Alabama lawmakers pass bill to require COVID-19 vaccine exemptions

By Mike Cason | mcason@al.com

Alabama lawmakers gave final approval tonight to a bill to prohibit employers from firing an employee who refuses a COVID-19 vaccine and claims a religious or medical exemption.

After a long day of negotiations, the Senate and House agreed to a version of the bill produced by a conference committee.

“There are people in the state of Alabama that are hurting right now, that are trying to decide between taking a vaccine that they are frightened of, that they have objections of, that they are concerned about for any number of reasons,” Sen. Chris Elliott, R-Fairhope, the sponsor of the bill said. “And because of that they are in danger of losing their jobs due to federal mandates that are really unnecessary.

“And this Legislature felt like it needed to stand in the gap and provide some protection for employees while the courts take their time to look at this mandate and hopefully make the determination that this is not something the federal government can do.”

The issue moved to the forefront of a special session called for the purpose of redistricting because of opposition to President Biden’s mandate. Lawmakers finished redistricting on Wednesday.

The special session came to an end shortly after the House gave final approval to the bill.

The bill goes to Gov. Kay Ivey. Lawmakers also sent to Ivey a bill requiring parental consent for minors to receive COVID-19 vaccines.

Gina Maiola, communications director for Ivey, said the governor hopes to sign the bills on Friday.

“Given that the Legislature has been debating proposals all week aimed at sending a strong, powerful message against the overreaching Biden vaccine mandate, the governor will review these bills tomorrow morning with the goal of signing them into law tomorrow afternoon,” Maiola said. “She has directed her legal staff to begin reviewing these bills as soon as they are transmitted from the Legislature.”

One of the final changes to the bill says it will be repealed on May 1, 2023, unless the Legislature passes another bill to extend it.

“I hope that it is no longer necessary at that time,” Elliott said.

The vaccine exemption issue put the Republican majority in the State House at odds with business interests opposed to the bill. Democrats spoke against the bill on the House floor today, partly because they said it would hurt businesses.

The Republican majority voted to cut off the debate after about an hour of discussion this afternoon, forcing a vote on the bill, which came a short time later. The House passed the bill 67-23, with most Republicans supporting it and most Democrats opposed.

The Senate then sent the bill to a conference committee of representatives and senators that produced the final version.

Business Council of Alabama interim executive director Robin Stone had told lawmakers on Wednesday that the bill would put thousands of jobs at risk because federal contractors are bound to comply with the Biden mandate.

The House changed the bill before passing it today but the BCA remained opposed as of early this evening.

“This version continues to put employers and particularly federal contractors in a no-win situation between existing federal rules and conflicting proposed state laws,” the BCA said in a statement before the final version of the bill was approved. “Non-compliance with the federal mandate could result in the loss of current and future contracts and jobs for their companies and communities.

“Unfortunately, this legislation continues to move rapidly with minimal real analysis of the current and future impact to our state and the economy.”

The BCA said it supports challenging the mandate in court, rather than through state legislation.

Ivey and Attorney General Steve Marshall have joined a lawsuit with other states to fight the mandate.

Elliott’s bill, SB 9, would create a standard form allowing employees to choose one of these reasons for an exemption:

-Health care provider recommended refusal of the vaccine because of health conditions or medications. (A licensed health care provider’s signature is required for this reason only.)

-Previously suffered a severe allergic reaction, such as anaphylaxis, to a vaccination.

-Previously suffered a severe allergic reaction to receiving polyethylene glycol or products containing that.

-Previously suffered a severe allergic reaction to polysorbate or products containing polysorbate.

-Have received monoclonal antibodies or convalescent plasma to treat COVID-19 in the last 90 days.

-Have a bleeding disorder or am taking blood thinners.

-Severely immunocompromised such that the vaccine would cause a health risk.

-Diagnosed with COVID-19 in the past 12 months.

-Receiving the vaccine conflicts with sincerely held religious beliefs, practices, or observances.

An employee whose claim for an exemption was denied could file an appeal within seven days with an administrative law judge appointed by the state Secretary of Labor. The administrative law judge would issue a decision within 30 days. If the appeal is denied, the employee would have 14 days to appeal to the circuit court.

A company could not fire an employee while an appeal was pending. And the company would have to continue to receive pay an employee who has appealed until the administrative law judge’s decision.

Rep. Mike Jones, R-Andalusia, who handled the bill in the House, said appeals should be straightforward and not require a hearing because the only question is whether the employee properly submitted the form. Those who do are presumed to be entitled to the exemption.

The Biden mandate, which applies to companies with more than 100 employees and to federal contractors, allows religious and medical exemptions. But advocates for the state exemption bill say some companies are routinely denying religious exemptions.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration issued rules about the mandate today. Tens of millions of Americans who work at companies with 100 or more employees will need to be vaccinated against COVID-19 by Jan. 4 or get tested for the virus weekly under those rules, the Associated Press reported.

House Minority Leader Anthony Daniels, D-Huntsville, said he was “angry as hell” about the bill because he said it would hurt businesses and eliminate jobs.

“This is the most anti-business legislation I’ve every encountered during my time in office,” Daniels said.

Daniels said he has heard from defense contractors about the bill.

“Forcing them to have more red tape and adding more regulations for them to operate in the state of Alabama is a shame,” Daniels said.

Jones said he has heard from people who stand to lose good jobs they have had for many years because they don’t want to take the vaccine. Jones said he believes some people are genuinely afraid to take the vaccine.

“The reason why we’re here is there was a mandate from President Biden mandating vaccinations that people are afraid of,” Jones said.

Jones said he believes enforcement of the mandate will be settled in court.

“I think this fight is going to happen primarily in a federal court room,” Jones said.

People opposed to the Biden mandate have helped draw attention to the issue during the special session with a State House march and appearances at committee meetings, urging legislators to try to stop the mandate. Two of the organizers told a legislative committee on Wednesday that SB 9 was weak because it lacked a penalty for businesses who fired an employee for refusing a vaccine.

After passing the bill on vaccine mandate exemptions, the House passed a second bill, SB 15, which would prohibit minors from receiving COVID-19 vaccines without parental consent. That would be an exception to existing Alabama law, which allows minors 14 and older to consent to medical treatments.

SB 15, by Sen. Arthur Orr, R-Decatur, also prohibits schools and colleges from inquiring with minor students about vaccination status without parental consent.

The bill passed by a vote of 65-23. The Senate sent it to a conference committee.

Orr’s bill would also give the attorney general authority to enforce the vaccine passport law legislators passed earlier this year.

That law prohibits businesses from requiring proof of immunization status as a condition of providing goods and services or admission. It prohibits government agencies from requiring documentation of vaccine status as a condition of receiving government services or admission to a government building. And it prohibits schools and colleges from requiring proof of vaccination status except for vaccines already required as of Jan. 1, 2021.

But a conference committee later deleted all the language in the bill concerning the vaccine passport law. The House and Senate then approved the conference committee’s version of the bill, which concerns only the parental requirement for minors to receive COVID-19 vaccines.

Alabama lawmakers pass bill to require COVID-19 vaccine exemptions - al.com

Alabama State Port Authority: Amtrak’s return ‘would be calamitous’

By John Sharp | jsharp@al.com

The potential harm to the Alabama State Docks “would be calamitous” in Mobile if Amtrak is allowed to restart passenger rail and operate 28 train trips per week connecting the Alabama Port City with New Orleans, a filing before the U.S. Surface Transportation Board says.

The Alabama State Port Authority, in its Wednesday filing, urges that Amtrak’s Gulf Coast project be denied by the STB and argues that not enough “appropriate mitigation” has been presented by the passenger rail entity to illustrate that no harm would occur to freight operations crucial to the State Docks in downtown Mobile.

But Amtrak, since an October 20 filing before the STB, does not consider the Port Authority a party to the proceedings, and is not commenting on their concerns. According to last month’s filing, Amtrak believes the Port should not be allowed to present evidence during the proceedings or make arguments.

The Port Authority’s filing comes at the same time that CSX and Norfolk Southern, the two main freight operators along the Gulf Coast line, predict “systematic failure” if improvements are not made to avoid potential delays of what they predict will be up to 2-1/2 hours at grade crossings.

The two freight operators, in a study they jointly conducted this year, identify 14 projects that would cost Amtrak more than $400 million to complete before either company could be supportive of passenger rail’s return.

“We will review the filings from the railroads – in this case, CSX and NS – and respond accordingly,” said Marc Magliari, spokesman for Amtrak. “As for the Port, we previously filed about two weeks ago their need to establish themselves as a party to the action.”

The Port, behind its attorney Robert Wimbish, is “alarmed” over Amtrak’s characterization that it’s not a “party of record” in the STB’s case, and that it should therefore be prevented from submitting evidence. Port officials are also pointing to a STB order on Aug. 6 in which the federal entity recognizes concerns expressed by Alabama state leaders and port entities on the the potential impact of passenger service on fright, and the “need for a study to assess those impacts and identify mitigation measures.”

According to Wimbish, the layout and freight activity at the State Docks is complicated. The facility consists of complex “cross-corridor operations” that could be affected by Amtrak’s addition, he said, and that freight activity is only expected to increase in downtown Mobile. Predictions are for a roughly 30% year-over-year increase in containerized freight transported over rail lines, the Port Authority contends.

 The Port Authority, in its filing, identifies some mitigation efforts that should be considered “to protect (the State Docks) from unreasonable impairment.

Highlights include:

*Operate a train station away from downtown Mobile at the Mobile Aeroplex at Brookley. The Brookley location could be located within a new airport terminal planned to open by the fall of 2024. Amtrak plans dropping off and picking up rail passengers at Cooper Riverside Park at the foot of Government Street in downtown Mobile. According to the Port, a Brookley location would “slightly reduce, but not eliminate, pressure on the CSX corridor assets” that the State Docks relies on.

*Fund the construction of a flyover track to provide the State Docks a direct line between two rail yards in downtown Mobile and “eliminate the need for (the State Docks) to use any part” of CSX trackage in Mobile for trains traveling between the two terminals. Another option is the development of a bypass track aimed at decreasing CSX track usage.

Amtrak had targeted a New Year’s Day start-up for passenger rail service to return, for the first time in more than 16 years, to the Gulf Coast. The twice-daily service would connect New Orleans to Mobile with four Mississippi stops – Bay St. Louis, Gulfport, Biloxi and Pascagoula.

It’s unclear when the STB might rule in the case. Magliari said the restarted Gulf Coast line will be “as soon as possible” after New Year’s Day.

Freight operators and the Port Authority have long sounded alarms over the project’s restart, and its potential impact to freight operations along the Gulf Coast. The CSX and NS filing includes a 2021 Gulf Coast Rail Traffic Controller “RTC” analysis that both companies believe “demonstrates that Amtrak’s proposal would impair unreasonably the freight transportation service” that both companies long have offered along the Gulf Coast.

The study predicts by 2039, without supporting infrastructure upgrades paid by Amtrak, the addition of the passenger rail service will increase freight delays considerably, and a “degradation across all train types on both railroads.”

CSX, in a statement emailed to AL.com, said the study also highlights challenges of the Gulf Coast corridor that includes 150 miles of single-tracked main line, 13 moveable bridges that open on demand to maritime traffic, 160 grade crossings through communities (1.1 crossings per mile on average) and four ports and freight gateways.

“Any STB grant for Amtrak to access the Gulf Coast corridor should, at a minimum, be conditioned on Amtrak funding the 14 infrastructure projects recommended in the 2021 Gulf Coast RTC report,” CSX said in its statement.

The CSX/NS RTC study is the first major analysis of the rail line since Amtrak sought the STB’s involvement on the Gulf Coast project earlier this year. Amtrak, about 11 months ago, opted to cease negotiations with CSX and NS after talks over moving forward with a cooperative rail study stalled. Amtrak officials have said that the study should have lasted only seven months, and that it went beyond a time frame they felt was suitable.

Passenger rail has not operated along the Gulf Coast since 2005, when Hurricane Katrina damaged the rail line.

Alabama State Port Authority: Amtrak’s return ‘would be calamitous’ - al.com