Motions for mandatory vaccination by the traffic light coalition and the CDU/CSU in the Bundestag failed by a clear majority

Those who had already written off parliamentary democracy in Germany were proven wrong yesterday, Thursday, April 7, 2022. In the plenary session, both the group motion from the ranks of the traffic light coalition, which had been put together practically at the last minute and which provided for compulsory vaccination for all persons aged 60 and over and compulsory counseling for all adults, and the Union's so-called Vaccination Prevention Act were both rejected by parliamentarians with clear majorities. However, the motions put forward by FDP politician Kubicki and the AfD against compulsory vaccination also failed, albeit predictably. The session of the Bundestag was preceded by unprecedented political chaos, which parliament was fortunately able to put a stop to after a heated debate.

The most important lesson from this stage victory should be that all our efforts are not in vain. Every conversation, every round table, every walk, every email and every letter to responsible politicians counts! We would also like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who is accompanying and supporting our peaceful and democratic movement for a self-determined vaccination decision and the abolition of all reprisals to the best of their ability!

According to the Tagesschau, Health Minister Dr. Lauterbach is already planning another push for compulsory vaccination, as if the clear rejection of the Bundestag had simply not happened. For this reason alone, we will of course continue to stay on top of the issue and provide you with important information as usual, validated by our expert advice, online conferences, warning letters and sample letters - compact, critical and competent!

#Compulsory vaccination #Bundestag #378_Helden

We from Team Corona-Solution took the trouble to follow the almost five-hour parliamentary session. For those interested, here are some details from our minutes:

• Yesterday's biggest defeat was probably suffered by the ruling coalition government and in particular Chancellor Scholz and Health Minister Lauterbach. Large parts of the debate were characterized by party-political bickering about who should not have spoken to whom, when and why, and why one or the other proposal for mandatory vaccination was better or worse. Nevertheless, there was no viable majority for any of the bills.
• The motions from the red-green-yellow politicians were only merged into a group motion a few days before the meeting due to a lack of prospects of success. Only the day before, the age limit of originally 18 years, then later raised to 50 and finally to 60 years, was raised as an alleged compromise (the comment by Green health politician Dahmen that this age limit was "chosen with care and medical evidence" therefore seems downright desperate). 378 heroines and heroes (against 296 votes in favor, 9 abstentions) in Parliament ultimately brought down this unspeakable motion for a general vaccination requirement that could potentially be extended to all adults.
• But the CDU/CSU motion, also a sham in our opinion, also failed by 172 votes to 497 (again 9 abstentions). Although reference was rightly made to the blatantly poor data situation, meaning that it was not possible to adopt such a tough measure as compulsory vaccination at the current stage, this was nevertheless planned as an option for next fall.
• In many speeches, the argument of herd immunity or "dangerous vaccination gaps" came up again and again, apparently many MPs are not yet up to date with the current scientific status that the gene therapeutics currently on the market against Covid cannot prevent infections or transmissions.
• An apparently unique political move by the governing coalition was to reverse the order of the votes, with accusations of manipulation being heard. According to current practice, the most far-reaching proposal is voted on first. The Bundestag's Council of Elders was unable to reach an agreement on this, so that as a result of a motion on the Rules of Procedure, two possible voting sequences were put to the vote first. Surprisingly, the Union's proposal on the usual order found a majority
• As word quickly spread, the Federal Chancellor summoned his Foreign Minister Baerbock at short notice from the NATO summit taking place in Brussels at the same time to vote in the Bundestag. Apparently, every single vote was at stake.
• In a brief intervention after Karl Lauterbach's speech, dentist Dr. Christina Baum (AfD) quite rightly objected that she had not contracted Covid despite constant contact with aerosols at work and attributed this to her good immune system. Without specifically addressing the objection, Lauterbach called it "dismaying" when medical colleagues (allegedly) say unscientific things. Anyone can see for themselves on Lauterbach's Twitter account how often he himself is completely wrong scientifically.
• In addition, Lauterbach came up with two daring theories (after the usual knock-down arguments): One is that the Omikron variant is only less dangerous because so many people have already been vaccinated. How Omikron could have known this when it mutated to its current status will probably remain the secret of our health minister. On the other hand, compulsory vaccination would prevent 90% of deaths. He also failed to provide any evidence for this.
• The threat of renewed measures in the fall was repeatedly used as an argument (or rather: to intimidate) for mandatory vaccination. You only need to take a look at all the neighboring countries to see this as a pretext. The image of Germany as a ghost driver in Europe is already doing the rounds.
• The pseudo-argument of postponed operations and preventive medical check-ups seems just as pretextual. This is an attempt to compensate for a misguided policy (flat rates for hospital beds kept free) with even more blatant measures.
• The contribution by young Green politician Max Lucks, who spoke out against compulsory vaccination, is worth mentioning. This would create normative pressure, which he believes is the wrong approach. He believes that the promise to end the pandemic by law cannot be kept.
• Sarah Wagenknecht (Die Linke) spoke of a "headless health minister" who had "long since made himself impossible through his erratic actions".
• Far too often, many good contributions from our point of view were lost or ridiculed. For example, the clear references to the Nuremberg Code, the side effects that are now almost impossible to grasp or the former decision of the Federal Constitutional Court on the Aviation Security Act (2006). This clearly ruled out sacrificing innocent people (by deliberately shooting down a passenger plane) in order to protect other lives. This would violate human dignity by making people mere objects of the state.
• Only the AfD motion called for the suspension of the already valid, facility-based vaccination requirement. Although neutral in terms of party politics, we fully share this demand.
  
  

Editor: GO
Photo: pixabay, license CC0