Lawmakers will again debate religious exemption to vaccines
Democrats to push bill to eliminate the exemption for schoolchildren
Democratic leaders of the legislature’s public health committee said Wednesday they will again push a bill to end religious exemptions for vaccinations among Connecticut schoolchildren over Republican objections that the committee should focus on less controversial and coronavirus-related matters.
“The bill has the intent of protecting the public ... and particularly children who may not be eligible for vaccinations due to autoimmune conditions and the like, or in areas where the immunization rate falls below what is generally accepted to be a reasonable standard for herd immunity, roughly 95%,” said Rep. Jonathan Steinberg, D-Westport, co-chair of the committee.
Committee l eaders delayed a vote on raising the bill at Wednesday’s meeting, but said it was not for a lack of support and that the bill would soon move toward being drafted.
Several Republican legislators on the committee raised concerns about online hearings potentially limiting the number of people who can testify on the issue and whether the bill’s title, “An Act Concerning Immunizations” might confuse members of the public given the state’s ongoing COVID19 vaccination process.
“Last time we had almost 5,000 people show up at the [Legislative Office Building] and it was almost a 24-hour hearing. I’m expecting that will be repeated, if not more,” said Rep. Anne Dauphinais, R-Killingly. “I guess I’m looking for some opportunity that all of these families will have an opportunity ... to testify. It’s going to be very different virtually, than being there in person.”
They also urged their fellow committee members to focus on the pandemic and skip controversial bills like the vaccine legislation and a proposal to allow physicians to prescribe life-ending medication to terminally ill patients.
Sen. Tony Hwang, R-Fairfield, a ranking Senate Republican on the committee, said: “If we focused on nothing but COVID-related issues in this committee, it would fill the table. ... I would urge my leadership to consider that as we evaluate some of these concepts that may be extremely controversial, that perhaps we should focus in on things we are unified on.”
A petition signed by nearly 10,000 Connecticut residents asks legislators not to take up the religious exemption bill this session.
“That just gives you a perspective on what we’re doing, and how this virtual session is being received by citizens of Connecticut,” said
Sen. Heather Somers, R-Groton, who is also a ranking member on the committee.
After hearing from their colleagues, Steinberg and Sen. Mary Daugherty Abrams, a Meriden Democrat and the committee’s other co-chair, agreed to hold off on voting to raise the bill Wednesday but expected to take it up next week.
“It is our intent to bring this bill back to the committee — we’ll hold it today — if not by our Friday meeting ... by next week. That’s the expectation,” said Steinberg. “Because this bill is of interest to so many folks, [we want to] be as clear as possible, and that’s whywe’ll hold this bill today.”
In February, thousands of people from across the country — many of them families opposed to mandated vaccines — gathered at the state Capitol to protest a previous bill that would have prohibited parents from citing religious or philosophical beliefs in refusing to vaccinate their public school children. The legislation was drafted after a measles outbreak in 2019 and data from the state that show numerous schools have vaccination levels below what public health officials recommended.
Steinberg added that in his view, testimonies and petitions do not necessarily represent the opinions of the majority of Connecticut residents.
“While we take all that testimony very seriously, this is not a popularity contest where we look at who is raising hands,” he said. “We consider everyone’s testimony on the merits, and we do what we think is best. ... We’ll see how the votes turn out.”
Abrams said her commitment to passing the bill “has not wavered in any way,” but she felt it would be beneficial to have additional time to establish a clear understanding of “what we are starting with.” She noted the committee has many new members and different versions of the bill have been circulated in the past.
“I’m absolutely ready to do that and very committed to it,” she said.
Rep. Peter Tercyak, D-New Britain, reminded his colleagues that meetings to raise concepts are “specifically, by definition, not about raising bills that are entirely written.” He also questioned who held the power to decide what issues were deemed “too controversial.”
“The example is a vaccine bill. I don’t see that as controversial. I was certain that the example was going to be aid-in-dying, and I know there are many people whodon’t see that as controversial,” he said. “We’ll have a very short list, and even shorter meetings, if we don’t do things for fear that there is somebody who can voice their concern that it’s controversial.”