Health Care Bill Will Fund State Vaccine Teams to Conduct ‘Interventions’ in Private Homes
July 16th, 2009Via: CNSNews:
There is a knock at the front door. Peeking through the window, a mother sees a man and a woman, both in uniform. They are agents of health-care reform.
“Excuse me, ma’am,” says the man. “Our records show that your eleven-year-old daughter has not been immunized for genital warts.”
“And your four-year-old still needs the chicken-pox vaccine,” says the woman.
“He will not be allowed to start kindergarten unless he gets that shot, you know,” says the man—smiling from ear to ear.
“So, can we please come in?” asks the woman. “We have the vaccines right here,” she says, lifting up a black medical bag. “We can give your kids the shots right now.”
“We are from the government,” says the man, “and we’re here to help.”
Is this a scene from the over-heated imagination of an addlepated conspiracy theorist? Or is it something akin to what is actually envisioned by the health-care reform bill approved this week by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee.
The committee’s official summary of the bill says: “Authorizes a demonstration program to improve immunization coverage. Under this program, CDC will provide grants to states to improve immunization coverage of children, adolescents, and adults through the use of evidence-based interventions. States may use funds to implement interventions that are recommended by the Community Preventive Services Task Force, such as reminders or recalls for patients or providers, or home visits.”
Home visits? What exactly is the state going to do when it sends people to “implement interventions” in private homes designed “to improve immunization coverage of children”?
The draft of the bill posted on the committee Web site provides more details.
Title III of the bill is entitled, “Improving the Health of the American People.” It includes four subtitles. They are: “Subtitle A: Modernizing Disease Prevention of Public Health Systems,” “Subtitle B: Increasing Access to Clinical Preventive Services,” “Subtitle C: Creating Healthier Communities,” and “Subtitle D: Support for Prevention and Public Health Information.”
The program authorizing home “interventions” to promote immunizations falls under “Subtitle C: Creating Healthier Communities.” This subtitle directs the secretary of health and human services to “establish a demonstration program to award grants to states to improve the provision of recommended immunizations for children, adolescents, and adults through the use of evidence-based, population-based interventions for high-risk populations.”
The bill lists eight specific ways that states may use federal grant money to carry out immunization-promoting “interventions.” Method “E” calls for “home visits” which can include “provision of immunizations.”
This nauseating scenario is a direct result of overcrowding. Yes, immunization side effects may destroy a percentage of individuals, but since our dear friend “life” insists on inspiring us to reproduce beyond the carrying capacity of our habitat, the bureaucrats have decided that those susceptible individuals will just have to be sacrificed in the interests of preserving the hive. God forbid that we should actually take the time to figure out how to balance our population with our carrying capacity so that individuals who don’t want to be poked full of dead germs don’t have to be.
@Peregrino Consider the situation from the bureaucrats perspective, though. Fewer people means a smaller power/tax base, _and_ the high population density means increasingly ‘heroic’ measures will be required to keep that population alive and (relatively) healthy. Carrying out these heroic measures will of course require the handing of enourmous new powers over to said functionaries.
And, TBH, my take on the phrase “figure out how to balance our population with our carrying capacity” is “check the ‘Kill Off’ section”. This is not the sort of event that seems likely to happen in a voluntary manner.