The Middletown Press (Middletown, CT)
Debate on mandatory vaccinations set to resume
Last February, 4,000 people, mostly children and parents opposed to mandatory vaccinations for school-age children, descended on the state Capitol complex for an aroundthe-clock hearing in a push against legislation that would have eliminated a loophole used to keep thousands of school kids from inoculations.
A month later, the coronavirus pandemic hit, suspending the General Assembly, closing the Capitol and killing the bill that Democratic leaders wanted to finally prohibit parents from claiming religious reasons to avoid requirements that school kids receive vaccinations for measles, mumps and rubella.
Now, more than 7,000 COVID deaths later, in a state of 3.5 million where many are anxious to get vaccinated, one of the state’s most controversial issues is emerging for another public confrontation.
Opponents led by a coalition of conservative Republican lawmakers have proposed a bill that would allow parents to avoid vaccinating their school-age children on “moral and philosophical” grounds. Speaker of the House Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, a chief proponent of these vaccinations said he thinks opponents are endangering others.
“The growing anti-science stance of the Republicans is alarming,” Ritter said Thursday. “Is their next proposal to declare the Earth is flat? I, for one, will continue to listen to Dr. (Anthony) Fauci and the women and men who save lives every day in our hospitals and doctors offices.”
But veteran Rep. Kurt Vail, R-Stafford, one of 15 House Republican proposing the new exemptions, said Thursday it’s important for lawmakers to consider reasons why parents choose not to vaccinate their school-age children.
“I think the important thing is for you to balance public safety, civil liberties and parental choice,” said Vail, a conservative in his fourth term in the legislature. He is worried that the current law forces some parents who aren’t religious, to hide behind that exemption.
“I certainly don’t believe in removing the religious exemption,” said Vail, the father of four children. “There is a lot of passion on both sides. With the issue of vaccines, it’s not easy. We’re trying to make it so bureaucrats aren’t making decisions for us. It is about trusting people to make good decisions for their own families. At the very least, it deserves public hearing and debated.”
In 2019, parents of about 7,800 school-age children chose the religious exemption.
Rep. Jonathan Steinberg, D-Westport, who as cochairman of the legislative Public Health Committee led last year’s marathon hearing attended by thousands in the Legislative Office Building, said the upcoming hearing via Zoom will be on legislation nearly identical to last
year’s, so the arguments will be familiar. So will the opposition.
“The expectation is to not re-invent the wheel,” said Steinberg, who expects the bill’s language to be finalized within the next few days. “There is nothing profoundly different.” He said there will be a provision allowing some unvaccinated school kids
to remain enrolled.
“We expect an extensive hearing for legislation with clear and robust medical exemptions, as well as the creation of an oversight group to meet regularly,” Steinberg said.
Senate President Pro Tempore Martin Looney, D-New Haven, another proponent of mandatory vaccines, criticized the
Republican proposal. “It’s actually more murky and less defensible,” Looney said Thursday. “This is a public health issue and it should not be mischaracterized as parental rights.”
Looney stressed that children are not possessions and the Republican opposition is a variation on one of last year’s themes among opponents.
“Children are not something to treat as one’s own property,” he said. “There is a responsibility to the child here. We believe it is beneficial to have a high level of vaccinations, especially to create a safe level of immunity for them to go to school.”