Tennessee once led the U.S. in childhood vaccines; a proposed bill would strip requirements
Tennessee was once a leader in childhood vaccines, but a Tennessee House bill would make required vaccines unconstitutional. (Photo: John Partipilo)
Since 1967, Tennessee has protected students, faculty, staff, and communities by requiring certain vaccinations for children to attend school but House Joint Resolution 28, by Rep. Gino Bulso, a Brentwood Republican, threatens to make these requirements unconstitutional.
School vaccination requirements play a vital role in keeping diseases at bay. Measles eradication is a shining example of the success of such laws and the return of outbreaks like the current one in Texas is a chilling reminder of their importance.
The first measles vaccine was approved in 1963, and the first national vaccination campaign followed in 1966. Within two years, measles incidence had decreased by more than 90% compared with pre vaccine-era levels.
In 1967, the Tennessee General Assembly enacted the state's first school vaccine requirements for kindergartners entering school. Physicians could grant medical exemptions when necessary. Unless there was an epidemic or immediate threat, parents could request a medical exemption if they were members of a 'well-recognized religious denomination whose teachings include reliance on prayer or spiritual means alone for healing.'
The law was incredibly effective, and Tennessee saw a large drop in yearly measles cases. In the textbook, 'Law in Public Health Practice,' Kevin Malone and Alan Hinman write, 'states that had school vaccination laws for measles vaccine had measles incidence rates 40% to 51% lower than states without such laws.' Tennessee was a proud leader in the campaign to eradicate disease.
By 1977, vaccination rates were declining and. President Jimmy Carter began the national Childhood Immunization Program. The goal of the initiative was for at least 90% of American children to be immunized by 1979. Many states reviewed their immunization laws and began finding better ways to enforce them.
After much discussion and deliberation, Tennessee legislators decided that the 1967 law 'was inadequate because it lacked sufficient sanction.' In 1978, almost 10 years after first requiring school vaccinations, the Tennessee General Assembly unanimously passed 'one of the most compulsory school immunization laws in the nation.'
The new law extended the requirement to all children in grades K-12 and imposed a penalty for non-compliance. Unvaccinated children were not counted in the school's average daily attendance, which meant they would not be counted for state funding. The state department of public health determined children would be required to receive vaccines for iphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, poliomyelitis, measles, and rubella to begin school in 1978.
Ensuring 840,000 Tennessee K-12 students were vaccinated was a monumental task. The health departments, schools, media outlets, the Red Cross, the State PTA, and others helped get the word out to parents.
Parents and children stood in long lines to get immunized in time for the school year to begin. State Health Commissioner, E.W. Fowinkle, reported that though they had a difficult mountain to climb, 'the campaign received strong support from the public, physicians, and the health and education personnel.' He admitted that the departments of health and education were not always aligned. They agreed about the importance of the immunization program, but it wasn't always easy to manage.
Naturally, the health department's main focus was the immunization program. They needed the education department to help with enforcement. The education department sometimes resented the disruption the immunization program caused. Despite these difficulties, an audit at the end of the 1978–1979 school year showed that 95.3% of all K-12 students in public schools were immunized. Only 0.2% of parents requested medical or religious exemptions. According to Malone and Hinman, 'an analysis of states with the highest and lowest incidences of measles in 1979–1980 found that states with the lowest incidence rates were significantly more likely to have laws covering the entire school population … and more likely to be strictly enforcing the laws.'
In 1981, Commissioner Fowinkle wrote, 'outbreaks … are not as devastating now as outbreaks of earlier years, but they are viewed as unnecessary because today they are preventable. The infrequent incidences of physical impairment and death that result from these diseases are even more tragic because they are unnecessary.' Forty five years later, his words are still true, perhaps even more so.
The laws enacted in 1978 have largely remained intact over the last several decades. Religious exemptions have broadened to any 'conflicts with the parent's or guardian's religious tenets and practices.' Though immunization rates have steadily declined over the last several years, (Figure 2), Tennessee has a measles immunization rate of 94.9%. In 2000, the United States declared measles eradicated. Tennessee continues to have less than a handful of measles cases each year.
Parents want to keep their children safe and healthy. They understand the importance of school vaccine requirements. According to a 2024 Centers for Disease Control parent survey, 'the majority (76.6%) of parents/guardians somewhat or strongly agreed that school and daycare vaccination requirements are important and necessary.'
In Tennessee, despite the broad exemption policy, more than 90% of school children are vaccinated. Tennessee once proudly led the rest of the country in preventing disease. HJR0028 threatens to make us a leader in increased illnesses, hospitalizations, long-lasting impairments, and even deaths. Our general assembly has the opportunity to choose the kind of example we want to be to the rest of the country. It is my sincere hope that they choose the health and safety of our children and communities by rejecting Bulso's bill.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Medicaid spending in Mass. has nearly quadrupled in the past 20 years. It needs reform.
Advertisement Medicaid was The cost of this is staggering. The budget for the state's Medicaid program, called MassHealth, has to over Advertisement But this explosion in the cost of Medicaid begs the question: Has all this spending led to better health outcomes? Surprisingly, Despite these findings, even modest Medicaid reform in Republican proposals before Congress — like encouraging community engagement through volunteering or work, preventing duplicate payments to insurers, and closing state-level However, it should be noted that the current proposals in Washington — which the House passed last week and are now in the Republican-controlled Senate — will result in more Medicaid spending over 10 years, not less. The bill merely slows the rate of growth. Only in Washington, D.C., is more spending decried as a cut. The fundamental issue remains: Are we prioritizing the right goals? Advertisement The evidence on the power of connection is . Past state-level experiments with work engagement in programs like food stamps and welfare cash assistance offer a promising road map. A Medicaid reform could similarly refocus state efforts on connecting enrollees with community engagement rather than solely maximizing federal funding. Encouragingly, these past reforms also saw a halving of the time individuals needed to stay on public assistance. Shouldn't we celebrate if someone like J.D. could earn enough to transition to employer-based or ACA coverage? Sadly, too often, critics characterize any transition off Medicaid as Advertisement While Medicaid reform often faces bipartisan heartburn, paradoxically there's longtime bipartisan agreement that major entitlement programs are growing unsustainably. If we can't at least slow the rate of growth, in part by delivering better outcomes, then our fiscal house of cards may fall, which hurts the most vulnerable. Our leaders must shift the debate from simply protecting the flow of federal dollars to ensuring that every Medicaid dollar genuinely improves patient health. Current inertia seems more about preserving the status quo than addressing the health impact on individuals like J.D. Meanwhile, our communities suffer as we miss out on J.D.'s contributions to society. The federal proposals provide a crucial moment to discuss opening doors of opportunity rather than defending a system that requires poverty for coverage. It's time to move beyond simply paying insurance companies for a card in J.D.'s pocket and focus on reforms that foster human thriving.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
VR Headset offers new way for Des Moines lifeguards to train
DES MOINES, Iowa — Des Moines Parks and Recreation has a VR headset that lifeguards at its public pools are now using to train. Ian Knutsen, a Recreation Superintendent with Des Moines Parks and Recreation, said that the VR headset allows lifeguards to simulate real-life emergencies. 'Our VR headset is a really new tool that we've been utilizing. It uses virtual reality that shows actual like real-life scenarios at different areas. So water parks, lap lanes, and it shows a swimmer in distress. So that way our guards can see and react to what would be an act of drowning,' Knutsen said. Four-day school week 'went fantastic' says Saydel Superintendent The VR headset uses a program developed by the Red Cross to help develop the scanning skill, which involves watching the pool for swimmers exhibiting the signs of drowning. Nick Shelton, a Recreation Supervisor with Des Moines Parks and Recreation, said that scanning is the most important skill lifeguards can have. 'That's the most important skill for a lifeguard because we really want to focus on preventative lifeguarding, not, you know, reactive lifeguard. We want to get there before the actual drowning happens, not after,' Shelton said. Des Moines Parks and Recreation will open Ashworth, Nahas, Northwest, and Teachout Aquatic Center this Saturday, June 7th. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


Black America Web
3 hours ago
- Black America Web
Op-Ed: Care For Constituents Or Chaos? Medicaid Cuts Will Devastate All Of Us
Source: Jemal Countess / Getty In our country, which has so much abundance, poverty shouldn't be a death sentence. However, proposed cuts to Medicaid will cause many individuals, families and communities to suffer for that very reason–poverty. Significant and potentially massive cuts to Medicaid will cause irreparable harm. Shockwaves will reverberate in rural, urban, and suburban communities, and impact individuals, working families, many of our most fragile elderly and our most vulnerable young and disabled. I offer this perspective as a public health practitioner. I have spent my career supporting and advancing health systems in our country, across Louisiana, the Gulf Coast, and in our nation's capital, Washington, D.C., Medicaid supports our workforce and health systems (hospitals and clinics), in addition to individuals, families, and communities Medicaid provides insurance to people with low incomes and people who have disabilities. This includes many individuals who work, but still don't work jobs with health insurance, work part-time, or don't make enough to cover insurance. It is the nation's single largest health insurance program. And it is wildly popular. More than 96% of Americans believe the program is important in their communities and recent national polls from January 2025 found that 80% of Americans have a favorable view of Medicaid. Some may wonder if I am overreacting. I'm not. More than 70 million Americans receive health care coverage under the Medicaid program. In Louisiana, where I live, one-third of our adult population is on Medicaid, and the percentage of coverage is even higher in rural areas. In fact, Medicaid plays a much larger role in covering rural communities in Louisiana and across our country than it does in metro/areas. In other parts of the South, like rural Kentucky, more than 40% of the population is on Medicaid. These individuals, like all of us, want nothing more than to live healthy and thriving lives while making ends meet for their families and making their children's futures more prosperous. The public may envision people on Medicaid as unworthy of receiving assistance. But there is no one profile of a Medicaid recipient. They come from all backgrounds, all races and ethnicities, all ages and all communities. In fact, most low-income Americans, whether rural or urban, Black or White, Republican or Democrat, share an economic fate impacted by hardship, and the solution to their support and prosperity is also shared. For instance, 'The number of people earning less than $25,750 for a family of four is rising in both Republican and Democratic districts, and across racial and geographic lines.' It's also important to understand the range of services people receive from Medicaid. Services include everything from general health services, to behavioral health (mental health and substance use) services, disability services, maternal health supports and more. Impacts across all of these areas could be devastating with federal and state cuts to beneficiaries or benefits. For example, maternal health outcomes, particularly maternal mortality, continue to devastate families and communities across our country. Louisiana had the nation's fourth-highest maternal mortality rate in 2021 at 60.9 deaths per 100,000 births, but I know this is not just a Louisiana problem; it's a national one. The March of Dimes reported that '870 maternal deaths occurred each year…and every year 50,000 women experience a life-threatening complication (sometimes called a near-miss)' or severe maternal health complication. With such high risk, good coverage and high-quality care is more important than ever, and over 42% of all births in our country are covered by Medicaid. Reducing these Medicaid benefits would be disastrous to mothers, babies and families. Chancing the lives of mothers and babies is simply too risky! While I referenced maternal health, Medicaid supports the existence of healthier communities. Beyond the immediacy of illness, sick people can't work, study, or play. They can't contribute to their families, our communities, and the country's economy—from kids, to employers, to the GDP, everyone loses. Our nation's health systems, from rural health centers to large urban hospital systems receive critical funding to cover the millions of peoples seeking care. The healthcare sector, one of the most important sectors of our economy overall, relies heavily on Medicaid reimbursement to sustain jobs and services. Cuts of great magnitude will threaten clinics, hospitals and medical providers. We will see the impacts of this immediately in rural regions with the shuttering of services, significant job losses, and further diminishing already challenged access to care. With health care shortages already existing, our conversations need to be continued around closing the gaps in access, not creating new chasms. Now more than ever, we need our leaders and legislative champions to protect our communities and their health and well-being! Given the adverse impact Medicaid cuts would have on the nation, we need to boldly reject proposals that will weaken the program and impact all of our communities. Given its importance, some may wonder why elected leaders would want to cut the program. Some legislators propose cutting Medicaid as part of a broader plan to give $4.5 trillion in tax cuts. Others want to lower the federal deficit, a $1.1 trillion deficit at the end of February 2025. Policymakers should not attempt to bring down federal spending with ill-conceived strategies that will only add to Americans' suffering. They should instead think strategically about taxation. Legislators can bring a great deal of confidence in their leadership by examining other alternatives to drastic Medicaid cuts, by reminding us that they care for all of their constituents, and that they are creating a vision for a healthier future based on their community's needs—timely doctors' visits, healthy births, high quality mental health care and substance use supports—not disregarding, or even worse targeting the thing that keeps us safe and well. Shelina Davis is the Chief Executive Officer of the Louisiana Public Health Institute. SEE ALSO: 'We All Are Going To Die': Joni Ernst's Chilling Defense Of Medicaid Cuts Sparks Outrage At Iowa Town Hall The Midnight Medicaid Cuts: Why The GOP's Reconciliation Bill Is A Raw Deal For The American People SEE ALSO Op-Ed: Care For Constituents Or Chaos? Medicaid Cuts Will Devastate All Of Us was originally published on Black America Web Featured Video CLOSE