Hatley's COVID Vaccine Incentive Resurfaces, but Who Actually Had the Power to Set Tennessee's Rules?

Five key takeaways:

1. Hatley responded directly to TruthWire News, stating that his 2021 vaccine incentive was voluntary, employees were not treated differently, and he opposes government mandates.
2. Blackburn also encouraged COVID vaccination in 2021, while opposing federal vaccine mandates.
3. Major employers imposed actual vaccination requirements, while the Supreme Court ultimately blocked OSHA's broad employer vaccine-or-testing rule.
4. Tennessee's governor and legislature held authority over the state's emergency-management framework, unlike private employers operating within it.
5. COVID-era government messaging, vaccine-safety concerns, and economic consequences deserve scrutiny, particularly when evaluating decisions made under the pressures of 2021.

A five-year-old story about independent Tennessee gubernatorial candidate David Hatley offering employees a chance to win a Mercedes-Benz for reaching a COVID-19 vaccination target is making the rounds again. The insinuation is that because Hatley offered an incentive in 2021, he would impose vaccine mandates if elected governor in 2026.

TruthWire News contacted Hatley directly about the controversy, and his response challenges the suggestion that his 2021 business incentive reflects support for government vaccine mandates.

According to a 2021 WJHL report, Hatley offered employees an opportunity to win a Mercedes if his company reached a 90% vaccination rate. Critics are now revisiting that decision, but there is a fundamental difference between encouraging vaccination through an incentive and requiring it as a condition of employment.

More importantly, a private business promotion does not establish how someone intends to exercise government authority five years later.

Hatley Responds to TruthWire News

Asked about the incentive and his position on vaccine mandates, Hatley explained the circumstances facing his businesses in 2021 and rejected compulsory vaccination.

“This was at a time when people were not showing up for work because of fear and we had lots of local pressure and companies around us pushing these. It was never mandatory, nor was anyone required to do it or treated differently. I do not like mandates of vaccines or anything for that matter, I have said that over and over and I am adamant that the government should give us the data and let us make our own decisions not force them on anyone, and I plan to make sure that never happens in TN.”

Hatley says employees were neither required to receive the vaccine nor treated differently for refusing it. He also explicitly opposes government vaccine mandates and says he intends to prevent them in Tennessee if elected governor.

His statement directly addresses the premise of the criticism. An employer's decision to offer an incentive during an unprecedented period of government intervention is not evidence of an intention to impose medical requirements through executive authority.

Blackburn Encouraged Vaccination, Too

Republican gubernatorial candidate Marsha Blackburn publicly encouraged COVID vaccination in 2021.

According to Clarksville Now, Blackburn appeared in a video encouraging Tennesseans to schedule vaccination appointments, noting that she had received the vaccine herself. In another August 2021 report, she encouraged individuals to consult their physicians about vaccination.

Blackburn opposed the Biden administration's federal vaccine mandates, distinguishing voluntary vaccination from government compulsion.

That distinction applies equally to Hatley. Encouraging vaccination, offering an incentive, and requiring vaccination under threat of losing employment are not interchangeable actions.

Other Employers Actually Imposed Mandates

While Hatley offered an incentive, major American employers imposed vaccination requirements.

Tyson Foods announced a companywide vaccination mandate in August 2021. United Airlines implemented a similar policy, while Citigroup subsequently warned employees that refusing vaccination could result in unpaid leave and termination, subject to applicable exemptions.

Meanwhile, the Biden administration attempted to require employers with 100 or more workers to enforce vaccination or regular testing through the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

The dispute reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which blocked OSHA's broad requirement on January 13, 2022, finding that the agency likely exceeded its statutory authority. That same day, the Court allowed a separate vaccination requirement for workers at federally funded healthcare facilities to proceed.

Employers were making decisions while government requirements were being challenged in court and major corporations were threatening workers with the loss of their jobs. Hatley says his company never required vaccination or penalized employees who declined.

The distinction between an incentive and a mandate was significant then, and it remains significant now.

The Government Created the Rules

During campaign appearances, Hatley has stated that his manufacturing businesses remained operational and expanded during the pandemic, adding jobs as economic disruptions created new opportunities.

He was making those decisions while government officials exercised extraordinary authority over commercial activity.

Gov. Bill Lee issued executive orders restricting restaurants and bars, temporarily closing fitness centers, and imposing a statewide stay-at-home order. Local governments, including Nashville under Mayor John Cooper, implemented additional restrictions.

An April 2020 Tennessee Attorney General opinion, requested by Lt. Gov. Randy McNally and House Speaker Cameron Sexton, explained the governor's broad emergency-management authority under Tennessee law. The General Assembly also possessed the power to amend the statutes governing those emergency powers.

Lawmakers eventually passed legislation restricting certain COVID-related mandates during a special legislative session in late 2021.

Lee and state lawmakers held all of the authority over the state's emergency-management framework.

The people who created and enforced Tennessee's COVID restrictions bear greater responsibility for those government decisions than the employers trying to keep their businesses operating within them. There is a fundamental difference between navigating government-imposed rules and possessing the authority to create, enforce, or change them.

The Economic Damage Was Enormous

According to a Federal Reserve analysis, more than 700,000 American business establishments closed at least temporarily during the second quarter of 2020. Approximately 1.1 million permanently exited during the year, roughly 181,000 more than the pre-pandemic average.

Government restrictions, declining consumer activity, illness, and supply-chain disruptions contributed to the damage. Families lost income, employees lost jobs, and businesses that had taken decades to build disappeared.

Meanwhile, hospitals and healthcare providers received substantial federal pandemic funding. The healthcare industry's lobbying operations and campaign contributions deserve examination alongside the policies affecting businesses and individuals. When government decisions carry enormous financial consequences, taxpayers have every reason to scrutinize who benefited, who influenced those decisions, and who paid the price.

Judging 2021 With 2026 Hindsight

I personally would not have offered employees incentives to receive COVID vaccines. I disagreed with that approach then, and I disagree with it now. But I also wasn't employing hundreds of people, responsible for their paychecks and families, while government officials imposed restrictions and employers faced uncertainty about what requirements might come next.

It's easy to declare five years later what we would have done differently. It's another matter when you're making decisions in real time, under extraordinary pressure, with hundreds of livelihoods depending on whether your business remains operational.

Frankly, it's egregious to judge someone as though they possessed in 2021 everything we know today.

The controversy surrounding COVID vaccines now extends far beyond their limitations in preventing infection and transmission. Serious adverse reactions, including myocarditis and rare fatal complications, have been documented. Questions about how government agencies, pharmaceutical manufacturers, and major media outlets communicated vaccine risks have contributed to lasting public distrust.

Many Americans believe critical information was deliberately obscured while legitimate concerns were dismissed as misinformation. The question of what officials knew, when they knew it, and what they chose to disclose deserves far more attention than it has received.

Employers were expected to make consequential decisions based on assurances from institutions claiming considerable authority and expertise. The institutions responsible for those assurances should not escape scrutiny while the people operating under their guidance become convenient political targets.

Accountability Should Begin With Those Who Exercised Government Power

Hatley's vaccination incentive is part of his business record, and voters can evaluate it accordingly. But his direct statement to TruthWire News makes clear that he opposes government vaccine mandates and says he intends to protect individual medical decision-making as governor.

Tennessee's broader COVID record includes Blackburn's public encouragement of vaccination, Lee's executive orders, the legislature's response, and the actions of officials who exercised authority over businesses and residents.

If COVID policy is going to become an issue in the 2026 governor's race, the examination should focus on what candidates actually required, what policies they currently advocate, and what government officials did with the authority entrusted to them.

Five years of hindsight may make the past easier to criticize. It doesn't change who held the power at the time.

TruthWire exists to provide independent investigative journalism that holds Tennessee’s political establishment accountable.

Independent journalism depends on the support of readers who believe in that mission.