Assembly Bill (AB) 1993 or California’s “No Jab, No Job” Bill was authored by Democratic Assembly Members Buffy Wicks, Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, Evan Low, and Akilah Weber, and was officially introduced on February 10, 2022. As of yesterday, the bill is on hold, with Assemblywoman Wicks citing “opposition” from public safety unions as the reason for the sudden retraction.
Healthcare workers in California and across the country have been protesting mandatory vaccinations. Pictured is a protest in New York City. (Michael Santiago / Getty Images)
As one of the United States’ most far-reaching vaccine mandate bills, AB 1993 was intended to ensure “safety” for all Californians yet for many, the reality of its implications would have been a far cry from safety. If implemented, AB 1993 would have required employers to demand that each person — employee or independent contractor — receive the COVID-19 vaccine and show proof to the employer or an authorized agent. According to the bill itself, it would also have required:
"...each employer to affirm, in a form and manner provided by the department, that each employee or independent contractor complied with these provisions, and would require the employer to affirm that each new employee or independent contractor is in compliance at the time of hiring or contracting with that person. The bill would require the department to impose a penalty of an unspecified amount on an employer for any violation of these provisions.”
Creators of AB 1993 were in for a rude awakening as strong opposition was indeed felt from public safety unions — including the California Assn. of Highway Patrolmen, California Correctional Peace Officers Assn. and California Professional Firefighters — to the general public. Most recently, The People's Convoy, a peaceful and united group of truckers that utilizes the slogan, "Let Freedom Roll," announced they will continue protesting nationwide vaccine mandates by heading to The Golden State.
Trucks from The People's Convoy drive into downtown Washington, .D.C, on March 18, 2022. (EPA / Shutterstock)
Dissenters of the bill highlighted not only the infringement on personal freedoms posed by AB 1993, but the potential physical harm of forcing a relatively novel vaccine on humans — a risk that a number of Californians are not willing to take. Not to mention, this bill would have pushed more able-bodied individuals into unemployment when the unemployment rate in California is already at a staggering 5.4%. Although the bill made room for exemptions, that provided no solace since the approval of exemptions is difficult to come by and often never granted.
Despite the significant pushback against the bill, mainstream media has unsurprisingly kept it under wraps; however, this latest development is evidence that can't be overlooked. In short, politicians proposed unconstitutional policies and the people have spoken... they will NOT subject themselves to vaccine mandates.
In the face of defeat, Assemblywoman Wicks tweeted: “Vaccines, and vaccine requirements, remain a critical tool for moving from pandemic to endemic. That work is still needed, and it could ensure that millions more Californians become vaccinated.” This statement indicates that the fight may not be over for proponents of medical freedom. If the COVID-19 situation changes or a "new" variant emerges, AB 1993 and vaccine mandates could likely be on the table again.
Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks announces a halt on AB 1993 on Tuesday. (Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)
The moral of the story? Californians and Americans alike should remain vigilant in their awareness of proposed legislation and the goings-on of government. As the Founding Fathers intended, it is up to the people to demand and maintain the freedoms they so enjoy.
Comments