Assembly Bill A416- Next Level Infringement

For those paying attention, alarm bells started ringing when Assembly member N. Nick Perry (Brooklyn) introduced Assembly Bill A416 which “Relates to the removal of cases, contacts and carriers of communicable disease who are potentially dangerous to the public health” (originally introduced in 2015-2016 Legislative Session as Bill A6891; 2017-2018: A680; 2019-2020: A99).  Apparently this Bill was first introduced in 2015, in response to an incident in which a nurse was infected with Ebola and refused to quarantine.

If you haven’t already had enough surveillance, this Bill seeks to “detain a person or group” for periods of from 3 business days to “more than ninety days” by “court order” by application of the “governor or his delegee” in a “medical facility or premises until he or she is discharged.” 

The Bill begins as follows:

“§ 2120-A. REMOVAL AND DETENTION OF CASES, CONTACTS AND CARRIERS WHO ARE OR MAY BE A DANGER TO PUBLIC HEALTH; OTHER ORDERS. 1. THE PROVISIONS OF  THIS SECTION  SHALL  BE  UTILIZED  IN  THE  EVENT THAT THE GOVERNOR DECLARES A STATE OF HEALTH EMERGENCY DUE TO AN EPIDEMIC OF ANY COMMUNICABLE DISEASE.

   2.  UPON  DETERMINING BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT THE HEALTH OF OTHERS IS OR MAY BE ENDANGERED BY A  CASE,  CONTACT  OR  CARRIER,  OR SUSPECTED  CASE, CONTACT OR CARRIER OF A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE THAT, IN THE OPINION OF THE GOVERNOR, AFTER CONSULTATION WITH THE  COMMISSIONER,  MAY POSE  AN  IMMINENT AND SIGNIFICANT THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH RESULTING IN SEVERE MORBIDITY OR HIGH MORTALITY, THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER  DELEGEE,  INCLUDING,  BUT  NOT  LIMITED  TO THE COMMISSIONER OR THE HEADS OF LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS, MAY ORDER THE REMOVAL AND/OR DETENTION OF SUCH A PERSON OR OF A GROUP OF SUCH PERSONS BY ISSUING A SINGLE ORDER,  IDENTIFYING  SUCH  PERSONS  EITHER  BY  NAME  OR  BY  A  REASONABLY SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF THE INDIVIDUALS OR GROUP BEING DETAINED. SUCH PERSON OR GROUP OF PERSONS SHALL BE DETAINED IN A MEDICAL FACILITY OR OTHER APPROPRIATE FACILITY OR  PREMISES  DESIGNATED BY THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE AND COMPLYING WITH SUBDIVISION FIVE OF THIS SECTION.”

This is not only an infringement on our basic liberties of movement and self-autonomy, but a new level lockdown for “protection, safety, and health” (or so we’ve been sold/told to believe) of everyone, everywhere, and into infinity. The identification and detainment of residents of New York State based on the current PCR testing system when the New York Times has stated: “[i]n 3 sets of testing data that included cycle thresholds compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90% of people testing positive carried barely any virus” (in other words - false positive) gives me pause. (The New York Times ~ August 29, 2020.)

According to an advisor of Governor Cuomo, the governor never knew this bill existed. Rich Azzopardi, Senior Advisor to the Governor wrote, “It apparently is six years old, has no Senate sponsor and has never moved out of committee. We have real problems to focus on and I urge the crazy uncles…and the politicians pandering to them—to knock it off … take a walk or something.” (Years-old bill that would allow state to detain contagious patients extremely unlikely to gain any traction in Albany, by Jeff Rusack, January 4, 2021.) This type of dismissive response, which ridicules the questioner as well as fails to address any of the substantive content of the Bill does nothing to assuage the fears of average everyday citizens upon reading the Bill. It sounds more like snide comments and trivialization.

The Bill goes on further to discuss decontamination procedures which include:

12. … TO REQUIRE THE TESTING OR MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PERSONS WHO MAY HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO OR INFECTED BY A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE OR WHO MAY HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO OR CONTAMINATED WITH DANGEROUS AMOUNTS OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS OR TOXIC CHEMICALS; TO REQUIRE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS BEEN EXPOSED TO OR INFECTED BY A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE TO COMPLETE AN APPROPRIATE, PRESCRIBED COURSE OF TREATMENT,  PREVENTIVE  MEDICATION  OR VACCINATION,  INCLUDING  DIRECTLY  OBSERVED THERAPY TO TREAT THE DISEASE AND FOLLOW INFECTION CONTROL PROVISIONS FOR THE DISEASE; OR  TO  REQUIRE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS BEEN CONTAMINATED WITH DANGEROUS AMOUNTS OF RADIOACTIVE  MATERIALS OR TOXIC CHEMICALS SUCH THAT SAID INDIVIDUAL MAY PRESENT A DANGER TO OTHERS, TO  UNDERGO DECONTAMINATION  PROCEDURES  DEEMED

NECESSARY BY THE DEPARTMENT. SUCH PERSON OR PERSONS SHALL, UPON REQUEST, BE AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD, BUT THE PROVISIONS  OF SUBDIVISIONS  TWO  THROUGH  ELEVEN  OF  THIS SECTION SHALL NOT OTHERWISE APPLY.”

It defies common sense that if I was exposed to radioactive materials or toxic chemicals, I would voluntarily seek medical attention and not need to be rounded up. This language reads more like a police manual for dealing with criminals than public health guidance.  In 2014, Hoosick Falls discovered its drinking water was contaminated with PFOA. One would think that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and/or the New York State Department of Health would have established appropriate treatment and removal of toxic chemicals based on this first-hand experience alone. Is it an appropriate measure to now criminalize sick or suspected sick people through no fault of their own?

Let’s take a look around for a moment. Over in New Zealand, Dr. Ashley Bloomfield, Director General of Health of New Zealand announced that “medical officers are now being directed to manage all positive confirmed cases in a quarantine camp…The nation has 32 managed isolation and quarantine facilities with operational capacity for 6,260 people…Patients will be held against their will at the quarantine camps until testing negative for the virus.” (New Zealand announces ‘quarantine camps’ where positive patients will be forcibly placed, Jarrett Staff, November 3, 2020.) Additionally, the creation of COVID isolation facilities are currently being floated in Canada, Australia, and Germany.

Back to further explanation of the Bill. Assembly member Perry in explaining the Bill said, “[in] every civil society… there has to be some manner of insuring that one wild person with[out] concern for the interest of others should be able to cause injury with no consequence at all…we provide a hearing to a person who may be facing some action and provide time to be heard by a judge.” (January 3, 2021, Assembly member N. Nick Perry). Cody Anderson, Chairman of the Libertarian Party of New York stated: [it] is an “egregious privacy violation.” “This bill offers a clear and direct path to unconstitutional and indefinite detainment, on the governor’s sole authority. No US state was ever meant to have a single person acting as judge and jury, without checks or balances; if this bill is allowed to pass, that is exactly what New York will have.”  19 million plus people in New York State should not have to be subject to “removal” as a consequence for the acts of one person 5 years ago.

According to Journalist Bill Mahoney in his column of January 3, 2021, “Perry said some people are trying to create a crisis so they can rev up a certain group of individuals.” This article makes no other reference to who these “some people” may be, crazy uncles or otherwise. It would seem that those people questioning such language are paranoid or exaggerating, imagining harm where none is intended.  

Critical thinking is “a persistent effort to examine any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the evidence that supports or refutes it and the further conclusions to which tends.” (Edward M. Glaser 1941.) This type of authoritarian approach is not the direction we should be taking and it’s time this Bill stops being thrown up against the wall, on purpose, by accident or otherwise.  Honestly friends, do we need this?

Lois Lane