To the Editor:

Our sole representative to the US House of Representatives is suddenly showing up for the affordability issue facing Vermonters. In a blast email to constituents on May 4^th, she outlined 10 proposals which would make it more expensive to live in Vermont. Her proposals are examples of why we need to vote for Common Sense solutions to the affordability problem facing our state.

For example, she recommends: “making housing cheaper by building millions of new homes.” Doesn’t she read the papers? New home construction costs $400 per square foot which means a 1,500 square foot house will cost $600,000, out of reach for most workers in retail or the hospitality industry. She does not explain where she will get the money, but it is very likely the cost will show up on your tax bill. And where is she going to get the tradesmen to build all these homes?

Next, she says “…offering every first-time homeowner $20,000 in downpayment assistance and expanding rental assistance.”  Well,1000 new homes would cost our government $20 million. Where do you get the money from? You got it! Your taxes will increase.

 I could go on but the message is clear-she wants more government intervention in our lives which always results in increased taxes.

A more practical approach is to foster a business-friendly climate and attract well-paying employers to Vermont. We should reduce major barriers to starting and growing businesses, including regulatory hurdles and a high-tax environment. Better-paying jobs build wealth and give our children a reason to stay. If Vermonters earn enough to afford a home, the housing problem will ease on its own.

As the saying goes, insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results. Unless we elect common-sense representatives and senators to the Vermont State Legislature, we can expect more regulations, higher taxes, and a weaker economy.

-Eric Salat, Manchester

Dear Republican members of the House of Representatives:

The Daily Chronicle has published good commentaries that expose serious problems with Prop 4…

• https://vermontdailychronicle.com/roper-vermonts-prop-4-equality-of-rights-amendment-is-racist/ 
• https://vermontdailychronicle.com/change-to-state-constitution-could-empower-homeless-immigrant-transgender-rights/
• https://vermontdailychronicle.com/mcguinness-proposed-constitutional-amendment-expands-protections-for-limited-groups/

Please also consider that the purpose of a Constitution, at least from an American (USA) perspective, is (1) to define the framework of the government and (2) to elucidate the individual rights enjoyed by ALL citizens and upon which the government cannot infringe. The only time that the U.S. Constitution strayed beyond these guardrails was the 18th Amendment – Prohibition – a disaster that the 21st Amendment repealed.

An American Constitution should NOT specify how rights are allocated BETWEEN individuals or groups of individuals. Neither should a Constitution dictate morality. Such allocations or dictations should rather be specified by laws enacted by elected legislatures. 

The problem with having a state’s Constitution specify the allocation of rights is that the details about allocating rights are decided by unelected and unaccountable judges and lawyers. In case you haven’t noticed, judicial systems are naturally biased in favor of government control and, especially in Vermont, are quite socialistic. 

For a legislature to abdicate to the court sits responsibility to legislate is definitely NOT compatible with America’s foundational principles. But this is exactly what a Representative will do if he or she votes to approve Constitutional Amendments such as Proposition 4 (and Prop 5 in 2022).  Furthermore, a YES vote signals to voters that they should approve Prop 4 in November.

Please vote NO on Prop 4.–

-Robert Fireovid, South Hero