House Speaker Mitzi Johnson (D-South Hero) had to cast a rare vote to counter a 74-73 tally that was favoring the Republican position. By forcing a 74-74 tie, Johnson defeated a GOP amendment that would shift teacher health care negotiations from the local to the state level.
The dramatic vote came at 10:30 p.m. after a long day of backroom negotiations followed by floor debate. Republicans would have won if two of their supporters — Reps. Marcia Martel (R-Waterford) and Jim Condon (D-Colchester) — were present.
“In nine years, I’ve never seen anything like it,” said Rep. Adam Greshin (I-Warren), who joined Republicans on the issue.
“It’s the closest I’ve ever come to winning,” said House Minority Leader Don Turner (R-Milton). “Unbelievable.”
Democrats prevailed in a subsequent vote to leave health care negotiations at the local level. Under that plan, any savings generated would be used to lower property taxes. That amendment passed by an 81-56 vote at 11:10 p.m.
Though Democrats technically prevailed, the close margin was a defeat of sorts for them — and a victory for first-term Republican Gov. Phil Scott. The governor had made a major push for statewide teacher health care negotiations in the previous weeks, arguing that the new health care plans could save the state $26 million a year if negotiations were conducted correctly.
Jeff Fannon, executive director of the Vermont-National Education Association teachers’ union, said he, too, was stunned by Wednesday’s vote. He agreed that the new health plans would save money but said the amount is unknown.
“People were wowed by $26 million and I think that number is made up,” Fannon said.
The governor indicated Wednesday night that the close vote would embolden his push for savings as the legislature nears its targeted Saturday adjournment.
“Clearly the willingness is there,” spokeswoman Rebecca Kelley said. “There’s definitely still a path forward.”
House Republicans, who hold only 53 of 150 seats, started the day Wednesday thinking they had amassed support from enough Democrats and independents to pass legislation creating a statewide teacher health care contract. But their optimism quickly faded as Democrats scrambled to announce their own plan to capture savings from the plans.
Democrats would keep negotiations at the local level but insist that savings from health plans be tracked and returned to the state to lower overall property taxes.
“There has never been disagreement that we should try to recapture as much of that savings as possible and return it back to taxpayers,” Senate President Pro Tempore Tim Ashe (D/P-Chittenden) told reporters Wednesday morning.
As an incentive, the revised plan called for returning savings in 2019 to school districts via grants. That money would have to be used to lower property taxes.
“We’re trying to find something that addresses property tax relief,” Webb said.
That there are savings to be had from teacher health care plans is not in dispute. But the ideological disagreement centers on who would negotiate, how much money could be saved and how it should be used.
To meet federal Affordable Care Act regulations, new health care plans for teachers and school staff take effect next January. Those plans are less expensive, but how much less expensive depends on which of four plans teachers choose. Those plans’ costs are negotiated at the school district level across the state.
The negotiations on that contract were difficult, Wrend said. As president of the Vermont Superintendents Association, she said she supports talking about a statewide approach to teacher health insurance contracts.
Scott and his Republican allies in the legislature pushed for shifting those talks to the state level this year. The idea is that the state would have leverage to negotiate a better deal than school boards do, thus ensuring the estimated $26 million a year in savings.
“School contract negotiations are extremely complex,” said Greshin, who is also a Warren School Board member. “By far, the most complex item to be negotiated is health care.”
Democrats held firm against altering the collective bargaining process that allows employees to negotiate directly with their employer.
Rep. Tommy Walz (D-Barre), a former teacher and school board member, decried “taking the power away from the school board and giving it to the state.”
“What I want to point out to you is this creates a very strange construct in collective bargaining. There is collective bargaining going on, but neither side is at the table,” Walz said. “I object to that.”
That, too, is the position of the Vermont-NEA. Fannon said he supported the Democrats’ plan to capture savings from the health insurance plans but would adamantly oppose moving negotiations to the state level.
Scott, speaking Wednesday afternoon to reporters, declined to say he’d veto any budget that depended on the Democrats’ plan. But he held strong to the notion that his approach — to take over negotiations and direct the savings to state coffers —would be the most successful.
How did he square the notion of Republicans, who are traditionally against big government, pushing for the state to take control of contract negotiations?
“These are interesting times, but this is an opportunity for all of us to reap the benefits of this change in health care plan as being presented to us with the Affordable Care Act,” he said.
Further irony? The governor was pushing a plan that came as a result of the Republican-despised ACA.
Disclosure: Tim Ashe is the domestic partner of Seven Days publisher and coeditor Paula Routly. Find our conflict-of-interest policy here: sevendaysvt.com/disclosure
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
“The governor was pushing a plan that came as a result of the Republican-despised ACA.”
Oh, they like big government alright just as long as it benefits them, and only them, in a big way.
Maybe our reps should work for free to save the Vermont people some money!
Thanks for your reporting, Terri.
I hope South Hero voters remember Mitzi Johnson’s anti-property owner vote when they open their tax bills. Governor Scott has a brilliant idea to save taxpayers money while helping school boards fight against the spiraling demands of the VT NEA. I am pro-union but their greed in always asking for more has resulted in Vermont paying more per student than any other state.
This situation gets worse every year and completely unacceptable for taxpayers who struggle to pay their property taxes. Every legislator that voted to keep the money spigot flowing into VT NEA’s pockets and maintain the status quo needs to be defeated in 2018.
Need more details. Cost savings by using the economics of scale is a good idea. Businesses use it everyday and it shouldn’t be stifled by some philosophic jargon about local control. Negotiating better drug prices by letting the government bargain for them on a massive scale is a good business metric to use to but republicans have a bullshit ideology that protects drug company profits. Of course, they mask it behind words like freedom, tyranny and government take over and socialism. It’s all crap of course since anyone who digs just a little bit can see that republicans far more than democrats get millions in donations to their campaigns from drug companies and get golden parachutes on their way out the door. They both do this shit though. Take a look at the contorted mess of a person Howard Dean has become. I’m just so sick of all this digging in from both parties around tired old ideas and slogans like local control and socialism you name it. Screw it all. Let’s just get out a spread sheet and see which program costs the least and provides the most benefit.
The author of this article notes the irony of Republicans, who are normally anti-big government, voting to have the state take over health care negotiations. (But it refuses to give Republicans credit for trying to save the taxpayers an estimated $26 million.) It further notes that Democrats and the NEA are opposed to having that provision removed from collective bargaining.
How about the irony that both the Democrats and the NEA were (just a couple years ago) adamantly in favor of the state taking control of all health care for all citizens, which by itself would have removed this issue from collective bargaining?
Mitzi Johnson and her caucus are owned and controlled by the state employees union and the teachers union. They are puppets on a string. Please — don’t insult our intelligence by saying that defeating this amendment was based on some philosophical principle of “local control” of teacher compensation negotiations. After all, the Democrats in the Legislature happily embraced statewide control of education finance years ago when they passed Act 60 in 2000. No, this was about doing exactly what the teachers union ordered Mitzi Johnson to do. This was about continuing to allow the teachers union to bulldoze local school boards into submission for Cadillac health care benefits that the average taxpayer doesn’t get.
This was another shameful episode in this legislative session (remember the election “recount” episode at the beginning of the session?). I just hope the voters remember in 2018. But they probably won’t.
Kudos to the handful of Dems who were willing to do the right thing.
The way we pay for education is absolutely out of hand. I find the elitist attitude that because South Burlington is special, then the teachers are special they should not have a cap on their salaries and of course their health care should be free. I would much rather see a fair system where teachers salaries and health care is uniformly handled, let Winnossi teachers have the same salary and health benefits as South Burlington. For this to happen we unfortunately need the government to step in. It is ridiculous in such a small state to have all these school systems negotiating salaries and benefits year after year and facing the disruption of teachers going on strike.
Remember compared to other professions in Vermont our teachers have great salaries , and fabulous benefits, and they only work part time. What other profession has those perks.
1. Teachers only work par time–you simply don’t understand the profession.
2. Teachers have great salaries compared to other professions–this is not totally true. Look at a master agreement sometime. That aside, perhaps it’s time for all Vermonters to enjoy great salaries.
I support a veto of the budget if the Legislature fails to support Governor Scott’s proposal. #VTNEABUYSVOTES
We must be careful and be respectful of the comments about teachers. These ‘part timers’ they have one of the most difficult jobs on the planet, and for that, they make WHAT. It may be a lot if you are pushing a wheelbarrow or aligning chips but when we are training the future leaders and voters in our country, the same people that we will call on to carry the torch, so we can retire, you should get a feel for the scope of their responsibilities. My wife was a teacher for several years. When she went to ‘full time’ work, it was like being on vacation, for both of us. No correcting papers till all hours of the night. No trying to figure out how to teach kids that were soured to learning, no trying to integrate children with disabilities into a classroom and keep it functioning, no one ready to strike you because they were failing, no teacher meetings or school board meetings or extra circular activities, and the very worst curse of all, no knuckle-draggers describing you as a part time worker with an easy job. Try standing in front of a room with our disinterested students EVERY day and being on!! This is not a job for the faint of heart and if you don’t agree show me how you teach your teenagers, get their respect, participation, support and contribution, and when you do and can, then apply that to 100-200 kids a day everyday. These folks that stand in our classrooms should be lauded for their willingness to come back everyday and do it again. WHATEVER we pay them is not enough and comparing them to what the average Vermonter does or earns is not comparing apples to apples.
I support a budget veto if Governor Scott’s $26 million savings plan is not inacted. This plan holds our valuable teachers harmless and will help lower our property taxes. #VTNEABUYSVOTES
As an educator in Brattleboro Vt under the new health care plans in January I am going to be paying a lot more per month for the insurance plus will have big deductibles . I have to choose the most expensive plan to have smallest deductibles offered as I have chronic health issues. I’ve done the math and I’ll be losing at least 3k more a year from my pay. How dare they say this plan is cheaper! Yes maybe cheaper for the state but not for the teachers! People are very unhappy!
By the way to the commenter who said we work part time. I work full year . Early Head Start /Head Stsrt in Windham county is part of the district! Also we make way less than what the teachers in the elementary and highschools get yet have the same insurance .