SoylentNews

bradley13 writes:

I read an apocalyptic novel a few months ago. It was placed in the USA, and the core assumption of the novel was that practically every agency in the federal government had armed troops. After sufficient build-up of these forces, one day the President took advantage of some crisis or other to declare martial law. Maybe this was inspired by the fact that lots of unlikely federal agencies do, in fact, have their own armed forces. Some of the stranger ones are: Dept. of Education, Food and Drug Administration, Internal Revenue Service and Post Office.

It was just a story, of course. Though one does wonder just why the Dept. of Education needs guns.

So now comes the CDC, proposing a new regulation. For those of you who are Americans, the CDC is accepting comments until October 14th. Here are some interesting excerpts:

The CDC "may promulgate regulations that provide for the apprehension and examination of any individual reasonably believed to be infected with a quarantinable communicable disease in a qualifying stage."

Understandable, quarantine people who are infectious. By force, if necessary. Only, it continues:

"a 'qualifying stage' means that the communicable disease is in 'a precommunicable stage, if the disease would be likely to cause a public health emergency if transmitted to other individuals' or "a communicable stage."

So, non-infectious people, but still infected? Well, not exactly...

"CDC defines precommunicable stage to mean the stage beginning upon an individual's earliest opportunity for exposure to an infectious agent"

[Continues...]

So you don't have to actually be infected. An "opportunity for exposure" is sufficient. They want the authority to forcefully quarantine anyone who may have been exposed to a disease. Considering the Zika virus, this would presently include a large portion of the population of Florida, as well as anyone who has been there recently.

Should they apprehend someone, what happens then? Well...

"...quarantine, isolation, conditional release, medical examination, hospitalization, vaccination, and treatment ... the individual's consent shall not be considered as a prerequisite to any exercise of any authority under this part."

If you disagree with an action they take, you can appeal, of course. Your appeal must be in writing, and sent to the CDC. The CDC will review their own action and "issue a written response to an appeal, which shall constitute final agency action.".

I do understand that unusual circumstances may require unusual actions. However, the CDC has somehow existed a long time without this regulation, a regulation that would explicitly authorize them to apprehend, detain and treat anyone, anytime, anywhere within the US, without that person's consent. So...why do they need this?

Since consent is not required, it is implicit that they will have to create an internal force to make apprehensions and enforce quarantines. So yet another federal department will have its own, private armed force. Maybe that apocalyptic novel wasn't so far fetched after all...

Original Submission