With the vaccine rollout well under way and hospitalizations declining, it's time to put personal health choices back in the hands of citizens.
While the Michigan Legislature is considering a ban of "vaccine passports," we understand why some businesses and campuses may call for proof of shots.
The government shouldn't punish anyone or deny privileges for private, medical decisions. Rather, state and local governments should provide residents with information and access to the COVID-19 vaccines instead of ultimatums.
Recent legislation introduced in the Michigan House would preemptively prohibit the state and local governments from requiring proof of vaccination.
Rep. Sue Allor, R-Wolverine, who sponsored the legislation, says she was concerned by the concept of vaccine passports and their implications for residents.
Allor touched on the troubling situation created by vaccine passports if participation in society is predicated on getting the shot. Some residents can't get the shot for medical or other reasons, like religious objections or phobias.
Another top concern surrounding vaccine passports is citizen privacy. Besides federal laws protect private medical information, Allor has worries passport vendors might lose control over the sensitive data entrusted to them.
She points to the possibility of data breaches and cybersecurity as another reason the state shouldn't be allowed to inquire about residents' vaccination status.
The bill would prohibit governments from "producing, issuing or providing an incentive for COVID-19 vaccination passports."
While the language doesn't specifically mention public universities like Oakland University and the University of Michigan, there could be amendments coming that would explicitly prohibit those schools from requiring students get vaccinated to live on campus.
These schools are in a tight spot and should have leeway to maintain a safe campus for all students and staff. They need a more nuanced approach from the Legislature that carves out space for universities to require vaccination to live on campus as long as they leave room for medical and religious exemptions.
"The vaccine is only required for those students living on campus because they're living in congregant living, in close quarters," says Rick Fitzgerald, a spokesman for UM. "We know students want to be living on-campus. Vaccination is the way to get there."
Fitzgerald says the university does not require any student to live on campus.
More than 90% of UM's freshmen live on campus, however, and having to choose between living on campus and getting the vaccine still poses issues for those unable to get the shot.
That's why college and university administrators should provide for students with legitimate reasons for not getting the shots. And some are.
The UM-Dearborn campus, for example, will allow students to attend without proof of vaccination if they show a negative weekly test.
The Legislature is right to stand up for personal liberty, but lawmakers must preserve the goal of letting businesses, institutions and individuals make the best choices for themselves as they seek a return to normalcy.
