All Statutes/Codes/Laws have a 'glossary' for definitions. Because you didn't find it does not mean it's not there. If words were not encoded in law, the Statutes/Codes/Laws would be meaningless. Believe me, the definition of 'vaccine' is there and cannot cannot be changed willy-nilly. There has to be checks and balances. Otherwise, the word 'up' would mean 'down', etc.
"From what I did see, it looks like they were pretty specific in naming diseases/vaccines. If they need Congress to add covid, will they? Or will they just try to reinterpret the words already there?"
A very good question. I tend to believe, it would have to go through a registrar of Congress to change it. It would make sense to me that both parties would have to agree on the change and a vote would ensue. Furthermore, it would need to be approved by the Senate as well.
Because you didn't find it does not mean it's not there.
I did admit that.
I was unsuccessful in finding a vaccine definition in the Act, not that there isn't one, mind you.
I found some pdf's and I think one was of the Act itself. It probably was in there, but could not readily find quotes of it online. I'm technologically-challenged, on a dumb little tablet and can't download much.
the definition of 'vaccine' is there and cannot cannot be changed willy-nilly
I'm glad to hear that. If it does have to be bipartisan and go through both houses, how fast or how slow that happens will say something in and of itself. I guess we'll have to wait and see.....
Thanks for your research and efforts here.
All Statutes/Codes/Laws have a 'glossary' for definitions. Because you didn't find it does not mean it's not there. If words were not encoded in law, the Statutes/Codes/Laws would be meaningless. Believe me, the definition of 'vaccine' is there and cannot cannot be changed willy-nilly. There has to be checks and balances. Otherwise, the word 'up' would mean 'down', etc.
A very good question. I tend to believe, it would have to go through a registrar of Congress to change it. It would make sense to me that both parties would have to agree on the change and a vote would ensue. Furthermore, it would need to be approved by the Senate as well.
I did admit that.
I found some pdf's and I think one was of the Act itself. It probably was in there, but could not readily find quotes of it online. I'm technologically-challenged, on a dumb little tablet and can't download much.
I'm glad to hear that. If it does have to be bipartisan and go through both houses, how fast or how slow that happens will say something in and of itself. I guess we'll have to wait and see.....