VT House GOP Caucus Decries Override of Gov. Scott’s Veto of Brattleboro Charter Change
In a statement issued today, the Vermont House Republican Caucus decried the Vermont House of Representatives’ override of Governor Phil Scott’s veto of H.361, an act relating to approval of amendments to the charter of the Town of Brattleboro:
“Vermont Democrat lawmakers have sent a series of mixed signals when it comes to their trust in young Vermonters,” said House Minority Leader Pattie McCoy (R-Poultney). “As it pertains to certain local elections, Democrats want 16-year-olds to be able to vote. But, according to the framework Democrats have structured, those same 16-year-olds would have to wait two years before they could play the lottery or join the military; 6 years before they could purchase alcohol or tobacco; and 7 years before they could be considered an adult for criminal proceedings. There is no consistency. Rather, there exists a patchwork of unclear and confusing contradictions.”
“In fact, when Vermont Democrats recently worked to raise the age of “youthful offenders” through age 22, they cited research indicating that these younger individuals take more risks, are more prone to peer pressure, and are less future oriented. Apparently, Vermont Democrats only feel young voters are mature enough to make informed decisions when it might be politically expedient.”
“Governor Scott’s veto of this legislation that House Democrats have now rejected was simple and sensible: the Legislature should be consistent on the age of adulthood. This should apply not only for different types of activities, but for all elections as well. Opening the door to early voting in certain elections in specific municipalities only worsens the Legislature’s “cafeteria” approach to the concept of adulthood, where Democrats pick and choose when the age of majority is reached.”
“Vermont House Republicans are disappointed in the House’s decision to override Governor Scott’s veto of H.361, and hope the Senate will give the issue more deliberate consideration.”
Categories: Commentary
This is horrifying and inappropriate. Liberal legislators talking out of both sides of their mouths. You can’t prosecute any young person as an adult until they are over 22, because they lack the maturaty to make mature and logical choices, but you allow 16 year olds to vote. The hypocrisy is staggering. I can gaurentee this demographic will vote in legislation to support whatever Marxist/Neosocielist ideologies teacher’s unions have been indoctrinating our children with. I believe this is the end goal to their agenda. Ultimate, indefinite power by brainwashing and then exploiting the vote of a child. I have no doubt other towns will follow suit.
Their real agenda is to garner votes.
I’m not sure how you can back up that statement. Lots of 16 year olds are staunch MAGA supporters who love Trump and America.
I am not so convinced of your statement, especially in Vermont. Essex highschool last year showed a PowerPoint presentation, which was presented by the state’s equity director. The presentation actually included a slide with President Trump and Melania. Needless to say the slide was politically motivated and derogatory. These kids are being brainwashed by school officials and the teacher’s unions. One slide actually showed 3 white women. The presenter actually stated that white women benefit most from Affirmative Action and that this proves systemic racism. Needless to say, the Zoom participants just shook their heads in acknowledgement. I decided to check the data in the 2020 census to validate her statement. The reason why white women benefit the most from Affirmative Action is because they represent 32 percent of the workforce. I believe black women were about 6.6 and Hispanic women 7.8. The point is that there is no other possible statistical outcome than white women benefitting the most. It has nothing to do with systemic racism. Our children are fed this type of propaganda every day they do to school.
I was in a group of people who was spit on and stalked by a teenager for attending a rally on election integrity. When I asked her what her mother would think of such behavior? She stated her mother would be proud as we were all white supremacists.
I feel that 16 year old’s have no business voting. period. hey are not experienced with life enough.. Plus the fact that most teachers are indoctranating the youth today
seems to me that you could have used a bit more indoctrination in the art of spelling. “indoctranating”.
What next?
This is blatantly illegal but not “confusing” whatsoever – young people tend to be very “left” on all issues, as they haven’t either the maturity or the life experience to adequately understand the intricacies of most issues….they are children in this case.
So what better voting block for the democrats to have on their side? Kids with no understanding of real life!
Bravo, again – maggots!
And just turning 18 changes all that…
quit messing with our laws.
These politicians need to go through a competency exam. They lack common sense.
These kids are going to vote on finances for the town. They don’t even know how to write checks or even have bank accounts.
These politicians need to go through a competency exam. They lack common sense.
These kids are going to vote on finances for the town. Hell they don’t even know how to write checks or even have bank accounts.
this is the most idiotic thing I have seen. These kids have no clue about politics, nor do they support themselves, and are MINORS. Yet, the Progs continually state that anyone under the age of 22 should not be tried as an adult, because they know not what they do. AND therefore, should be able to vote!! The legal age of maturity is 21 for voting, drinking, smoking, vaping and buying legal pot. Some of the most horrific crimes in this state have been perpetuated by those under the age of 18, thus the reason they changed the laws in VT to be able to charge them and try them as adults, because they DO know what they did. What makes them think that 16 yr olds are able to make decisions that will affect their towns for many years to come. Long after they graduate from high school and leave the state permanently. Do you really think they care? This whole debacle is to garner votes and make this state a socialist, Marxist state. Something our founding fathers of Vermont fought against and prevailed. Something my ancestors of 9 generations fought for–freedom!!
Well they can breed and make more Progressives at 16 so why not?
At least the ones that aren’t aborted.
Seems pretty reasonable to me.
I feel sure that their vote would be well thought through and consistent with the excellent education dollars they are receiving. Allowing this would enable them to demonstrate the lack of depth realized.
Given a few go arounds at the voting cycles we could then move on to 12 year olds ( perhaps younger) enabling them to more fully participate in our democracy. By that time, of course , the non citizen voting block on the way to being enabled may put a stop to this as it may negate their hard fought gains.
Hardly any room for voters who have played by the rules for decades.
I have to wonder would these currently eligible voters be able to vote for these same 16 year olds for their high school class president or student body representatives.
Seems pretty reasonable to me.
And you are preforming your stand up comedy act where next ?
Best idea since eating Tide Pods was a thing.
Or dropping pennies behind plugs in electrical outlets .
Sheer lunacy !!!! Maybe it says something about how seriously politicians take themselves if they think a 16 year old is mature enough to vote.
Oh, I think politicians, especially of the liberal and socialist ilk take themselves plenty seriously.
In a self- righteous way, by using this bill to further the anomie.
This legislation is but yet another example of the self-preservation of the liberal elite’s current status.
It is not for the better governance of Vermont.
This is taxation without representation, a version of people who don’t pay taxes representing those who do. This is completely unconstitutional.
or is it representation without taxation?
Unbelievable. How about 8 year olds?
Who would witness their X’s on the town voter’s check list ?
The past has shown us we have uninformed voters … What better way to begin EDUCATING up n coming voters, young folks, than by giving them the opportunity to PRACTICE RESPONSIBLE LEARNING and PARTICIPATION in local guvmental affairs? We WANT people to engage in local policy doings, dont we? I say, gove them a VOICE, and LISTEN to what they say….it is not us vs them any more: it is only we all together; we, together, choose the Path to the Future
You’re kidding, right ????
The state constitution says 18 to vote. The question is do any of these commies think they can override that? Is so, they are too stupid to be in any office. Someone needs to sue.
i certainly consider voting one of the most important civic duties and do not think people of that age are ready to give it their best. you need to get some life experience like paying taxes and having some dealings with government to have a better idea of what goes on in the real world
For eons, human societies were lead by the “elders”. Like Vermont legislators, the “elders” didn’t know everything. No one knows everything. But the “elders” compensated for this by consistently demonstrating “wisdom” in leading their tribes………It is this wisdom that has guided societies throughout time that is sorely missing in Montpelier today…….
Wisdom was again ignored by the Vermont legislature as it overrode Gov. Scott’s veto of H.361.
“Wisdom is the domain of the “Wiz”, which is extinct.” Frank Zappa
This is akin to ripping up the Vermont Constitution that states 18 as the voting age. Is it even legal for legislators to vote on something contrary to our Constitution?
I wonder what the whole state would think about this if it had to go through the Constitutional amendment process that Proposal 5 is about.
If it goes against the Vermont constitution then IT CANNOT BE. Period. Why is there even a discussion???
Because the “adults” lost control in Mount Peculiar years ago (decades?)
Well if this is instated, is there any litigation action Vermont citizens could take?
Thus is insane. The liberal out of-staters (98%) legislators need to get tback to where they came from.. Ut also show that they have no brains.. Most teenagers brains don’t mature till they are in their mid 20’s. These numbnutd liberals know that 16 yo will vote the way the commies want them too..
These leftist child predators find another way to pray on and abuse children and ruin their lives forever.
What would 16 year olds vote for but more free stuff and getting away with crimes committed?
We live in a stupid left wing place.
This is ludicrous! The Democratic Party only want brainwashed teens to vote for one reason and one reason alone these kids have been brainwashed by leftist teachers ( not all teachers ) and believe only in the democrats leftest ideals. The dems need more leftest minions! This bill needs to FAIL !
Vermont Democrats recently worked to raise the age of “youthful offenders” through age 22, they cited research indicating that these younger individuals take more risks, are more prone to peer pressure, and are less future oriented. It is more than obvious that there is only a double standard when it comes with the vote. Legislation knows the inmaturity of people under 22, (especially 16 and 17 year olds). But since They are highly favored to v ote Progressive, Democrate, Socialist agenda, due to what Public High Schools are forced to teach. It is a win / win for democratic party. So once voted in for a small City in Vermont, certainly the plan will be to mushroom this to a State Wide Bill. OUTCOME —–> unfortunatelly this will bring a landslide of Democratic positions in Vermont by 100%. It will unravel the honest voting platforms, where Republicans won’t bother running, wasting the money only to loose. Vermont will finally have their Democratic Utopia. Vermonters voted these clowns into office, Get ready for the Circus.
I agree with you completely and believe that this is part of a playbook that was written to support this outcome.