An act relating to reporting on adverse reactions related to immunizations
H.69 would require the Vermont Department of Health to produce an annual report to the Legislature on adverse reactions reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). The report would be due by January 15 each year and would cover the prior calendar year. It would include the total number of reported adverse reactions, and, if the data set is large enough, aggregated information by immunization type, lot number, and recipient age.
The bill also requires the report to include the number and cost of emergency department visits, hospitalizations, permanent disabilities, and deaths associated with reported adverse reactions. In addition, the Department would have to summarize its efforts to help Vermonters seek compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. The report would be posted on the Department’s website and sent electronically to immunization providers in Vermont. The act would take effect July 1, 2025.
This bill would amend 18 V.S.A. § 1132, expanding the state’s existing vaccine adverse event reporting framework by adding a new annual legislative reporting requirement for the Department of Health. It does not change immunization mandates directly, but it would increase state-level data collection, public reporting, and administrative oversight related to vaccine safety and adverse event tracking. It also formalizes the Department’s role in assisting residents with federal vaccine injury compensation claims.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of legislative debate or vote outcomes. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears framed as a transparency and reporting bill rather than a substantive change to vaccination policy. Its stated purpose suggests a neutral-to-supportive administrative approach focused on information sharing and public reporting.
Because there are no transcripts or votes, specific points of contention are not documented in the provided materials. Potential areas of debate, based on the bill’s subject matter, could include the scope of data reported, privacy concerns around lot numbers and age-based aggregation, the administrative burden on the Department of Health, and whether the report could be interpreted as encouraging vaccine skepticism. Supporters would likely emphasize transparency, accountability, and assistance for injured patients, while critics might question the usefulness or framing of VAERS-based reporting.