Government Versus Private Vaccine Mandates
A major controversy during the COVID-19 pandemic revolved around vaccine mandates, imposed by both governments and private entities, such as employers. Much of the debate failed to distinguish between the two types, treating all mandates as a single issue, whether in support or opposition. An example is Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s executive order, which prohibited all organizations, public or private, from enforcing vaccine mandates of any kind.
Libertarians, however, distinguish between government-imposed mandates and those set by private entities, emphasizing the unintended and potentially harmful consequences of government mandates. For instance, one study suggests that such mandates eroded public trust in government institutions and, paradoxically, made vaccine-hesitant individuals even less willing to get vaccinated.
That said, libertarians defend the right of private entities to require vaccinations for employees, customers, or other stakeholders.
A recent study illustrates the effectiveness of this private-sector approach:
Our findings reveal that employer vaccine mandates significantly increased staff vaccination rates. This had life-saving effects on the health of nursing home residents, who experienced reductions in both COVID-19 cases and mortality. For every two facilities that implemented a mandate, approximately one life was saved. Given that a typical nursing home houses only 100 residents, this impact is substantial.
The success of voluntary, decentralized measures underscores the power of market-driven decision-making. Employees and customers retain the freedom to choose where they work and shop, allowing best practices to emerge naturally, without state coercion.
In short, when private companies take the initiative in protecting public health and safety, they provide a viable alternative to broad, government-imposed mandates.
This article appeared on Substack on March 5, 2025. Karthi Gottipati, a student at Palo Alto High School, co-wrote this post.
