Every Republican present voted to sustain their governor’s veto, including those who had previously voted “yes” on the budget bill. Only three Republicans were absent.
There was no debate before the roll call. It appeared that all sides knew how the vote would turn out and saw no reason to delay the inevitable.
Legislative leaders crafted the budget bill, H.13, to include the vast majority of a new spending plan while setting aside the few areas of disagreement with Scott. It would have lifted the pressure of a pending government shutdown, which would happen on July 1 in the absence of a budget. But the governor vetoed the bill because, he argued, it would have done nothing to prevent a statutory increase in nonresidential property taxes. (Democratic leaders have said they would have addressed the automatic increase in separate legislation.)
Quite a few members took the floor afterward to explain their votes, and the arguments broke down along predictable lines. One view was shared by all: A crisis and potential shutdown could have been avoided — as long as the other side had been willing to surrender.
“The budget passed with tripartisan support and only 14 no votes,” said Rep. George Till (D-Jericho), referring to an initial House vote in May. He said that holding property tax rates level, as Scott is determined to do, would be “terrible and foolish fiscal policy” that would result in “higher taxes next year.”
“The legislature has had chances to advance a real compromise,” countered Rep. Kurt Wright (R-Burlington). “The legislature has wasted monumental amounts of time on a budget they knew would be vetoed.”
State Senate committees plan to start work Wednesday morning on yet another budget plan. But the divide remains, between a governor hellbent on keeping property tax rates level and a legislature dead set against using available revenue to achieve that. At this point, the middle ground looks more like No Man’s Land.
Correction, June 19, 2018: An earlier version of this story misstated when the Senate was to start work on a new budget plan.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Why isn’t anyone asking each and every Republican who is voting for these budgets but then voting to sustain the veto why their voting record is not inconsistent?
Vermont doesn’t need anymore taxes put on them! We’re one of the highest taxed places in the country, no wonder so many people are moving out of the state!
“no wonder so many people are moving out of the state!”
according to IRS data, the percentage of older and younger citizens moving out of Vermont is virtually identical to New Hampshire
With record surplus revenue it is hard to justify the need to raise property taxes. School boards have done their part in keeping their budgets under inflation. All that is needed is to move all the legislative mandated costs in the Ed Fund back to the General Fund where they belong. Use the surplus to balance the budget without the need to raise property taxes and let the legislature set the priorities for the remaining 20 to 30 million in excess revenue.
It appears that Democrats are willing to shut government down and risk the financial integrity of the state all in order to deny Governor Scott from keeping his core pledge on which he was elected of not raising taxes or fees. Not a fine moment for a party which has in the past done a great deal of good.
Mr. Freitag said “All that is needed is to move all the legislative mandated costs in the Ed Fund back to the General Fund where they belong.”
Sounds reasonable, but it is not quite as simple as you would have us believe. Even if some of the estimated surplus was used to cover such expenses in year one, how do you suggest the legislature pay for them next year and the year after that? Your focus on the savings to the property tax ignores the need for additional General Fund revenue going forward. Please tell us how you propose to raise the necessary funds or what services you would cut.
Mr Hoffer, if you lower the cost of taxes and continue to encourage economic growth as the Governor is doing, there will be natural growth in our general fund revenues to cover the additional cost as Vt becomes a more attractive place to do business.
Mr. Frazier – With respect, it’s a little late for Trickle Down. The facts are in; it doesn’t work. The peer-reviewed literature is clear on this: state taxes are a tiny cost for most businesses. For the most recent example of a failed ideologically-driven failure, see Kansas.
Has even one Republican managed to explain why the budget was perfectly acceptable to him or her a few weeks ago and is now anathema? I want to hear from each and every one of them about their hypocrisy, and why the very same budget had their full support then, and not now. We’ll wait.
Mr Hoffer, I respectfully disagree with you. Kansas went to far with their trickle down approach, it was destined to fail. Affordability is a real issue in VT and taxes, of all types, are a significant piece of that. I dont need peer reviewed literature to tell me otherwise. I am a non Chittenton County Vermonter and know far to many friends and neighbors that are adversely impacted by their taxes. Phil Scott gets it!
Why isn’t anyone asking the Democrats why they insist on making Vermont an expensive state to live in., why they insist on changing Vermont into the state they left and why Vermonters have to pay for the legislator’s pet projects??? Most of all why must the taxpayers of Vermont have to keep paying for the overinflated reimbursement claims??? Vermonters need to do what NH does with their legislators.. pay them $200. for a 2 yr term !!!! Vermont use to be a great state to live in. People made a decent living. We had GE, IBM, some factories, Democrats don’t want business in Vermont… It’s something when you have a legislation that won’t even listen to Vermonters. They feel it”s their way or the highway. in other words, screw the taxpayers. Just pay what we tell you to pay so we can spend spend spend and raise the taxes every yr..Another thing paying out of staters $10,000 to move here is the stupidest thing there ever was. What democrats thought up this idea? Will they pay $10,000 for Vermonters not to leave the state???
Mr. Hoffer,
Like many I appreciate your willingness to engage on issues as well as the professional way you run your office.
I also appreciate your acknowledgement of the many legislative mandated costs outside of K-12 education controlled by school boards in the Education Fund. It is vitally important for transparency and good government that people understand the implication of their votes. Perhaps the only good thing about the budget impasse is the attention it has focused on the shenanigans that have gone on since the Shumlin Administration with dumping programs in the Ed Fund and not providing funding Act 46 incentives.
With a massive revenue surplus we can set this right . Balancing future budgets will require hard looks at effectiveness of all programs and setting priorities, something not being done now when raising property taxes can always be the fall back position.
Donna Boutin said that “We had GE, IBM, some factories”
The implication is that the loss of manufacturing jobs is somehow unique to Vermont or that it’s worse here than elsewhere. That is incorrect. Here are the figures for New England: 1990 – 2018.
RI – 58%
MA – 50%
CT – 47%
ME – 46%
VT – 33%
NH – 31%
Facts matter.
John Freitag – You recommend shifting certain costs from the Ed Fund to the General Fund. I asked you how you would cover those new GF costs and you said it was up to the legislature. It’s easy to say that other people have to decide what’s important and what’s not (and how to pay for the former), but I was expecting to hear your view of the matter. I’m still waiting.
Mr Hoffer,
I never once said it was unique to Vermont or that it’s worse here than elsewhere. of losing businesses. Don’t put words in my mouth I said Vermont !!! Many of the Governors, the 2 so-called Senators, and the Congressman could care less about keeping businesses here in Vermont. Remember Dean was out running around the country soliciting to be president instead of being here in Vermont acting like a Governor, and trying to talk to IBM when almost 2,000 people got laid off on short notice, I am not stupid I know my facts. I’m a true Vermonter and again I know my FACTS !!!!
Ms. Boutin – You said “Democrats don’t want business in Vermont.”
I pointed out that all New England states have lost a large percentage of manufacturing jobs since 1990 (most more than VT). The point is that these changes have nothing whatsoever to do with one or the other political parties. They reflect national and international economic forces way beyond the control of governors or legislatures. Having said that, all governor’s in the last quarter century have supported numerous economic development policies and programs, regardless of Party (although I don’t think some have been terribly effective). You are free to claim that some elected officials and one major Party don’t care about jobs, but there is no evidence to support that.
BTW – What is a “true Vermonter”?