‘Trust Through Transparency’: Debates in Senate over the Reason Behind Former CDC Directors’ Termination
- Maddy Campbell
- 50 minutes ago
- 3 min read
Since Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s appointment to oversee the Department of Health and Human Services earlier this year, there has been a considerable amount of turnover in health officials within the branch. All a factor in RFK’s plans to realign the Department of Health’s objectives and future endeavors, the secretary has been filling newly opened seats with health officials who stand with him on his controversial anti-vaccine rhetoric.
Most officials who have been removed from their positions have left somewhat quietly, their personal experiences overlooked by the consensus that they are just one of thousands whose careers were terminated. But Susan Monarez, the former director of the CDC who served in her role for just one month before being fired, is fighting back and testifying before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions against Kennedy, claiming she was only terminated because she wouldn’t overlook scientific evidence to pre-approve new vaccine recommendations.
“How did Dr. Monarez go from being a public health expert with unimpeachable scientific credentials who had the full confidence of Secretary Kennedy, into being a liar and untrustworthy in less than a month?” asked Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), one of Monarez’s supporters during the nearly three-hour-long hearing. “I think the answer is fairly obvious.”
Monarez and others like Sanders stand behind the belief that Monarez was relieved of her job because she wouldn’t act as a “rubber stamp.” In other words, Monarez refused to pre-approve Kennedy’s new vaccine recommendations without looking into any scientific evidence.
Monarez explained she was especially wary of this idea, considering that Kennedy fired all 17 members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, replacing them with new members who were more critical of vaccines. Deb Houry, the former CDC chief medical officer who testified alongside Monarez, was another figure who shared this sentiment, claiming CDC leaders "were expected to serve as rubber stamps for the secretary's decisions."
However, for as much support Monarez and Houry received from Democratic senators, many Republican senators critiqued Monarez and the few decisions she made during her time at the CDC. Sen. Jim Banks (R-IN) particularly found issue with Monarez’s decision to hire a lawyer who had spoken outwardly against President Donald Trump. Another senator, John Husted (R-OH), blatantly accused the CDC of choosing “politics over science” and “having high profile failures” while writing recommendations about COVID-19 vaccinations during the pandemic.
He argued with Monarez that many recommendations coming out of the CDC today about children getting vaccinated for COVID-19 and other diseases such as measles and Hepatitis-B are endangering children who may not need them and scaring families about vaccines rather than properly informing them about the pros and cons of vaccinations.
Monarez shot back by saying that no recommendations from the CDC were mandatory, and it should be left up to parents to talk to their children's pediatricians and decide what is best for them.
The hearing adjourned seemingly still at a crossroads. Ironically, all the Democrats present in the Senate chamber had opposed Monarez’s ascent to director, but now viewed her as an ally who provided them with firsthand accounts of flaws and discrepancies under Trump and Kennedy’s administration. Meanwhile, Republicans had supported her nomination to direct the CDC, but were left with contempt now that she had undermined an administration they supported.
Either way, this Senate hearing allowed for an insight into any flaws within HHS and will hopefully result in changes that will benefit the public health recommendations and services the American public will receive.