House Health Care Committee chair Bill Lippert (D-Hinesburg) starts a hearing Wednesday on whether the state should continue to allow parents to take a philosophical exemption from having children vaccinated. Credit: Terri Hallenbeck

When the 2015 legislative session started, House leaders had no interest in poking what they thought was a sleeping giant of an issue — childhood vaccinations.

But the giant refused to remain asleep. So, next week — just as the session is wrapping up for the year — the House will have that difficult debate.

“It was not a priority of the House, but it’s here,” House Speaker Shap Smith said Friday. 

The issue is here because the Senate voted relatively late last month to remove the philosophical exemption that allows parents to opt out of vaccinations for their children. Senators attached the measure to a House bill that deals with other health records. From the House’s perspective, it appears more expedient to tackle the issue this year than to delay it until next year. 

And while the House defeated a similar measure three years ago, sentiment has shifted. “Some people who were noes then are clearly yeses now,” said Rep. George Till (D-Jericho), the House’s only medical doctor, who strongly supports removing the exemption.

Among those who’ve changed their minds: House Health Care committee chair Bill Lippert (D-Hinesburg). He went from voting to keep the exemption three years ago to being on the fence to now leaning toward removing the exemption.

“We need to find ways to increase the level of vaccinations in Vermont,” Lippert said Friday after his committee took three days of emotional testimony on the matter. Lippert said he’s received a flood of emails and phone calls from people on both sides of the deeply divisive issue.

His committee has called a public hearing for 5:30-7:30 p.m. Monday at the Statehouse. The full House will likely vote on the issue Tuesday or possibly Wednesday, Lippert said.

The outcome is anybody’s guess, said House Majority Leader Sarah Copeland Hanzas (D-Bradford). “There’s a chance it could fail,” she said, noting that Democrats won’t urge members to vote one way or another.

Hanzas is personally wary of removing the exemption, arguing that education is a more effective way to increase vaccinations. She fears removing the exemption would alienate some parents. Smith, on the other hand, supports removing the exemption.

A report released this week indicates that efforts to educate parents, which legislators approved three years ago, aren’t working to persuade more to vaccinate their children.

The percentage of parents opting for exemptions or receiving provisional admittance to school for their children without vaccinations rose from 5.4 percent in 2011-12 to 6.1 percent in 2013-14, according to a report released this week by the Vermont Health Department. Vermont is among 20 states that allow philosophical exemptions. Forty-eight states, including Vermont, also allow religious exemptions. 

Lippert’s committee fielded a firestorm of emotional testimony this week, including a celebrity visit from Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who argued that the government can’t be trusted to protect people from greedy pharmaceutical companies. The committee also heard from those who said keeping the philosophical exemption could kill their kids and others who said forcing their kids to get vaccinations could kill them.

Lippert said he expects that if the House votes to remove the exemption, it might delay the effective date for a year.

There may be alternatives. Rep. Anne Donahue (R-Northfield), a member of the House Health Care Committee, is proposing stricter rules for parents who want to choose a philosophical exemption. Under her plan, parents would have to sign a notarized affidavit affirming they have had an in-person consultation with a doctor about vaccinations and are seeking alternative medical treatment. Under a law passed in 2012, parents now have to sign a form saying they have reviewed materials about vaccinations to be eligible for the philosophical exemption.

“I am convinced from the testimony that it’s essential we increase the rate of vaccinations,” Donahue said.

State Health Commissioner Harry Chen said this week that he supports removing the philosophical exemption and would like legislators to act on it this year.

His boss, Gov. Peter Shumlin, is less eager. Shumlin said Friday he’d prefer to let educational efforts continue. But he said he doesn’t buy the notion that vaccinations are dangerous. He met with Kennedy when he visited, but said, “No, I did not tell RFK he’s full of hooey.”

Terri Hallenbeck was a Seven Days staff writer covering politics, the Legislature and state issues from 2014 to 2017.

24 replies on “House Headed for Vaccination Debate”

  1. @Katie: Try a different browser. The article is still there. And you completely misread which report was flawed. From the link:

    //The report, published last week by the Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT), was “speculative,” Celiac Disease Foundation CEO Marilyn Geller told FoodNavigator-USA.

    ‘THERE HAS BEEN NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE PUT FORWARD for a GMO/celiac disease link that is supported by the CDF medical advisory board.// (Capitals mine, for emphasis, as I can’t italicize here).

    Interestingly, I eat organic, exercise, drink plenty of water, “basically take care of myself.” And I have celiac.

    Also interestingly, from the NIH (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…

    North America
    CD prevalence in North American and Europe were found to be similar in symptomatic patients and not-at-risk subjects. In the United States, CD is believed to affect 0.5%-1.0% of the general population.

    Europe
    The overall prevalence of CD in Western populations is close to 1% (1:100) and may be higher in Northern European countries (Table ​(Table22)[36-38]. The Scandinavian countries, Ireland, and the United Kingdom population tended to show a higher prevalence of CD of approximately 1.0%-1.5%, although there also were studies that showed a lower prevalence in these countries. A study of small-intestinal biopsy obtained from healthy Dutch blood donors at Arnhem and Nijmegen Blood Donation Centers shows that the prevalence of CD-compatible biopsies of 1:330[39]. The prevalence of CD among 3654 children (age range, 7-16 years) in Finland was at least 1:99 based on serum autoantibodies and small-bowel abnormalities[40]. The prevalence of CD in Northern Spain in the general population was 1:389[41], 1:132 (0.75%) in Eastern Switzerland adolescents[42].

    I happen to oppose GMOs myself, for anti-monopoly and environmental-impact reasons. But it drives me insane when people cite pseudo-science/conspiracy theory babble as “proof” that a link between GMOs and specific health issues exists.

  2. “Not only does GMO’s affect humans”

    There is no medical evidence for this. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. There is only speculation driven by fear and paranoia. Stuff you find on the Internet does not equal medical evidence.

  3. @Jane – Interesting how the article is from 2013, when you click on it, the page the article is gone. However when you Google, there are more links showing how the report provided was flawed. Not only does GMO’s affect humans, it has been affecting the lab animals they are testing on. So I ask, how can you not contribute GMO’s to celiac? GMO’s do not offer the same nutrients as natural grown food. There is no way. If you think Roundup is not going to harm your system, then that is your right.

    Go to Europe, they are not pushing the GMO’s as they are here. It is mandatory that all food products show exactly what is in the food. If the GMO’s do not do harm, then why is the Grocery Manufacturing company fighting so hard against advertising what is in their products?

    I for one am tired of the government telling what is right and wrong for me. They have no right. I work out, eat right, drink plenty of water, get a good nights sleep, basically take care of myself. I have never been healthier. I stopped listening to the corporate dr’s advise. Next time you go to your Dr’s office. Look around, how many pharmaceutical reps are in the waiting room? That is a huge concern.

Comments are closed.