TPM:
NBC "Today" show host Matt Lauer on Tuesday criticized the New York Times for suggesting that vaccination poses a unique political challenge to the GOP.
Speaking to "Meet the Press" host Chuck Todd, Lauer brought up a Times article titled "Measles Outbreak Proves Delicate Issue to G.O.P. Field."
Lauer noted one paragraph in particular:
The vaccination controversy is a twist on an old problem for the Republican Party: how to approach matters that have largely been settled among scientists but are not widely accepted by conservatives.
Describing the newspaper as "liberal," Lauer said, "Let’s make it clear: this does not break down neatly between the right and the left. There are pockets of liberal affluent American where parents don’t want their kids vaccinated.”
Todd agreed.
"What this goes down to is, we've been politicizing science now in the last decade in a lot of ways," Todd said.
Referring to a tweet from Hillary Clinton that read "The science is clear: The earth is round, the sky is blue, and #vaccineswork," Todd said: "I think that came across as a little bit condescending."
I get what Lauer was trying to say. It really is
across the spectrum. And while there's no call to polarize vaccination, there's every reason to point out the bipartisan nature of the reaction to Rand Raul's idiocy. There are plenty of prominent Republicans who said the right things about vaccinations (among the other things they say). Who?
Bobby Jindal.
Scott Walker.
Ben Carson.
John Boehner.
Mitch McConnell (who had polio). And
Rubio. And
more. It ought not to be politicized. I commend them. And I use them in discussion with conservatives.
But where he's wrong is missing the gist of the comment, which Brian Beutler and the WaPo address, below. In any case, more on who the vax skeptics are from Christopher Ingraham:
Who are the vaccine skeptics? On the heels of the Disneyland vaccine outbreak, that's what everyone wants to know. As with just about every other major issue facing the country, the temptation is to divide it along familiar left/right political divides. It may seem natural that Republicans, who tend to be skeptical of mandates and government intrusions, would be most opposed to vaccination policies. Or that Democrats, distrustful of big businesses like pharmaceutical companies, would harbor the most skepticism.
But as it turns out, we're asking the wrong question. Public opinion polling shows that vaccination attitudes don't differ much by party affiliation. Or by income, or even education. But there is one important demographic factor: age.
Brian Beutler:
Vaccine Skepticism Isn't a Conservative Problem, but It's a Problem for Conservatives
WaPo, more importantly:
Vaccination debate flares in GOP presidential race, alarming medical experts
More politics and policy below the fold.
Brendan Nyhan:
Will a measles outbreak persuade more parents to vaccinate their children?
That’s the question people are asking as concern grows about the outbreak linked to Disneyland that has spread to 67 cases across seven states.
Some doctors have expressed hope that parents will be more likely to get their children immunized. I hope they’re right, but research suggests that the long-term effects of the outbreak could be worse, not better. The social and political conflicts we’ve seen emerge over the outbreak threaten to polarize the issue along political lines and weaken the social consensus in favor of vaccination.
Well, getting back to Rand Paul...
Susan J. Demas argues for putting candidates on the spot:
Vaccinations aren't an issue that cuts cleanly along party lines. And you can say this shouldn't be political.
But this is a critical public health issue. People are needlessly getting sick and dying.
We deserve to hear what politicians are willing to do about it.
And Christie and Rand take their licks.
Politico:
Wall Street Journal editorial slams Chris Christie on vaccines
Bloomberg:
Rand Paul Pulls a Michele Bachmann on Vaccine Safety
And then Rand pulls a Mike Dukakis.
Re: Rand Paul vaccination pics: do you even lift, bro?
— @Nicole_Cliffe
Rand just figured out, day after he was publicly stupid RE vaccinations, he needed a booster? Good thing he’s not seeing patients
— @DanaHoule
@DanaHoule i think it’s because Thom Tillis is doing away with hand washing. better to be safe.
— @DemFromCT
DMR:
Leading Iowa legislators and the governor said Tuesday that they're not inclined to tighten the state's vaccination law, which allows families to be exempted from childhood vaccinations for medical or religious reasons.
The state has seen the number of families using those exemptions more than triple since 2000. But the approximately 8,000 children with such exemptions still represent less than 2 percent of Iowa kids.
Most of the exemption increase has been among people who claim to have religious objections to the shots. In the 2012-13 school year, 5,612 Iowa children had religious exemptions to vaccination, compared to 2,355 who had medical exemptions.
To get a religious exemption, Iowa parents only have to sign a statement saying immunization conflicts with "a genuine and sincere religious belief, and that the belief is in fact religious, and not based merely on philosophical, scientific, moral, personal, or medical opposition to immunizations."