Merck vaccine mandatory in Texas

[youngins]

http://www.washtimes.com/business/20070202-100152-9747r.htm
Vaccine center issues warning
By Gregory Lopes
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
February 3, 2007
----------------------------------------------------------
--------
The National Vaccine Information Center yesterday warned state
officials to investigate the safety of a breakthrough cancer vaccine as
Texas became the first state to make the vaccine mandatory for
school-age girls.
Negative side effects of Gardasil, a new Merck vaccine to prevent
the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer, are being
reported in the District of Columbia and 20 states, including Virginia.
The reactions range from loss of consciousness to seizures.
"Young girls are experiencing severe headaches, dizziness, temporary
loss of vision and some girls have lost consciousness during what appear
to be seizures," said Vicky Debold, health policy analyst for the
National Vaccine Information Center, a nonprofit watchdog organization
that was created in the early 1980s to prevent vaccine injuries.
Following federal approval of the vaccine in July 2006, a storm of
legislation was introduced across the nation that would make the vaccine
mandatory in schools. The District and Virginia are part of a group of
at least 17 states considering such legislation. A measure had been
introduced in Maryland, but it was shelved last week over concerns about
the mandatory language in the bill.
Yesterday, Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed an order making Texas the
first state to require the vaccine. Girls ages 11 and 12 would receive
the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine before entering the sixth grade
starting in September 2008.
The American Cancer Society estimates there were 9,710 new cases of
cervical cancer in the United States in 2006. The District's cancer
control center estimates a total of cervical cancer cases in the city
last year, and the American Cancer Society estimates that last year
Maryland and Virginia each had 210 cases of cervical center.
Merck began marketing Gardasil last year after the Food and Drug
Administration approved it for females ages 9 to 26. The vaccine is the
first of its kind to build immunity against two strains of HPV, which
lead to 70 percent of cervical cancer cases in the United States.
The vaccine is not effective in men, who can get cancer from other
strains of HPV.
Its side effects were reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event
Reporting System, a federal reporting system for consumers to notify
federal regulators of bad reactions to medications. The adverse events
began being reported in July 2006, when an advisory panel to the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention recommended girls ages 11 and 12
receive the series of shots.
The types of side effects reported are not cause for alarm,
according to the American Cancer Society.
"We have not been informed of an instance that would call into
question the overall safety of the vaccine," said Debbie Saslow,
director of breast and cervical cancer control at the American Cancer
Society, adding that about 70 similar events had been known in October
2006.
Likewise, the CDC will not alter its approval of the vaccine despite
the number of adverse events revealed through the reporting system.
"A report to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System does not
necessarily mean the adverse event was serious or that it was caused by
the vaccine," said CDC spokesman Curtis Allen. "This vaccine has been
tested around the world and has been found to be safe and effective."
Merck is heavily promoting the vaccine through its salespeople
imploring doctors to provide it and running TV ads urging young women to
get vaccinated so there will be "One Less" cancer patient.
But physicians disagree with public health officials over whether
Gardasil is the panacea for cancer. Clayton Young, an
obstetrician/gynecologist in Texas, objects to Merck's claim that
Gardasil will prevent cervical cancer.
"There is no proof Gardasil will stop cervical cancer," he said.
"They haven't been studying it long enough to make that claim."
Merck spokesman Chris Loder said the vaccine is effective for five
years and the Whitehouse Station, N.J., drug maker is not sure how long
afterward the vaccine will work. Critics point out that an additional
booster shot may be necessary.
Advocates for a mandatory vaccine say that although the vaccine does
not prevent all causes of cervical cancer, Gardasil is an effective
vaccine against the most prevalent cause and therefore is a correct
public health measure.
Gardasil is delivered in three separate injections that cost $120 to
$150 per injection. Blue Cross Blue Shield, an omnipresent health
insurer in the Mid-Atlantic region, covers the vaccine for girls in the
federally recommended age groups.
Merck revenue from Gardasil reached $155 million for the fourth
quarter of 2006 and $255 million for the entire year.

[glenn-k]

First clue into why questionable drugs are pushed by government.

Gardasil is delivered in three separate injections that cost $120 to
$150 per injection.

Now for the rest of the answer find out which politicians and big fish stand to make a profit off of it.

http://www.merck.com/about/corporategovernance/board_members.html

For a start - Ties to ---JP Morgan Chase and co.

American Express - General Electric

[MountainDon]

Makes my blood boil. Again. It should be left to the parents to decide.

[youngins]

My thoughts precisely. Even though we plan to home school our kids, the idea that a Governor would issue and executive order is beyond me - probably because he knew the legislature would not pass it.

[Amanda_931]

There have been plenty of drugs ("the pill" to name a notorious example) that were badly tested prior to release.  I've no idea if this is one of them.

My father got the state of North Carolina to quit the mass screening for TB--vans like bloodmobiles went around in the counties offering free chest x-rays--because he'd decided that the cost-benefit ratio was wrong.  X-rays were killing more people (well, down the line, not immediately) than were being saved by the screening.  He was probably right at the time--among other things, reading the film was a dead bore, according to him.  He thought that the vaccination that was available at the time was great if TB was a big problem in the area.  But not in 1950's North Carolina.  He had been involved in TB treatment--during WWII he was acting as a doctor in a TB hospital while he himself was hospitalized with TB, had become interested in public health, and public health statistics somewhat later.  

That said, the National Vaccine Information Center seems to have their own agenda.  The Google search engine quotes this "Attempts to educate parents about the risks of immunizing their children." from the website.  It's not on the front page of the current website.  It is still in their mission statement.

I don't know what the truth is here.  Some vaccines are relatively harmless lifesavers--probably small-pox.  I can remember the joy that greeted the development of the polio vaccine--and the epidemics that swirled through the country before that.  Some are probably ridiculous, not to mention harmful.

I've no idea what the cost-benefit is on this one.  My guess is you won't get it either from the drug companies or the people who belive that immunization is very risky.  But in order to make an informed decision you'd have to know how much of the virus is around, what its effects are (can lead to cancer, which is still a scare-word), how likely they are, etc.  And the potential for good information has gone down sharply because it has to do with young girls having sex.

[glenn-k]

9700 Cervical Cancer problems in the US in 2006.  Let's say 200 were in Texas for argument sake - give them a few extra.

Population, 2005 estimate         Texas 22,859,968      US296,410,404

Population definition and source info       Population, 2000       Texas 20,851,820      US 281,421,906
Persons under 5 years old, percent definition and source info       Persons under 5 years old, percent, 2005       8.2%      6.8%
Persons under 18 years old, percent definition and source info       Persons under 18 years old, percent, 2005       27.7%      24.8%
Persons 65 years old and over, percent definition and source info       Persons 65 years old and over, percent, 2005       9.9%      12.4%
Female persons, percent definition and source info       Female persons, percent, 2005       Texas 50.2%      

Because of 200 cases which include adults, which are 75% of the population there,it looks like a chance for 2 to 3 million unwanted side effects - maybe some ending in death.  In reality this is about possibly but no guarantee of stopping 50 cases or so that are under the age of 18 by mass immunization.   All side effects will require doctor visits and medication - possibly hospitalization,  more medicine - good job pharmaceutical  industry and gov team.  

We the sheeple are all freaks.  Nothing more than cattle to be herded and immunized by the fascist elite.  We love the abuse.  

In reality this is about money.  

This governor is already under suspicion of making sweetheart money deals for himself, corporations and friends and taking Texas farmers land by eminent domain,  giving it to foreign government contractors, and is dubya's buddy so corruption is inherent.  

http://www.texasobserver.org/article.php?aid=1949

PERRY'S PERIL It looked like Governor Rick Perry's worst nightmare. Assembled in front of the Capitol steps on May 3rd, were more than 300 rural Anglos shouting, "Impeach Perry." These folks, mostly from Central Texas, are supposed to be Perry's base, but instead they left their homes to demonstrate against the governor and his plan for the Trans-Texas Corridor. As conceived, the TTC would be as many as 4,000 miles of toll roads, high-speed rail, freight rail, and utility pipes crisscrossing Texas. It would be built largely by private industry. Each company would have control of its piece of the corridor for decades. The first phase, the TTC-35, which would parallel I-35 from San Antonio to Dallas, has already been contracted out to a Spanish company called Cintra.

In order to make the TTC happen, the Legislature passed a bill that gives the state increased power to condemn property. Ranchers and farmers throughout the state are mobilizing to try and stop the project, which they are afraid will take their land. Many of those gathered for the rally consider themselves Republicans, and view Perry's TTC as an attack against property rights. The Texas Farm Bureau—not generally recognized as a left-wing organization—has come out against the proposal.

Rod Spencer from Fayetteville County in Central Texas stood in the crowd and held aloft a sign that read: "Don't confiscate our land to give it to a foreign company."

"Perry is a former Agriculture Commissioner, he should be concerned about saving rural land," said Spencer, whose grandfather struggled through the Depression to keep the family ranch together. Spencer identified himself as a "straight-ticket Republican," but said, "I would vote for a Democrat for governor based on this one issue."

Not surprisingly, state leaders have benefited handsomely in campaign contributions from highway contractors involved in pushing the corridor, according to an analysis by the Austin-based public interest group Campaigns for People. The top 10 TxDOT contractors and TTC-35 bidders gave $341,025 to Perry between January 1, 2001 and December 31. 2004. Just Zachry Construction alone, which has partnered with Cintra to build the first phase of the corridor, gave $45,500.

[Sassy]

All types of HPV can cause mild Pap test abnormalities which do not have serious consequences. [highlight]Approximately 10 of the 30 identified genital HPV types can lead, in rare cases, to development of cervical cancer. [/highlight]Research has shown that for most women (90 percent), cervical HPV infection becomes undetectable within two years. Although only a small proportion of women have persistent infection, persistent infection with "high-risk" types of HPV is the main risk factor for cervical cancer.

A Pap test can detect pre-cancerous and cancerous cells on the cervix. Regular Pap testing and careful medical follow-up, with treatment if necessary, can help ensure that pre-cancerous changes in the cervix caused by HPV infection do not develop into life threatening cervical cancer. The Pap test used in U.S. cervical cancer screening programs is responsible for greatly reducing deaths from cervical cancer. For 2004, the American Cancer Society estimates that about 10,520 women will develop invasive cervical cancer and about 3,900 women will die from this disease. [highlight]Most women who develop invasive cervical cancer have not had regular cervical cancer screening.  [/highlight]CDC

Looks like the vaccine only covers a couple of the potentially 10 strains that can cause cervical cancer out of the 30 known strains of HPV...    so now we play Russian Roulette...

I think I agree with Amanda, some vaccines are helpful, possibly even life-saving, but by the time a child enrolls in school, they've had close to 40 vaccinations (includes boosters).  Looks to me like our children & grandchildren are being used as guinea pigs - there has never been a long-range study done on children & vaccines because never in our history have children been given so many vaccines...  Read
Recommended Vaccinations There's a schedule for the vaccines to be given (I counted 36 I think if a child is given the flu shot every year to age 5)  And YOUR KIDS CAN'T GO TO PUBLIC SCHOOL UNLESS THEY ARE CURRENT ON THEIR IMMUNIZATIONS (ha, some would wonder why in the world a parent would want their kids going to public school  :-/ )
SENATE BILL 1873: PRESCRIPTION FOR TYRANNY
http://www.newswithviews.com/Howenstine/james.htm & http://www.newswithviews.com/Tenpenny/sherri1.htm

I am STRONGLY advised to get a flu shot at work every year... several years ago, I got one 2 yrs in a row - guess what, those 2 years I got really sick - since then I've refused & guess what?  I get a very mild cold every year, that's it... We see so many patients in ER who are very sick with pneumonia & guess what the most common remark they make is?  "I just got my flu shot!"

[Sassy]

Miracle Fruit  another cover-up by the FDA...  read the story "That old sweet lime trick"

also this link http://www.jacobgrier.com/blog/

[Sassy]

must see video on vaccines...  :-/
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=6890106663412840646&q=vaccine

[benevolance]

well it is also noteworthy that being responsible sexually is a safe effective way to prevent the HPV and cervical cancer...

Shocking that being responsible and protecting yourself will save your life....

The safe sex and being responsible part works both ways men and women.

I was shocked to read recently that most 13 and 14 year olds are having sex on a regular basis.....Damn I do not feel ancient...But it was nothing like that when I was 14

I still remember the shock and awe video where we had to look at film footage with people with herpes, the clap... see guys urinating blood and puss..scabs and rashes.....we were all petrified to even look at a woman for a long long time

Thank god I got married and never have to worry about that sort of thing ever again....I mean when you are young you think the grass is greener on the other side and all....I love my wife and I love the fact that I will never have to worry or wonder about getting sick from STD's

[benevolance]

gotta like the coffee commercial where the wife calls her husband sir and grings him coffee in the morning.... hehe

[jwv]

Having worked in women's health for a long time I've been watching this develop.  As Sassy quotes, there are many strains of HPV and the vaccine will be a drop in the bucket.

Things that make you go hmmmm.

It is completely effective in preventing cervical precancers caused by the targeted HPV types; however, about 30% of cervical cancers are caused by HPV strains that are not targeted by the vaccine.

Furthermore, the duration of protection is not yet known. Current studies indicate the vaccine is effective for 5 years.

Young men are also potentially good candidates for this protection since both men and women are carriers of HPV, but at this time the FDA has not included young men in approved populations to receive the vaccine.

and perhaps the most telling:

Merck stock tumbled Thursday, a day after the nation's No. 2 drugmaker was found liable for the heart attack of a New Jersey man who took Vioxx and a jury awarded $4.5 million in damages.

"We have high expectations for Gardasil," wrote Tim Anderson of Prudential Equity Group in an analyst's note, where he said vaccine sales could be fueled by routine vaccination in girls as young as 11 and 12. Anderson projects annual sales of $3.2 billion by 2010.

But even with these new drugs, Merck will have to scramble for more blockbusters to fill the impending sales gap while maintaining enough growth to keep investors happy

These quotes are from the FDA, Journal of the National Cancer Inst. and CNN/Money

Here's my scenario: Merck saw the financial potential of this even though their researchers were most likely warning that this is not a cureall.  Merck was facing financial disaster with the Vioxx debacle and threw the vaccine to the marketing guys who know how to make us think we need things.  Throw in a bunch of greedy politicians and Texas has a state mandate.

A friend and I have been discussing this and my stance is that public health is suspect beyond clean water and proper sewage disposal.  Takes the responsibility off the individual and gives it to the State which then allows the state to make decisions for us.  Makes me crazy!

Judy



I never get a flu shot either (not since the swine flu craze in about '76-I was in nursing school)-never had the flu, must not be high risk, why get it?  

[Deana]

This is clearly a case where Glen's recommendations that people need to 'know the law' really comes into play

" In 1986, Congress officially acknowledged the reality of vaccine-caused injuries and death by creating and passing The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (Public Law 99-660). The safety reform portion of this law requires doctors to provide parents with information about the benefits and risks of childhood vaccines prior to vaccination, and to report vaccine reactions to federal health officials."

The "consent to vaccinate" forms parents must sign prior to immunization are their way of legally protecting themselves(the government and drug companies), you sign acknowledging you understand the known risks and possible unknown side effects etc.  so whatever may happen puts the ball in your court.
As a parent, you may decide against vaccinating your child. This is your legal right.

Regarding the new Texas mandate:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070203/hl_nm/merck_vaccine_texas_dc;_ylt=AgvW4iNU12iymQ3yYIYnH9DVJRIF

Key words in this article are ""He added that parents could opt out of mandatory vaccinations for their children if they objected for reasons including religious beliefs. ""
Texas is one of many states that also have a  "Philosophical objection" clause which he specifically didn't mention .

This link has state by state exemption forms for parents
http://www.unhinderedliving.com/statevaccexemp.html

two other links with information on vaccinations and the law
http://www.vaclib.org/legal/avoid.htm
http://www.mercola.com/article/vaccines/legally_avoid_shots.htm

[Sassy]

Great article from Mercola...  I found it interesting that he stated "you don't leave your constitutional rights at the door when joining the military"    Unfortunately in today's world, judges are determining that a member of the armed forces is not protected by the Constitution of the United States but are under "military law"...  re:  Ehrin Watada... & Atty General Gonzales questioned the existence of habeas corpus...  strange, scarey world we live in of situational ethics... where the gov't operates under Orwellian principles...

[benevolance]

careful sassy

you are starting to sound like Glenn

[glenn-k]

She has a little problem.  She set out to prove me wrong about dubya and the government.  She is still trying.  Unfortunately the truth has sidetracked her and she has not been able to prove me wrong.

[jwv]

Regarding the Consent to Vaccinate-probably 95% of the time the person gaining that consent hasn't a clue as to what your individual rights are nor the consequences of receiving or not receiving the vaccine, they just know that it's their job to administer and in order to do that you need to sign.  And often in the case of refusal the parent is made to feel like a pariah and an unfit parent.

It takes a well-informed strong individual to refuse to vaccinate.

Judy

[youngins]

Fortunately, Wendy and I plan to home school our girls (right now 4 yr and 16 mo). By the time they are old enough to even be considered to get the vaccine - there will hopefully be enough research done for us to make a decision if we want to vaccinate them or not.

I also hope that we have escaped Texas's "good 'ol boy" politics and living in a Victoria's Cottage located in Colorado's majestic San Luis Valley by then  

[Amanda_931]

Speaking of Watada--this turned up on the Huffington Post yesterday.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-goldstein/unlawful-order-iraqi-ma_b_40850.html

Of course the big news from the military court martial front this week was the surprise mistrial in the case of Lt. Ehren Watada. But the less publicized case of Marine Cpl. Trent Thomas, accused in the kidnapping and murder of an Iraqi civilian, presents an interesting parallel to Watada's legal defense, while raising disturbing questions about the government's efforts to undermine it.

Lt. Watada refused an order to deploy to Iraq, a statement of fact so undisputed that the defendant signed a stipulation that he would not contest it. Prosecutors understood this stipulation to be a signed confession, and thus presented little evidence otherwise supporting the charge. But Lt. Watada insists that the deployment order was unlawful, because the war itself is illegal under U.S. and international law. Under his oath of service, Lt. Watada argues, he has both a legal and moral obligation to refuse to follow an unlawful order. Admitting to the facts, Lt. Watada told the court, was not an admission of guilt. It was this failure to achieve a "meeting of minds" between Lt. Watada and the prosecutors that the presiding judge cited in throwing out the stipulation and instigating a mistrial.

Lt. Watada's legal defense has always relied on the argument that he cannot be convicted of refusing to follow an unlawful order -- a defense the judge did not allow his attorney to present. Prosecutors have argued that Lt. Watada should not be allowed to put the war itself on trial, even if that is his only means of proving his innocence. Our military, they argue, cannot function without strict discipline, and strict military discipline requires that soldiers unflinchingly follow their commanders' orders. In refusing to allow him to argue the illegality of his deployment order, the government asserts that Lt. Watada had no legal right to question it.

Compare that to the case of Cpl. Trent Thomas, who after having an "epiphany" decided to put himself at risk of the death penalty yesterday, by withdrawing his guilty plea in the brutal killing of an Iraqi civilian.

Cpl. Trent Thomas, 25, pleaded guilty as part of a pretrial agreement to several charges Jan. 18, including kidnapping and murder, in the slaying of 52-year-old Hashim Ibrahim Awad in Hamandia last year. But Thomas said Thursday that he no longer believes he's guilty and was following a lawful order.
''Sir, when my country gives me an order, I follow it,'' Thomas told the judge, Lt. Col. Tracy A. Daly, adding that his squad leader and his lieutenant gave the order.


Cpl. Thomas's defense rests on the assertion that he was issued a lawful order, whereas Lt. Watada's defense rests on the assertion that he was not.

[youngins]

Lawmakers Call On Perry To Rescind Vaccine Order

Feb 6, 2007 03:23 PM

Some Texas lawmakers are scrambling, looking for ways to undo Gov. Rick Perry's order on a new vaccine for school children.

The executive order requires Texas school girls to be vaccinated with Merck's new drug, Gardasil. Now lawmakers are questioning his motives and bringing up new safety concerns.

"This vaccine is not proven," said State Rep. Charlie Howard, D-District 26. "We don't know the long-term effects."

Howard was floored by Perry's executive order. It requires all Texas fifth-grade girls to get vaccinated with Merck's new drug, Gardasil, to fight a sexually-transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer. Howard is not alone at the Texas Capitol.

State Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Lewisville, chairs the Health and Human Services Committee. She says she was blindsided and will now request help from the attorney general.

"There will be many other legislators who are interested in signing that request, along with me," Nelson said.

The lawmakers say there are too many unknowns with this vaccine, which was tested for just five years and approved seven months ago.

"Eighty-two cases of adverse reaction have been reported," Howard said. "Eighty-two cases since June."

Perry issued this statement Monday, standing by his executive order.

"Never before have we had an opportunity to prevent cancer with a simple vaccine. While I understand the concerns expressed by some, I stand firmly on the side of protecting life," said Perry.

Despite the adverse reactions, and what Howard calls "limited testing," Merck's vaccine does have FDA approval.

"Well, the FDA also approved Vioxx, another product by the same manufacturer as this vaccine," said Dawn Richardson with PROVE.

Disclaimers on Merck's packaging state the vaccine was never tested for its own ability to cause cancer. And its effect on a woman's reproductive capacity is unknown.

In addition to a request to the attorney general, Howard is drafting a resolution and has filed House Bill 1115 to kill the governor's order.

Merck's lobbyist, who is also the governor's former chief of staff, was doing damage control under the dome.

Whether the newly-filed bills or resolution will have any effect remains to be seen, but lawmakers say if the governor is going to continue to bypass them on important legislation like this, they might as well go home.

[MountainDon]

Merck back peddles a little, but Texas's mandating the vaccination has started a steamroller that may not be easy to stop.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/02/profamily_groups_welcome_merck.php

My state of New Mexico has a bill considering mandatory vaccination. Your state may be considering it as well... goto below link, and scroll down.

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/HPVvaccine.htm

[Amanda_931]

I picked up an issue of Bark magazine the other day, saw an article in it on vaccinations and dogs.

It won't apply to young girls and the papiloma virus(es--there are a bunch of them).  

But apparently the latest right expensive wrinkle in canine vaccinations is to first see if the dog still has immunity from the last time she was injected.  Costs more than the vaccine, unless of course she has terrible side effects.  But frequently the immunity lasts for years, even from puppy shots.

[glenn-k]

Have you had your smallpox today?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0703170122mar17,1,4018337.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

[youngins]

An update on the Merck fiasco in Texas.  Another testament to why laws should be made by The People rather than aspiring presidential candidates.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ay24wp2bA8sQ

Texas House Votes to Reject HPV Vaccine Requirement (Update3)

By Margot Habiby

March 14 (Bloomberg) -- The Texas House of Representatives voted today to overturn Governor Rick Perry's executive order that sixth-grade girls be vaccinated against the virus that causes cervical cancer.

The measure passed 118 to 23, according to Chris Cutrone, a spokesman for House Speaker Tom Craddick. A similar bill in the Texas Senate has been sponsored by half the members. It's still under consideration by a committee.

Perry's order made Texas the first state to mandate the use of the vaccine against human papillomavirus, the most common sexually transmitted disease in the U.S., which can cause cervical cancer. In a preliminary vote yesterday, the House rejected Perry's order 119 to 21 with one abstention.

Perry's office again defended the order. ``The governor believes we should protect as many young women as possible -- rich and poor, insured and uninsured -- while maintaining parents' rights to opt their daughter out of receiving the vaccine,'' spokeswoman Krista Moody said in an e-mailed statement.

New Mexico, Virginia

The mandate's opponents include parents concerned about the vaccine's safety and conservative Christians who worry that the vaccine will encourage promiscuity. Perry's action has also drawn the ire of lawmakers who say the governor's order usurped the authority of the Legislature.

Perry is a Republican, and the party controls both houses of the Legislature.

The vaccine, Merck & Co.'s Gardasil, was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in June for use in girls and women ages 9 to 26. It's recommended for 11- to 12-year-old girls.

New Mexico's House of Representatives passed a bill mandating the vaccine on March 11, and Governor Bill Richardson said he would sign it into law by the end of this week. Virginia Governor Tim Kaine has said he plans to sign a similar bill. Both are Democrats.

Perry hasn't indicated whether he'll veto the bill if it reaches his desk. If he does, it's unlikely that the Legislature could override the veto because of the way the legislative process in Texas is structured, said Sherri Greenberg, a former member of the Texas House who is a fellow in state government at the University of Texas at Austin.

Legal Option

Depending on when the Legislature completes action, Perry would have 10 to 30 days to issue a veto. If the legislature has adjourned as required by law May 28 without voting to override, sponsors would have to reintroduce the bill in the next session and start the process over. The Legislature only meets every other year, unless the governor calls a special session for a specific agenda.

``Technically, in the Constitution, there is an override, but not from a practical standpoint in Texas,'' Greenberg said. ``It takes the impossible.''

The last time the legislature overrode a governor's veto was in 1979.

Vaccination opponents may turn to legal challenges. ``It's an open question currently in the courts as to whether the governor has the power to issue binding executive orders,'' said Cal Jillson, a political science professor at Southern Methodist University in Dallas.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott told legislators March 12 that the order ``does not carry the weight of law,'' according to a statement issued by state Senator Jane Nelson, a Republican from Lewisville, and Representative Jim Keffer, a Republican from Eastland. Abbott spokesman Jerry Strickland declined to comment on the statement.

Merck Ties

Perry has also drawn criticism for his ties to Merck. His former chief of staff, Mike Toomey, is a Merck lobbyist, and the drugmaker gave Perry's re-election campaign $6,000 on a single day in September, according to Texans for Public Justice, a campaign watchdog group.

``To assert Governor Perry's executive order was issued due to political motives is absurd,'' Moody said. ``Regardless of what company it is or who works for them -- if someone comes to the governor and says they have an effective tool to prevent cancer, he is going to listen.''

Shares of Whitehouse Station, New Jersey-based Merck fell 10 cents to $43.27 as of 4:25 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. The shares have risen 23 percent in the past 12 months.

To contact the reporter on this story: Margot Habiby in Dallas at mhabiby@bloomberg.net .
Last Updated: March 14, 2007 16:42 EDT

[youngins]

What did Gov. Perry gain? This will definitely hurt any future bid he may try to make for the White house.

http://keyetv.com/health/local_story_115143042.html

Legislature Sends Bill Blocking HPV Order To Perry

(AP) AUSTIN Texas lawmakers officially rejected Governor Rick Perry's anti-cancer vaccine order Wednesday.

They're sending him a veto-proof bill that blocks state officials from requiring the shots for at least four years.

Perry says he is disappointed with the Legislature's actions but has not indicated whether he will veto the bill. He has 10 days to sign or veto it, or the proposal will become law without his signature.

Lawmakers can override a veto with a two-thirds vote of both chambers. The legislation passed by well over that margin in both chambers.

Perry made national headlines in February with an executive order requiring the human papillomavirus vaccine for sixth-grade girls.