In February 2025, the "Vermont Clean Air Preservation Act" (H.217) was introduced in the Vermont House with nineteen co-sponsors but stalled in committee.

As the 2026 session begins, H.217 remains stalled. Why did it lose momentum—and what comes next? The answer lies in legislative procedures, environmental priorities, and politics.

It’s Not Just Stuck: Procedural Rules Blocked It

To understand the bill’s fate, look beyond political arguments and focus on the mechanics of the Vermont legislature. Lawmakers did not vote down H.217; instead, they set it aside due to the legislative schedule.

The Crossover Deadline Matters Most

The March 14, 2025, crossover deadline presented the main obstacle to the bill. This vital Vermont General Assembly rule requires the original committee to approve most bills and send them to the other chamber—in this case, the Senate—within the same year. If a bill misses this deadline, it usually cannot move forward that session.

A Hearing Held After the Deadline?

The committee held a hearing for testimony on H.217 on March 26, 2025—twelve days after the crossover deadline. Members did not schedule the session to revive the bill; instead, they conducted a procedural step often called a 'courtesy hearing.' The meeting allowed the committee to recognise the bill's sponsors and public interest without advancing the legislation.

Alive but on Life Support for 2026

Due to Vermont's two-year (biennial) legislative cycle, H.217 did not officially end at the conclusion of the 2025 session. Instead, it "carries over" and will be available in the House Committee on Environment and Energy when the 2026 session convenes. While still active, it currently faces significant challenges moving forward.

A Conflict of Environmental Perspectives

The procedural delay was a sign of a more profound disagreement over what counts as a real environmental threat and how to address it. The bill did not move forward due to a fundamental conflict between two views on environmental policy.

The Committee’s Main Priorities

The bill went to the House Committee on Environment and Energy, which is chaired by Representative Amy Sheldon, a natural resource planner. She prioritises established climate science and reducing carbon emissions. In 2025, her committee spent most of its time on widely supported environmental laws, like the 30x30 conservation goals and updates to the Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA).

Recent developments shaped this focus. Vermont experienced severe flooding, and a July 2025 report showed the state was not meeting its GWSA carbon-reduction goals. The committee focused on passing laws addressing these issues, such as following up on the Climate Superfund Act that legislators passed the previous year. Consequently, members sidelined topics they viewed as less immediate.

The Bill’s Populist and Cautious Approach

The bill’s primary sponsor, Representative Gregory Burtt, and his supporters saw the issue differently. They followed the precautionary principle, which compels authorities to prevent potential harm even if the science lacks absolute certainty. In his testimony, Rep. Burtt used government documents, including a June 2023 White House OSTP report on Solar Radiation Modification, to argue that atmospheric experiments pose a real, unregulated risk that the state must ban before problems arise, rather than dismissing the topic as a conspiracy theory.

The Stalemate Over Beliefs

The bill did not proceed because its central idea differed from the committee leadership’s priorities. The committee concentrated on reducing greenhouse gas emissions through various laws and regulations. H.217 addressed atmospheric spraying, including connecting 'chaff' to PFAS and regulating communications systems in an anti-geoengineering context. This difference in focus contributed to the bill not being selected for a vote.

More Than a Ban: Unusual and Controversial Parts of the Bill

H.217 stands out for more than just proposing a ban on geoengineering. Examining its unique enforcement methods, specific definitions, and inclusion of technology issues reveals why the bill faced strong resistance from Vermont’s leaders but gained praise from a national movement.

It would allow citizens to help enforce the law.

Section 589a(b) mandates that every county sheriff 'deputise and train one or more Vermont citizens to help enforce the provisions.' The requirement establishes a citizen monitoring group, diverging from the standard approach where state agencies manage environmental enforcement.

It connects 'chemtrails' to 'forever chemicals.'

In its definitions, the bill says in § 587(2) that 'Chaff,' a kind of atmospheric aerosol, contains 'Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as forever chemicals.' The reference links the anti-geoengineering proposal to concerns about PFAS pollution, a significant issue in Vermont’s environmental policy.

It addresses 5G and communications technology.

The bill covers not just atmospheric particles but also electromagnetic radiation. Section 589 sets limits on the signal strength of radio frequency (RF) equipment. The inclusion of these limits connects the bill to the 5G opposition movement, expanding its political support and attracting attention from groups interested in broadband issues.

The bill’s distinctive provisions—such as deputising citizens for enforcement, tying geoengineering bans to concerns about 5G, and explicitly defining chaff to involve PFAS—help explain both its national appeal and the opposition it faces among Vermont leaders.

Part of a National Movement That Calls It the Gold Standard

H.217 is not just a Vermont effort. It is an integral part of a larger, organised national political movement that became more active in 2025.

A Nationwide Push for Legislation

During the 2024-2025 legislative sessions, GeoLawWatch tracked 33 states considering bills related to geoengineering. Many of these bills used similar wording to H.217, suggesting that legislators modelled them on drafts circulated by national advocacy groups like Zero Geoengineering.

Boosted by National Figures

The push for these bills grew stronger thanks to the national Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement and public figures like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who supports a ban on geoengineering. Activists in this movement see Vermont’s H.217 as a model for other states, particularly for its strict enforcement and broad definitions.

In fact, a July 14, 2025, memorandum from MAHA strategist Gray Delany to co-founder Calley Means explicitly labelled Vermont’s H.0217 as the 'gold standard' for anti-geoengineering legislation. The internal strategy memo praised the bill for establishing strict regulations and empowering citizen enforcement, urging the movement to adopt it as a priority.

A Difficult Path Ahead in 2026

Although H.217 is technically active for the 2026 session, it faces substantial challenges. It did not meet the key 2025 deadline, and there is notable opposition from committee leaders, so its prospects for advancement are limited. The committee may choose not to take further action on the bill during the session. In an election year, legislative attention may shift to other topics.

Even if H.217 does not become law, the discussion around it illustrates differing perspectives on environmental risks. As severe weather events continue, public dialogue about climate policy may evolve.