I almost fell out of my chair last month when I heard the ol' boy declare an executive order mandating Gardasil vaccines for all sixth grade girls beginning in 2008. The vaccine, which the FDA approved last June, protects against several strains of the human papillomavirus that can cause cervical cancer.

Not only did Mr. Perry bypass his buddies in the Legislature with this announcement, he walloped them: ordering the state to pick up the tab for all girls ages 9 to 18 who cannot afford the $360 vaccine series and mandating that Medicaid fund it for women ages 19 to 21.

You'd think such an announcementone that could have a profound effect on the health and well being of girls and women, especially those with little money or access to regular gynecological carewould send me scurrying to the governor's door with flowers, candy, home-baked cookies and an apology for all of the times I've castigated him for his failure to provide leadership on the health care front.

But after I picked myself up off the floor and steadied my spinning head, I became suspicious. Why Gardasil?

It's not that I have anything against Gardasil: it looks like a promising vaccine that has the potential to save the lives of our daughters.

But to mandate it and authorize state coverage for it when we won't even cover basic health care for the children of the working poor? (Remember, Texas kicked 167,158 children off of the Children's Health Care Program back in 2003, despite the fact that the U.S. government reimburses states for any monies spent on CHIP.)

From a purely fiscal standpoint, mandating the vaccine doesn't seem to make sense. Based on current population statistics, 350,000 Texas girls would receive the vaccine each year at a cost of $126 million, for which the state would pay $29 million (for those not covered by other insurance). Given that 5,800 Texas women contract cervical cancer each year, and that cervical cancer treatment costs roughly $2,200 per woman per year, treating the disease costs around $12.8 million annually. That means the governor's mandate would spend nearly ten times the cost of treatment on prevention.

Please don't misunderstand: I am not suggesting that the state shouldn't do or spend whatever it can to prevent the nearly 400 deaths from cervical cancer each year in Texas. I just question the motives behind mandating Gardasil when, according to th eCenters of Disease Control, 24% of children in this state lack basic health careÑthe highest number of uninsured kids in the country. These uninsured kids cost the state millions of dollars each year because their parents must wait until the kids are severely ill before seeking care, usually at an expensive emergency room. How many of these kids will go on to suffer long-term health issuesÑfor which the state undoubtedly will payÑbecause lawmakers turned a blind eye to them when they were young and vulnerable but unable to lobby on their behalf?

And yes, it may all boil down to lobbying. The conservative Texas Eagle Forum suggested that Mr. Perry's political ties to Merk, Gardasil's manufacturer, may have influenced his decision. Those ties include $6,000 in donations by Merk to Mr. Perry's political campaign, and the fact that Mr. Perry's former chief of staff is now a lobbyist for Merk.

Mr. Perry, a staunch and proud conservative, denies any political influence and says his decision was motivated strictly by public health; indeed, his press spokesperson has linked the Gardasil mandate with Mr. Perry's strong pro-life views, telling the Houston Chronicle that Mr. Perry considers Gardasil protecting life.

If Mr. Perry is so concerned about protecting life, I humbly ask him to whip out that pen and sign another executive order mandating comprehensive health care not simply a single vaccine for all children in this state (or, at the very least, reinstating CHIP for the kids who were kicked off). Imagine what a life-affirming message that would send! It not only would lift Texas out of its worst-in-the-nation health care ranking, it would protect the lives of all children by allowing them to grow up healthy.

I do hope the governor has had an epiphany and is readying his pen for more mandates to improve children's health care. If not, I'm afraid the political overtones of this one overshadow Mr. Perry's alleged intent.

Still, I'm waiting with flowers, candy, home-baked cookiesand hope for poor, uninsured children.