Bill Description: House Bill 131 would require blood donors to disclose their mRNA vaccination status and require blood donation agencies to label blood accordingly.
Rating: +1
Does it violate the spirit or the letter of either the United States Constitution or the Idaho Constitution? Examples include restrictions on speech, public assembly, the press, privacy, private property, or firearms. conversely, does it restore or uphold the protections guaranteed in the US Constitution or the Idaho Constitution?
House Bill 131 would create Section 39-3704, Idaho Code, to require "blood donors to disclose whether the blood donor has received a COVID-19 vaccine or a messenger ribonucleic acid vaccine during the donor's lifetime."
The bill would also require that "blood originating from a donor who has received a COVID-19 vaccine or a messenger ribonucleic acid vaccine shall be clearly and conspicuously marked."
Finally, it would say that "in a nonemergency situation, as determined by the person providing medical services, a person receiving a blood transfusion shall have the right to request blood based on whether or not the blood originated from a person who has received a COVID-19 vaccine or a messenger ribonucleic acid vaccine, as long as the requested blood is available."
Most blood (and plasma) donations are made to non-profits such as the American Red Cross and America's Blood Centers. These non-profits then sell it to hospitals on a “cost-recovery basis,” and, at least for plasma, some of this money may be used to incentivize donors.
Both non-profits and hospitals are highly regulated, which is one of the reasons why the business of blood donation and sales is not a traditional market transaction. Patients also have limited if any options to "shop" for alternatives when they need a transfusion.
In a free market, the growing demand for blood free from traces of mRNA vaccinations would result in a corresponding increase in supply, but that hasn't happened in the heavily regulated environment that exists.
Increasing government regulations is a poor substitute for the natural equilibrium of a free market, but in cases like this where the market has essentially been regulated out of the process, it may be a necessary evil to protect fundamental rights such as health freedom.
(+1)
