Friday, October 9, 2009

Pandemic Bill in Massachusetts

This week was a mixed bag of issues at the State House. On the larger issues, we passed a pandemic bill in the House that closes gaps in our chain of command and should make it easier to react to a health emergency, whether it is an illness outbreak or a terrorist biological attack. We did so while avoiding the controversial issues that have plagued (pun intended) this bill since it was introduced.

The House bill struck out the Senate version sections that mandated vaccination, that allowed entry into people houses, and that took away the right to public assembly. While these were probably well intentioned by the authors, they traded away too many freedoms in exchange for control. This bill has been around for eight years, and we needed to get a bill passed.

What does this bill do? It gives local boards of health a role in pandemic preparations for the first time. It codifies a lot of regulation so that everyone is aware of the actions that could be taken. It codifies an appeal process for individuals for the first time. It limits the Governor’s power to suspend rules and call for a public health emergency to ninety days. It gives people civil liability protection if they volunteer to assist in a public health emergency. And it sets out rules for the Department of public Health in how they react and what they can do in case of emergency.

This is important. A few weeks after September 11, I was part of a group of Legislators that were chosen from the large municipality and state organizations to meet with Homeland Security in order to detail plans in case of further attack. It became apparent that we needed better inter and intra state cooperation in order to react to threats, whether they were natural or “man made”. For example, if a terrorist biological weapon were to be released in New York City, what do we do if parents start arriving at Williams College in the Berkshires to pick up their kids? If the Massachusetts Turnpike finds a pathogen in a rest stop, who do we contact to coordinate efforts on containment? Or if the Swine flu becomes an epidemic, how do we contain the illness and cover essential services? We need plans to react to these and we need to coordinate our efforts in a clear manner. This bill sets us on that path to planning.

No comments: