Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Bill would let child‑care centers opt out of accepting religious vaccine exemptions for infants and medically fragile children, with required public notice

March 01, 2025 | 2025 Legislature MT, Montana


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Bill would let child‑care centers opt out of accepting religious vaccine exemptions for infants and medically fragile children, with required public notice
Representative Mary Caferro introduced House Bill 747, which would allow private child‑care centers that care for infants under 1 or medically fragile children to adopt a policy refusing to enroll children who attend under a religious vaccination exemption and require those centers to provide notice to parents and guardians.

Sponsor Mary Caferro said the bill’s purpose is to protect infants and medically fragile children in closecontact childcare settings. “This bill provides choice which allows [providers] to respond to their own community and clientele,” testified Grace Decker of Montana Advocates for Children, calling the transparency requirement useful for parents making informed decisions. The bill’s language, Caferro said, does not apply to medical exemptions and specifically excludes taking away centers’ ability to accept children under medical exemptions.

Tracy Moseman of the Department of Public Health and Human Services explained the state’s current licensing context: federal childcare development funds require states to adopt an immunization schedule and accept medical and religious exemptions for purposes of licensing and subsidy compliance, and the department is operating under a non‑enforcement discretion notice issued in October 2022. Moseman said the proposed bill would codify in statute what the department’s non‑enforcement letter currently allows providers to do — and would add a parent‑notification requirement.

Opponents said the proposal risks discrimination and may misread Montana Code: Rebecca Schwartz testified that most statutory immunization provisions the bill cites apply to school‑age children and that child‑care licensing already requires a full immunization schedule in rule. Another opponent argued the bill would discriminate against families based on religious beliefs and urged alternatives such as private care.

No committee vote was recorded that day; the hearing ended after questions and responses from the sponsor and agency staff. The department and proponents urged coordination with federal funding rules and licensing requirements when drafting any final language.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Montana articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI