After more than an hour of debate, the West Virginia House of Delegates Judiciary Committee advanced a bill that would provide immunity from civil liability for people, businesses and health care providers as it pertains to the coronavirus pandemic.
During Tuesday’s committee meeting, lawmakers rejected a series of amendments to Senate Bill 277 that sought to dampen the wide effect of the bill. The bill would completely eliminate liability related to the coronavirus and offer a defense on claims being brought forth related to infections, treatment or death.
Del. Chad Lovejoy, D-Cabell, first offered an amendment that would have allowed claims against persons or entities that act “with actual malice, or a conscious, reckless and outrageous indifference to the health, safety and welfare of others.”
Lovejoy argued that he understands giving immunity to those who might be negligent, but not those who intentionally harm others. The amendment was similar to a proposed change that was offered last week by Sen. Richard Lindsay, D-Kanawha, but was ultimately rejected.
“To go beyond that and to immunize intentional harm or outrageous indifference, to the health of others, I think is bad policy,” Lovejoy said.
In the end, Lovejoy’s first amendment failed.
A second amendment brought forth by Lovejoy would have limited the definition in the bill of “impacted care” so that it would only apply to treatment related to the coronavirus and not other treatments that were delayed as a result of the pandemic. The effort was also rejected.
Lovejoy also offered an amendment that would have expired the the bill. Like his first amendment, it also echoed a change offered by Lindsay in the Senate — calling for immunity from claims to end when the state of emergency related to the coronavirus is rescinded.
Del. Steve Westfall, R-Jackson, spoke against putting an expiration date on Senate Bill 277.
“The governor called the state emergency. He’s gonna end it someday,” Westfall said. “But I’m not sure this pandemic’s ever gonna end. I think it’s gonna be a new normal.”
And like Lindsay’s similar amendment in the Senate, Lovejoy’s third amendment also failed.
Lawmakers also rejected four amendments from House Judiciary Vice Chair Tom Fast, R-Fayette, that would have narrowed the scope of immunity offered in various provisions throughout the measure.
Del. Joey Garcia, D-Marion, offered an amendment that would have created a death benefit of up to $10,000 to be used for funeral expenses for anyone who dies as a result of an intentional act and has no claim otherwise under the bill.
Garcia’s amendment also failed.
As the committee discussed the full bill, Lovejoy made mention of two letters sent to committee members that argued against the passage of Senate Bill 277 — one from the AARP and another from the ombudsman of long-term care facilities through the West Virginia Bureau of Senior Services.
The two letters argue the measure does little to protect the state’s elderly population from those who might intentionally inflict harm. Lovejoy said the bill fails to balance competing interests between protecting businesses and residents in the midst of the pandemic.
“That’s just not right. That’s not the way the law was meant to be,” Lovejoy said. “And so, because we fail to balance those competing interests of protecting our businesses — and I’m all for it — but also protecting our residents, which we do not have in this bill. I have to speak against it.”
With the Republican majority voting to advance the measure to the floor, Senate Bill 277 — unchanged from its passage in the upper chamber — now heads to the full House for consideration.
More than 500,000 people have died in the U.S. from COVID-19 since the pandemic hit this country and the world just over a year ago. NPR is remembering some of those who lost their lives by listening to the music they loved and hearing their stories. We’re calling our tribute Songs Of Remembrance.
Since she fell in love with it in the 1970s, John Denver‘s “Sunshine On My Shoulders” was one of a handful of cheerful, heartfelt songs Gran constantly sang to loved ones. The ’70s were an especially tumultuous period for her; one of significant loss that had a profound impact on her life. This song was a gift. Though she never said it, I believe the lyrics reminded her to appreciate life’s small joys. She chose to be grateful for something as simple as the sunshine “on my shoulders” or “in my eyes” or “on the water,” and she invited the people she loved to do the same. For her, I believe the sunshine of which Denver sings is a metaphor for the small joys she cherished: reading books to her granddaughters, skiing with her son, dancing with her husband, sharing a meal with friends. For the rest of her life, she listened to John Denver. A coal miner’s daughter born and raised “up Cabin Creek,” she also treasured Denver’s song about her beloved West Virginia, where she experienced her many sunshines.
Gran sang this song to me on numerous occasions: while planting flowers in the spring; eating Ellen’s ice cream on Capitol Street; riding bikes on a Saturday afternoon. Beyond nostalgia, when I hear this song, I can picture the hours and days we shared, and I feel close to her. Also, simply the word “sunshine” makes me think of her. As I wrote in her obituary: “Our grandmother was sunshine. If you had the pleasure of knowing her, you know that she was a vibrant, generous woman full of life, smiles, and unconditional love. A humble person who wisely valued the ‘precious present.'” Regardless of life’s trials, she seized every opportunity for happiness, constantly whistling and singing her favorite songs. Perhaps you heard her sing, “Have I told you lately that I love you?” … “You are my sunshine” … “Sunshine on my shoulders makes me happy” … “The sun will come out tomorrow.” Now, the song makes me think of the gift of being by her side during her final week, when we had not been permitted to touch for nearly one year because of the pandemic. The first evening we spent with her, she asked to listen to music. When we played Denver’s song, she swayed her hand to the melody and joyfully sang the words “makes me happy.” Despite feeling badly, she knew little time remained and she chose to enjoy it. She repeatedly told us “I’m so lucky,” “I’m so fortunate,” and “I couldn’t have been happier in my life.” When I hear “Sunshine On My Shoulders” or sing it to the great-granddaughter she could not meet because of COVID-19, I think of my Gran and smile, for she was my sunshine with whom I shared countless small joys, and I am grateful we had each one of them. —Marissa Yingling, granddaughter
Copyright 2021 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.
The West Virginia Senate has passed a bill that would eliminate liabilities related to the coronavirus pandemic, including claims made against businesses, individuals and health care providers. Members of the upper chamber voted 25-9 Friday to send the bill to the House of Delegates after rejecting two amendments to the measure.
Senate Bill 277, the Creating COVID-19 Jobs Protection Act, would allow no claims to be made against businesses, individuals or health care providers for “loss, damage, physical injury, or death arising from COVID-19.” The bill would be made retroactive to Jan. 1, 2020.
Before lawmakers voted on the bill, Sen. Richard Lindsay, D-Kanawha, offered two amendments.
The first proposed change would have allowed for lawsuits to be filed against “any person, or any employee or agent thereof, who acts with actual malice or a conscious, reckless, and outrageous indifference to the health, safety, and welfare of others.”
In a floor speech, Lindsay mentioned that zero civil liability cases have been filed in the state of West Virginia to date.
He also noted reports that Democratic New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo has been under scrutiny for moving coronavirus patients into a nursing home, which resulted in more than 1,000 deaths.
“The way the bill is constructed, it gives blanket immunity to not only good actors — which are the people we want to protect — but bad actors,” said Lindsay, noting that West Virginia’s law would protect incidents such as the one involving Cuomo. “And so this amendment would say those who engage in actual malice or reckless indifference would not have the luxury of immunity.”
Senate Judiciary Chair Charles Trump, R-Morgan, spoke against the amendment.
“The fundamental purpose of the bill, Mr. President, is to preempt and prevent gobs and gobs of litigation regarding COVID lawsuits that could be directed at any person,” Trump said. “‘You know, it’s your fault that I got COVID, or it’s your fault that my uncle got COVID.’”
Lindsay’s first amendment was rejected on a voice vote.
Lindsay’s second proposed amendment would have terminated the effect of Senate Bill 277 upon the state of emergency related to the coronavirus pandemic being rescinded. The proposed change was also rejected on a voice vote.
Following the discussion of Lindsay’s amendments, senators debated the Senate Bill 277 in its entirety.
Many Democrats, including Mike Romano, D-Harrison, stood in opposition to the measure based on the rejection of Lindsay’s first amendment which attempted to make exceptions for reckless and malicious behavior.
“There’s been seven states that have adopted COVID immunity. Three states require good faith compliance with all of the guidelines that are set forth by their state or local government,” Romano said. “We didn’t come close to that. But yet we’re gonna allow intentional conduct to receive the benefit of immunity.”
But Trump argued that such an all-encompassing immunity from liability is needed to protect businesses and individuals in the state.
“I’ll concede that we are creating liability protections that are very broad and dissimilar to what we have in other areas of the law,” Trump said. “But Mr. President, this is a global pandemic — and it requires extraordinary measures and responses in a lot of different ways.”
Sen. Bob Plymale, D-Wayne, and Sen. Mike Woelfel, D-Cabell, joined Republicans in supporting the measure.
Senate Bill 277 now heads to the House of Delegates for consideration.
Lawmakers in the West Virginia House of Delegates debated amendments to a bill that would make changes to the governor’s emergency powers. The lower chamber adopted one amendment to the bill Thursday and considered another that had been on a winding road before it was rejected.
House Bill 2003 would limit a state of emergency declaration to 60 days. It would also allow the Legislature to extend that declaration 30 additional days or remove the declaration altogether.
The measure comes as the state is now in an 11-month long state of emergency related to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. With the bill on second reading in the House Thursday, lawmakers considered amendments on the floor.
“The First Amendment to the Constitution says, ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.’ In my mind, a state of emergency or state of preparedness is not a law,” Brown said. “I just want to erase any gray area that may be there for future governors or our legislators.”
After a brief debate, the House adopted Brown’s amendment on a 94-4 vote.
But most of the attention on amendments was focused on a proposed change offered by Del. Pat McGeehan, R-Hancock.
McGeehan once again offered an amendment that would add a single line to the end of the bill: “Upon passage, any state of emergency or state of preparedness currently in effect are subject to the provisions of this section.”
McGheehan explained his amendment on the floor.
“What my amendment does is make it clear that this [check on the executive powers] bill applies to the current state of emergency,” he said.
The House Judiciary Committee initially adopted McGheehan’s amendment during a Saturday meeting before reversing course on Monday.
House Judiciary Chairman Moore Capito, R-Kanawha, spoke in opposition of McGeehan’s amendment during the Thursday floor session. Capito noted that a small workgroup of lawmakers got together months before the start of the session to craft the bill.
“Nothing in this bill precludes application of the law to any existing state of emergency or state of preparedness,” Capito said. “And as I said, we take careful deliberation, we carefully construct amendments and law. Because, my preference is to craft policy that makes an impact — not policy that proves a point.”
Capito argued that McGeehan’s amendment would make the legislation “cloudy” and eventually make its way to the courts over the ambiguity of the word “passage.”
“I don’t know what passage means. Does it mean passage from this body? Does it mean passage from that body? Does it mean when it’s signed by the governor?” Capito said. “Sounds like a question that needs some interpretation.”
Various members of both parties came to McGeehan’s defense throughout the course of debate on the floor Thursday. Del. Chris Phillips, R-Barbour, was one of the lawmakers who sat on the workgroup Capito mentioned.
“Currently, we’re almost a year into this emergency — so the situation is no longer emergent. And I think that this body has every right as a co-equal branch of government to make our voice heard and exercise our status as a co-equal branch,” Phillips said. “I support the amendment.”
Others who sat on the workgroup, including Del. Barbara Fleischauer, R-Monongalia, also spoke in favor of the amendment.
“I don’t think it harms anything at all to say that this law applies right now,” Fleischauer said. “We can all disagree about legal issues. But I think ‘upon passage’ is pretty clear that we want this law to apply to the current situation and to future situations that we defined very carefully.”
In closing, McGeehan urged delegates to consider a situation in which the governor’s political affiliation was different from the party in control of the House. He also asked members to consider the powers that Justice has wielded over the course of the pandemic.
“There’s been, as far as I know, no talk of when the state of emergency will end. If we don’t apply this check to executive power now, then it’s at the executive branch’s discretion as to when it’s going to end and what they can do,” McGeehan said. “And we’ll continue to have no input.”
However, McGheehan’s amendment was rejected on a 47-51 vote.
House Bill 2003 now advances to third reading and will be up for passage on Friday.
Since 2012, the 2nd Chance Center for Addiction Treatment has served people in Lexington, Kentucky. The office sits on a busy street on the city’s north side. Similar to the heavy traffic that passes by, clients seeking treatment for substance and opioid use disorders steadily stream in and out of the building.
But in 2020, the clinic had to limit that flow of patients as it changed its protocols to adhere to COVID-19 restrictions. Group therapy and individual counseling meetings stopped. In-person meetings moved to online video calls as telehealth appointments became an alternative.
NorthStar Online NA
/
For one 2nd Chance client receiving treatment, the pandemic’s disruption has been searing.
“I’m employed, and I do have a stable background and family. But still, the isolation is extremely tough, and it does weigh on you,” he said. (The client asked to remain anonymous because of the stigma associated with addiction.)
In a December interview, Dr. Tuyen T. Tran, CEO of 2nd Chance, said he worried that the pandemic would worsen addiction, relapses and overdoses.
“With the pandemic, we’re going to probably see a surge in the number of cases of patients experiencing suicidal ideation, increased patients with addiction,” Tran said. “And for those who have been stable in treatment, the increased need for isolation will result in multiple relapses.”
A week later, drug overdose death data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention affirmed Tran’s prediction. June 2019 through June 2020 was the deadliest year for drug overdoses the country has ever seen.
Suhail Bhat
/
Ohio Valley ReSource
The Ohio Valley, an early epicenter of the opioid crisis, saw overdose fatalities soar, and in parts of the region the rate of increase surpassed the national average. But while the pandemic is compounding the addiction crisis, it has also catalyzed additional state and federal responses to the epidemic. From local clinics and state agencies to newly appointed officials in the White House, people are looking for ways to tackle both new and existing barriers to treatment during the pandemic.
Overcoming Barriers
When the pandemic first emerged, many addiction treatment programs went to a virtual setting online. But, as with many aspects of work and education, that shift exposed common barriers people face as economic inequality and infrastructure gaps restricted access to telemedicine visits.
“We take it for granted, everyone has a cell phone, everyone has a laptop or a computer. But that’s not necessarily the case,” Tran said. “And so we experienced many difficulties with getting our patients seen with telehealth.”
The lack of broadband internet access in parts of the region also impeded access to treatment. Tran’s clinic provided Wi-Fi access so people could safely participate in group therapy sessions from their cars in the parking lot. For patients who didn’t have a phone or internet, 2nd chance established isolated space in the clinic with a computer for telehealth visits.
The pandemic’s economic impact also started to affect their clients, as unemployment escalated and people lost income. Some were struggling to pay for rent, food and other necessities. The clinic helped out with unemployment insurance claims, job searches, and even referred some patients to food banks, as well as signing some up for Medicaid as well as signing some up for Medicaid, which, among other things, allows clients to continue to pay for treatment.
In addition to the multifaceted stress caused by the pandemic, stigma still presents a significant barrier to treatment and the acknowledgement of substance and opioid use disorders as chronic diseases.
Corinne Boyer
/
Ohio Valley ReSource
2nd Chance Center for Addiction Treatment adjusted its in-person services in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic
“It’s not a moral choice, and we’ve been trying to preach that for quite a while.” Tran said. “If we can get everyone to understand that this is a disease, then the treatment of that disease will not be any different. We don’t view the chronicity of other illnesses, such as hypertension, or diabetes, in any other way, but yet for this particular illness, we view it as if it was a poor moral choice.”
Tran said Lexington area hospitals have worked to combat that stigma and treat addiction patients the same as anyone being seen at a hospital.
For a few months during the pandemic, Tran said, the clinic couldn’t monitor patients, which helps hold those in treatment accountable.
“Since they weren’t being monitored, they began to use additional illicit drugs, and we’ve been detecting them when we started monitoring again,” he said.
KY Drug Control Policy Office
Kentucky Drug Control Policy Director Van Ingram.
The danger for those who abuse drugs is now magnified by the increased traffic in more powerful synthetic drugs. Over the past few years, fentanyl, a synthetic opioid, has become more common in Kentucky. Van Ingram, executive director of the Kentucky Office of Drug Control Policy, said the potent drug is used in the manufacturing of other drugs. A person intending to use methamphetamine, cocaine or even a different type of manufactured opioid may unknowingly take a drug laced with fentanyl.
“So all these things cause all kinds of problems in the illicit drug market because people may think they’re injecting methamphetamine when in fact it’s a cocktail of methamphetamine and fentanyl,” Ingram said. “They may think they’re taking a pharmaceutical drug when they’re not.”
Tran fears that the number of fentanyl analogs, or various chemical structures, will complicate drug screenings.
“To detect certain analogs, you have to have the proper reagents,” Tran said. “Well, the new analogs are coming out so rapidly, we can’t keep up with creating reagents to test for them.”
If fentanyl analogs evade drug tests, it can complicate treatment for patients possibly leading to more drug overdose fatalities, Tran said.
State and Federal Efforts
West Virginia has long had some of the nation’s worst rates of addiction and overdose deaths, and federal data show the death toll has surged during the pandemic.
Last year West Virginia was awarded $43.7 million in State Opioid Response grant funding from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. So far, that’s assisted in the statewide distribution of approximately 28,000 doses of the overdose-reversal drug Naloxone.
“To be completely honest, our goal was to stop deaths so that we could get people into treatment or back into treatment,” Christina Mullins said. Mullins is Commissioner for the Bureau for Behavioral Health in West Virginia’s Department of Health and Human Resources, “We expect people to relapse. This is a chronic disease where relapse happens.”
Alexandra Kanik
/
The grant funding also helped her agency tackle one of the biggest barriers for many rural Appalachian people seeking treatment — transportation. The West Virginia Public Transportation Association buses alter routes to pick people up.
“And since the pandemic started, we’ve run over 7,700 of those deviated routes, getting people back and forth to where they need to be,” Mullins said. “That has been one of the biggest challenges in my public health career.”
At the federal level, health officials just beginning their duties in the Biden administration know that more people with substance use disorder need access to treatment. Regina LaBelle is the acting director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, which develops and oversees the administration’s National Drug Control Strategy and budget.
“We have to develop a treatment infrastructure around this country that makes sure that we can get people the treatment they need, the services they need, when they need it,” she said. “And we’re just not there yet. I mean, there are 20 million people in this country who have some form of substance use disorder, and only about 11% of people get treatment.”
LaBelle says the pandemic has allowed for some policy revisions that have improved access to treatment, such as telehealth.
“The ability to do Telehealth has been kind of a game changer for their ability to connect with their patients. And it’s really helped to retain people in treatment during this very uncertain time.”
Courtesy ONDCP
White House Office of National Drug Control Policy Acting Director Regina LaBelle
Racial equity is one of the office’s top five policy priorities. LaBelle said that means striving for “culturally competent” treatment and prevention.
“That we recognize that how we treat someone, a person of color, in one part of the country may not be the same as that type of treatment or other services the person needs in another part of the country,” LaBelle said.
She added that expanding that treatment is part of “the whole government approach to racial equity that the Biden-Harris administration is taking on.”
LaBelle echoed the importance of some of the work already underway in the Ohio Valley, such as expanding the availability of Naloxone and providing transportation assistance for rural patients.
She said her office will be reviewing some of the temporary policy changes that have been made to address needs during the pandemic with an eye toward which of those changes should be made permanent.
In Treatment
The experience of clients at Lexington’s 2nd Chance clinic drive home just how urgent those efforts will be as the pandemic wears on.
The anonymous client who spoke with the ReSource said extended isolation is a challenge for him as he manages his opioid use disorder, and he said it can affect addiction of any kind.
“You’ll probably see a large increase in people with addiction and needing recovery,” he said. “Anytime you have people with addiction, and they’re being forced to stay at home or out of [work], I think it’s going to create a bit of a problem.”
He hasn’t attended recovery meetings like he once did because he helps elderly members of his family. The pandemic has forced him to further limit his contact with others so as to reduce the risk of transmitting the virus to highly vulnerable people.
“By visiting, helping them with groceries, I’m over there taking them to the doctor when they need help,” he said. “Things like that have really kept me from attending meetings, like I would have in the past prior to the pandemic, just because of the fear of me being asymptomatic and transferring the disease to someone and someone I really care about passing away because of me.”
He has stayed in touch with his recovery group and sponsors by using social media, but he doesn’t think the public has “broad knowledge of what people with addiction go through, what the disease is. So I think, definitely, people with addiction are kind of left behind in so many ways.”
This is the second story in a series of reports about the addiction crisis during the pandemic. Part three will examine solutions regional experts are developing to expand treatment and reduce overdose deaths.
The Ohio Valley ReSource gets support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and our partner stations.
West Virginia Coronavirus Czar Clay Marsh spoke to a U.S. House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on Tuesday and credited the state’s success in vaccinating its population to “scrappy and resilient” leadership.
West Virginia Coronavirus Czar Clay Marsh spoke to a U.S. House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on Tuesday and credited the state’s success in vaccinating its population to “scrappy and resilient” leadership.
In West Virginia, state leaders took control of vaccine distribution, partnered with local agencies and pharmacies and prioritized the most at-risk populations.
“In order to best meet the needs of our citizens, we need to have local involvement at many levels so that we can share information,” Marsh said.
Almost one in nine West Virginians have received at least one dose of vaccine, second to Alaska. West Virginia leads the nation with 3.8% of its population having received two doses of vaccine, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
“Ultimately, West Virginia created a plan that worked for us,” Marsh said.
He said the state has the capacity to increase the weekly number of people vaccinated by as much as eight times the current numbers.
The state has received 207,200 first doses and 94.5% of them have been administered, according to the West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources COVID-19 dashboard.
Additionally, 121,400 second doses have been received and 58.4% have been administered.
While many of the questions at the hearing were directed at Marsh because of West Virginia’s success, lead health officials from Illinois, Michigan, Louisiana and Colorado also testified.
Marsh suggested creating a venue for state and federal leaders to share strategies that are working and said this would help state leaders coordinate their vaccine distribution.
“The fact that we have these vaccines are game-changers,” said Marsh. “This is the most complex, problematic response of modern-day America and the world. So staying together and working together and sharing with each other best practices is really key for our global and country’s success.”
9(MDA2NDA4NzY1MDEyODkzMjYyNTkxZjFiZQ004)){kind=small}
