccines may contain one or more diseases in their make-up, which will get you even sicker. VACCINES ARE LIKE A BOX OF CHOCOLATES; YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET!]
http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data/health/vaccinations/news.php?q=1435768358