Bill Overview
Title: Ending Discrimination in COVID–19 Treatments Act
Description: This bill prohibits consideration of certain factors, including vaccination status, in decisions about an individual's access to federally provided monoclonal antibody therapies to treat COVID-19. As a condition of receiving the therapies from the federal government, states must ensure that providers do not consider specified demographic characteristics, veteran status, or political ideology or speech when determining a patient's eligibility for such therapies.
Sponsors: Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals globally needing access to non-discriminatory COVID-19 treatments
Estimated Size: 10000000
- The bill affects individuals seeking monoclonal antibody therapies for COVID-19 treatment.
- The bill specifically mentions prohibition of discrimination based on vaccination status, demographic characteristics, veteran status, or political ideology, thereby impacting individuals in these specific groups.
- The use of monoclonal antibody therapies is a method of treating COVID-19, indicating that this bill's primary focus is on individuals infected with or at risk of severe COVID-19 who seek these treatments.
- Globally, COVID-19 treatment protocols affect all populations; however, this bill targets regulations for treatments funded federally within the United States.
Reasoning
- The population distribution considers individuals across various demographic groups to capture diversity in experiences and impacts.
- The budget constraints mean it's crucial to have a blend of individuals who are directly impacted and those who aren't, to gauge the policy's cost-effectiveness.
- COVID-19 infection trends, healthcare access disparities, and history of past treatments can influence how strongly individuals feel the effects of this policy.
- The 10 interviews will include people who range from high to no impact, covering different geographic locations and social demographics to provide a balanced view.
Simulated Interviews
Hospital Administrator (New York, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy ensures fair treatment for vaccinated individuals, which is important in a healthcare setting.
- As a hospital administrator, I see the importance of not discriminating against unvaccinated patients for lifesaving treatments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Veteran (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill is crucial because it prevents discrimination against veterans like myself who have chosen to remain unvaccinated.
- I appreciate not being judged by my vaccination status when seeking treatment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Public Health Researcher (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could lead to more equitable healthcare across varying demographics.
- As a researcher, I support evidence-based, non-discriminatory treatment approaches.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Retired (Miami, FL)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Knowing that treatments could be administered without biases is reassuring to someone with my background.
- I support the idea that past infection and recovery should not affect treatment accessibility.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I'm vaccinated, it's comforting to know that unvaccinated individuals, possibly including my students, aren’t denied critical treatment.
- I support any measure that protects my community from bias.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 24 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill feels like a protective measure for personal choices and medical privacy.
- Concern over access to treatments was a stressor, so this policy is a relief.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Retired Farmer (Boise, ID)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Rural healthcare access is already challenging, and this policy helps ensure treatments aren't restricted based on vaccination status.
- I need this security in my older age.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Nurse (Boston, MA)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- In healthcare, we've sworn to provide impartial care, making this policy align with that mission.
- I hope this policy reduces any political pressure on healthcare decisions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Freelancer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A policy like this levels the playing field for everyone regardless of personal choices.
- It's important for a diverse country like ours.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Small Business Owner (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy helps ensure fairness in healthcare, which is critical for small businesses and our employees.
- It’s good to not have divisions among us regarding treatment access.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $80000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $80000000)
Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $80000000)
Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $80000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $80000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $80000000)
Key Considerations
- Ensuring compliance across a diverse set of healthcare providers might present challenges.
- The policy's legal and ethical dimensions could affect its implementation pace and efficiency.
- Monitoring non-discrimination compliance will require clear guidelines and potential audits.