Push to restrict power of Kansas health officials during pandemic advances

TOPEKA, (KSNT)--- A bill restricting the power of Kansas health officials is advancing. The state Senate recommended the bill be passed on Wednesday.

Senate Bill 489 would remove certain authority from the secretary of health and environment and local health officials when dealing with infectious or contagious diseases. It mainly focuses on their ability to create mandates but would allow recommendations to be made.

Senator Mike Thompson, R-Shawnee, who carried the bill, argued that it would give people the freedom to make their own decisions about their health.

"When you order somebody to do something, and they feel like their liberty is being taken away, they're less likely to comply," Thompson said. "But, if you educate them about a situation, they're most likely to make good decisions about this...and that's what this bill is about."

According to the bill, it would remove the authority of the Secretary to take action to prevent the introduction of infectious or contagious disease into the state and to prevent the spread of infectious or contagious disease within the state. It would also remove a provision allowing the county or joint board of health or local health officer to prohibit public gatherings when necessary for the control of any and all infectious or contagious diseases.

Local health officers wouldn't be required to comply with recommendations made by the state health secretary to prevent the spread of infectious diseases.

It would also prevent them from requiring people 18 or older who are unvaccinated to go into isolation or quarantine.

Senator Thompson also added an amendment to strike language that allows health officers to use all "known" measures to prevent the spread of communicable diseases as may be required. Instead, as amended it would allow them to take "medically necessary and reasonable" steps.

Thompson pointed to wearing masks during the coronavirus pandemic as an example of a measure that's not medically necessary.

"We thought through CDC recommendations that masking, for example, was medically necessary, and yet, we masked up, we shut down, and the disease still spread," Thompson said. "Here we are two years later, if masked work, then it would be medically necessary, but they didn't and we know that they're not."

Some democrats expressed concerns over the bill.

Senate Minority Whip Pat Pettey, a Democrat from Kansas City, explained that it would also inhibit action in defending the public against other diseases.

"We are restricting the authority of the secretary of health and environment when it comes to dealing with these kinds of diseases in our state...we are restricting our local health officials as well," Pattey said.

Sen. Marci Francisco, D-Lawrence, also stood in opposition to the plan.

"This is to help prevent the spread of disease. This is not a public health officer treating a disease. This is to say, if someone has that disease, it's important to limit their interactions with others and prevent the spread," she said.

Several controversial measures are moving above the line as lawmakers wrap up before a long weekend.

The Senate is also debating changing the deadline for advance voting ballots, and another bill up for debate would allow the prescription of off-label drugs for coronavirus treatment, like ivermectin.