Government Overreach During Pandemic

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, we witnessed the egregious overreach of government during the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in the infringement of Americans' rights and devastating consequences for our economy and unprecedented government spending.

From the outset of the pandemic, we witnessed unprecedented government actions that trampled upon our basic freedoms and liberties: social shutdowns, mandated mask wearing, and vaccine mandates were imposed with little regard for individual autonomy, constitutional rights, or people's personal health issues.

These heavy-handed measures not only eroded the fabric of our society but also inflicted severe economic harm on businesses and families across the Nation.

Those of us with an ounce of common sense suspected from the beginning that COVID was little more than the flu and that the government's actions bordered on martial law.

We were told it would take 2 weeks to flatten the curve. Well, were we played or how did that really turn out when it became 3-plus years?

Instead of allowing citizens medical freedom, they forced the jab onto all of us, encouraging employers to threaten employees with termination if they didn't comply and keeping kids out of college. In order to return to their classes, they had to take the jab.

One of the common controversies came from ivermectin, which we now know, and many knew at the time, works as a very effective early treatment for COVID-19. How many people were harmed because they weren't allowed this early treatment because it was politicized?

Indeed, recently, the FDA finally had to walk back an early-on smart- aleck tweet they made trying to compare real ivermectin that is prescribed for people and formulated for people to something that would be comparable for livestock. After having suffered that embarrassment, they had to walk it back.

In the meantime, how many lives were lost because this early treatment was not available? Instead, they were forced into other types of treatment or flat out being ignored when doctors and hospitals said: Well, come back to us when it is really bad, then we will check you in.

Americans should have the right to make their own informed decisions with doctors they trust, including the choice to use alternatives such as ivermectin, especially in early treatment.

It is very troubling that the government actively suppressed information about treatments for COVID-19, including ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, and other materials that were available, while promoting instead a one-size-fits all approach centered around vaccines. Safe and effective, we were told.

In fact, the FDA's censorship of information about ivermectin has had real-world consequences for medical professionals who dared to speak out. Again, what you see is that the FDA had to walk back their lies and their deception about this. They also were browbeating hospitals and doctors into selling the same thing. We see that even in my own local area where people were asking legitimate questions about ivermectin and were made fun of: Oh, this is just horse paste. You don't want to do that.

Medical experts were contradicting themselves time and time again since the beginning of the pandemic. We were told to lock down for 2 weeks, right? Then it was masks, and then it was double masks. Then it was something called social distancing. For a while, they thought ventilators were going to be the issue for that, so they hurried manufacturers into making ventilators, and then they found out maybe those were harmful.

Before Trump left office, we had top officials saying: Oh, I will never take it if it is Trump's medicine. Then immediately after they were forcing it on people when Biden took over. Interesting how that works.

Commonplace therapeutics with decades of human usage and proven success--including ivermectin, which won a Nobel Prize in 2015 for its lifesaving qualities--again, as I mentioned, were branded as unsafe horse medication.

Treatment methods should be a topic of debate or discussion and, indeed, the experts should be allowed to bring this forward that have all people's best interests in mind. If a treatment works, then it should be distributed as widely as possible or at least allowed, whether it is a vaccine, a dosage of ivermectin, or an infusion of monoclonal antibodies.

The politicization of differing treatments hurt Americans by restricting their ability to receive lifesaving medications, especially early treatment, when it probably could have saved thousands of lives.

As we stand today, there are multiple options that have been proven effective in treating the virus, but we hear the same old saw about the latest iteration of vaccine being forced upon people and making billions for pharmaceutical companies.

We should be able to choose what we want. If you want to take therapeutics, you should have the ability to take them. In a lawsuit filed in Texas, three doctors claimed that the FDA's actions interfered with their medical practices and harmed their reputations. Pharmacists have refused to fill ivermectin prescriptions for patients, and doctors have faced professional repercussions for simply advocating for the use of ivermectin.

There is much more, but when these people ask for forgiveness for lying to us like that, no way. There needs to be prosecution.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source