But when the late-session proposal came up for a vote Wednesday afternoon, his colleagues made quick work of it.
After less than an hour of discussion, the Senate voted 18 to 11 to scrap a provision that currently allows parents to opt their children out of mandatory vaccinations for purely philosophical reasons. If signed into law, the amendment would still allow children to attend public schools if they qualified for a medical or religious exemption.
Whether the House follows suit in the final weeks of the session remains unclear. Speaker Shap Smith (D-Morristown) and Rep. Bill Lippert (D-Hinesburg), who chairs the House Committee on Health Care, said Wednesday they have yet to decide how to proceed.
In the Senate, the proposal came up last week as a surprise amendment to an unrelated bill concerning disease registries. Members complained at the time that the unexpected airing of such a contentious issue prevented them from hearing testimony from experts. They opted to delay the vote by a week, allowing the Senate Committee on Health and Welfare to hear from both sides Wednesday morning.
During the floor debate later in the day, Sen. David Zuckerman (P/D-Chittenden) argued against doing away with the philosophical exemption. He said the science of whether vaccinations are safe is “disputed.”
“What we put into us, whether it be the food we’re eating, the various things we consume in society or shots and whatnot into our body, this is the one vessel or being that we completely control,” he said. “And we are adjusting the laws of our state to such that someone else is determining — we in this room are determining — what is going to go into every single person’s body.”
Zuckerman attempted to further amend the bill with a provision that would keep the philosophical exemption in place until the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention “determines that there is a reliable DNA swab test to check for the genetic predisposition to an allergic reaction to various immunization ingredients.” He later said that “maybe it requires a more rigorous test.”
“I don’t know,” the organic farmer conceded. “I’m not a scientist.”
His amendment failed by a voice vote.
Sens. Ann Cummings (D-Washington) and Anthony Pollina (P/D-Washington) argued that eliminating the exemption would leave children whose parents oppose vaccinations with fewer educational options. They also wondered whether it would have a negative fiscal impact on schools because fewer students would attend.
Supporters of the amendment largely held their fire, likely because they were confident they had the votes. In the end, the margin was closer than in 2012, when a similar measure passed the Senate by a 24 to 4 vote. It was later watered down by the House.
Like the Senate, the House has not focused on the subject this year. Lippert said his committee has been too busy working on a health care reform bill. He said his peers were divided on the issue and that a path forward was not clear.
For his part, Smith said his leadership team had yet to canvass the Democratic caucus to gauge its support for the idea. But he said his personal views were clear.
“If I were to vote on it, I would vote to remove the philosophical exemption,” he said.
Gov. Peter Shumlin said earlier this year that he supports retaining the exemption.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
I’d love to know the difference between a “Religious exemption” and a “Philosophical” exemption.
“The science is disputed!!” – Not a scientist.
Thought this was interesting and I should have sent it to Dave, who I like very much but I completely disagree with on this issue.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/22/health/mmr-v…
Medical professionals are in agreement that you need to get your kids vaccinated. On top of that, we have a small outbreak in Charlotte and this is how you vote. C’mon guys. I got vaccinated and I turned out just fine while two cousins’ parents passed on vaccinations and they were sick constantly growing up (e.g., whooping cough). It’s just stupid.
So it will just be the kids from religious families who infect and potentially kill others.
“I don’t know,” the organic farmer conceded. “I’m not a scientist.”
The only correct thing he said.
“I don’t know,” the organic farmer conceded. “I’m not a scientist.”
But . . . he knows that climate change is real because strong winds have blown the plastic off his greenhouses.
Zuckerman is a joke, albeit not a funny one. I mean, the way he presents himself in general is laughable, but not funny. The reason it’s not funny is that he was elected to represent the people, but the only thing he really represents is himself. He only shows up when it’s something that he will directly benefit from, or that he has taken on as a passion project. Please, for Christ’s sake, send this guy packing next election.
Hi all-
I appreciate our differences. It is a sad day when it has to get personal.
I suppose I should have said that there are very few scientists (Ginny Lyons is the exception I believe) in the Senate. But we all read through lots of information on many issues (scientific and not) and make decisions based on both judgement and science and experience.
Scott, I have not stated, nor do I believe that their is a link between MMR and autism. That has clearly been debunked. You could have sent that too me, but I already understand that.
My presentation was about herd immunity (which we have across the state, except for a very very few small school scenarios for specific vaccines). It was about the risks of allergic reactions (which I have some constituents who have had those and they have also been life altering). And I presented the concerns regarding who controls which vaccines are going to be mandatory and what their financial interests are (this part was in the prior session where we discussed the amendment prior to the delay.)
There were 11 total legislators who felt this was not the amendment to vote for. It was for a variety of reasons, from science questions, to process questions, to education questions. We were from the left, the center and the right.
I appreciate the strong sentiments. And I appreciate that there are those that will always have vitriol for me (from prior issues or this one) and that there are others who sometimes agree with me and sometimes don’t. And those that often agree with me. I try to take into account many considerations in my deliberations. But please, just as you are human, so are we.
To bad there’s not a vaccination for ‘stupid’.
There are many good reasons to get a philosophical exemption. One, simply put, is that there are ‘recommended’ CDC vaccinations (in the current list of over 110 vaccines/combination strains given today) that are not necessary. If your child has had chicken pox, your child is not going to a daycare (the recommended CDC list vaccinates for certain STD’s like Hepatitis) or you are not travelling to one of the three countries where polio is actually not cured – your child may not need those immunizations, but you cannot avoid them unless you take the philosophical exemption.
The biggest issue with outbreaks is that people who are given many vaccines should avoid contact with others for several days to even several weeks. Some doctors don’t even seem aware of this, and in our own state over 85% of cases of whooping cough (which is the norm) have been traced back to people who have been partially or fully immunized http://vtdigger.org/2012/10/08/90-percent-… Whooping cough was proclaimed a ‘dead disease’ by the inventor of the vaccine, but parents are not informed to prevent contact with a recently immunized child for 48-72 hours following a whooping cough vaccine. The lack of information is what keeps the disease, and fear, alive and well.
Another commenter asked what the difference is between religious and philosophical exemptions – basically some religions do not allow for blood transfusions or foreign material to enter the bloodstream. Philosophical exemptions are a large catch all that contain well informed people who choose to opt out of a few specific vaccines because the child has had the disease/is not at risk, because the parent is making a life choice which can include avoiding certain immunizations (veganism, etc.) or the parent is fearful of all vaccines
Oh for pity’s sake, Sen. Zuckerman. You’re constantly sobbing that any criticism of you is “personal.” Get over it. You seek out the spotlight and put yourself in it. You say highly controversial things. You take highly controversial positions. Vaccinations, GMOs, marijuana, etc., etc. If you can’t take criticism get out of the spotlight. No other Vermont politician whines that criticism against them is personal. Not Shumlin. Not the Speaker Smith. Not Senate Pro Tem Campbell. Not Bernie, Not Pat. Just you.