By Guy Page
With an $8.5 billion budget, legislative pay hikes, police interrogation of minors, ambitious state-funded child care and more on the table, the veto override Special Session of the Vermont Legislature kicks off Tuesday with two bills in the Senate, and as many as five in the House.
Gov. Phil Scott vetoed eight bills passed by the Vermont Legislature this year. Three of those eight were first introduced in the Senate, five in the House.
As of 9:08 AM Monday morning, Tuesday’s House agenda had not been published on the legislature’s website. Up for override in the Senate tomorrow:
S.6, banning deceitful, coercive police interrogation of juveniles. law enforcement interrogation policies. There were no roll calls held in either House or Senate on its way to passage, so there’s no way to know whether either body has the votes to override.
S.6. As law, S.6 “would make Vermont an outlier by offering these expanded protections to young adult offenders up to the age of 22, despite Vermont’s already robust constitutional protections,” his veto letter said. “This bill would make it more difficult to investigate and prosecute young adult perpetrators involved in serious crimes, such as narcotics trafficking, sex offenses, including sexual assaults that happen on college campuses and child sex abuse cases, and internet crimes against children.”
During a recent press conference, Gov. Scott noted that drug gangs intentionally employ minors for drug trafficking, knowing the relatively light criminal justice consequences.
S.39, increasing legislative pay and benefits and creating a study committee for other changes, such as how often the Legislature meets – including, possibly, year-round.
S.39 would give the next and every future Legislature a steep raise, plus adjournment pay, plus State of Vermont employee-level health care benefits, plus several other benefits that, when toted up, equal almost $50,000 (estimated) per legislator.
Supporters say it will increase the racial and age diversity of the General Assembly. Opponents say legislating should remain a part-time public service, not a well-paid part-time or full-time job.
“This year, the General Assembly passed several pieces of legislation that will significantly increase costs for Vermonters through new and higher taxes, fees and penalties,” Gov. Scott said in his veto letter. “In my opinion, it does not seem fair for legislators to insulate themselves from the very costs they are imposing on their constituents by doubling their own future pay.”
S.39 offers State of Vermont employee-level health care benefits beginning with next year’s Legislature. The weekly pay hike from $811 to $1000 would begin in 2025, rise another $1000 in 2026, and total $1210 by 2027.
When S.39 proceeded to passage this year, all three Senate roll calls fell just short of the 20 votes needed to override. If Senate President Phil Baruth (D-Chittenden) can’t get 20 votes on Tuesday, the veto will be upheld. S.39 passed 102-44 in the House.
The third Senate veto – S.5, the so-called “Affordable Heating Act” – was overridden in the regular session in May.
Scott vetoed these House bills:
H.217, child care, early education, workers’ compensation, and unemployment insurance
H.305, professions and occupations regulated by the Office of Professional Regulation
H.386, 16-17 year-old voting charter change for Town of Brattleboro
H.494, $8.5 billion 2023-24 state budget
H.509, voter qualifications charter change for City of Burlington
Categories: Legislation
Let’s insert some incentives in this bill. For every dollar the legislature reduces State taxes (income, sales, property, etc.) on Vermonters living in-state, each legislator receives a penny bonus. If the average Vermonter realizes a $100 decrease in taxes next year (and no additional debt), each legislator gets a $1 raise. If, for example, there are 300,000 taxpayers who realize an average of $100 in tax savings, the 180 House and Senate members would receive a $1666 year-end bonus. If the average savings is $200 per taxpayer, a $3300 bonus.
Here is the note that I just sent to my representatives:
“Good morning Senator Kitchel and Representative Pearl,
I am writing to ask you as my representatives to sustain the governor’s veto on the following bills; S6, S39, H217, H305, H386 and H509
S6: Putting this law in place and providing expanded protection to young adult offenders up to the age of 22 will only further tie the hands of law enforcement. As the Governor said when vetoing the bill, “This bill would make it more difficult to investigate and prosecute young adult perpetrators involved in serious crimes, such as narcotics trafficking, sex offenses, including sexual assaults that happen on college campuses and child sex abuse cases, and internet crimes against children.”
S39: In listening to the Governor, we should consider looking at the legislative pay, but this goes way to far and moves up closer to being a full-time legislature. We should encourage more people to run for office but a better way would be to shorten the sessions to 90 days. Serving in the legislature should not be considered a career but be looked at as public service. As the Governor said very appropriately: “In my opinion, it does not seem fair for legislators to insulate themselves from the very costs they are imposing on their constituents by doubling their own future pay.”
H217: Childcare is incredibly important. On that I am sure we agree. The Governor agrees and has put forth proposals to address the issue but from my vantage point the Legislature didn’t really even engage with the Governor to find a compromise. We can’t afford H217 as currently written. Please go back and negotiate a compromise with the Governor that Vermonters can afford.
H305: It is already very difficult to find professionals in the state of Vermont. Increasing fees on them is the wrong approach to get current professionals to stay and work in this state, and to attract new ones.
H.386 The age of adulthood in Vermont is 18 years old. We want to encourage young people to get involved but not by giving 16–17-year-olds the right to vote in Town of Brattleboro. Let’s be consistent on what we consider adulthood. If we want 16–17-year-old to have the right to vote, then let’s lower the drinking age to 16 and consider 16 and older as adults when they commit criminal offenses. And why did the Legislature one month ago pass (and the Governor signed) a bill that raises the age to marry to 18? Are you saying a 16- or 17-year-old in Brattleboro can run for town office and sign contracts but not get married? Makes no sense.
H509: The bottom line for me is you should be a legal resident of Vermont to vote. Giving Burlington residents who are not legal residents of this state the right to vote on local issues creates a piecemeal approach to municipal elections. Takes this up as a statewide initiative if you feel it is so important. But if you do, please consider giving non-residents of this state the right to vote on town and city issues if they own property in this state. Non-residents to have a vested interest in what impacts their property taxes.
The bottom line for me is the legislature in Vermont is out of control and making Vermont an undesirable and unaffordable place to live. We have lost any balance we had and we are one of the highest taxed states in the country. Please think about what is right for the people of this state, not the agenda the Progressive/ Democratic party is pushing.
I should have added that neither VTDigger or Seven Days are reporting today on tomorrow’s veto session. Vermonters should be aware of what is going on but nothing today from these two publications. Sad
Tomorrow you say?? Golly, I wonder how the vote will go…….I’m on the edge of my seat. Lol! Brazen, ballsy buffoons.
The legislature tentatively contemplating meeting year round? They think they can’t do enough damage to our once glorious state in half that time? We already can’t balance our budget, so why not add more to it. You know, so we can all sit in conference and giggle and tee hee about not reading the bills or realizing what’s in them. Why not, just get out on the floor and continue to mock the fine hard working people of the state of Vermont. Seems fitting.
Historically, officials who preyed upon their constituents like this were tarred, feathered, and run out of town on a rail. Despicable parasites.
Currently, we do not have a Legislature or a representative government of any kind. We have an installed, belligerent occupation. The most corrupt and fraudulent actions ever undertaken in the State and the United States. All by design and all with foreign money and assistance. The pantomime being performed pretending to be our government will not end well for the performers. Declared and decreed.