|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by Pattie McCoy
My tenure in the Vermont House of Representatives has been as a member of the minority party; which is to say I have seen my fair share of ideas and proposals from my counterparts that I do not agree with. I always try to keep an open mind, and most of the time there is room to find common ground on the outcomes we all want, both Democrat or Republican: better economic opportunities, stronger communities, and more comprehensive safety net programs for those who need them.
This election cycle; however, there is a major shift, as I witness my Democrat counterparts in the Legislature coalesce around Amanda Janoo and her platform. What is specifically jarring is my Democrat counterparts’ vision for Vermont’s economy coming from the top of the ticket in the following instances:
• In an interview with Population Balance, Janoo said, “economies need to stop growing” and need to “decline in some areas.”
• Janoo’s work for the Wellbeing Economy Alliance focused on “degrowth” and “post growth” philosophies and worked with governments on policy levers for this managed decline.
• Finally, in her Seven Ideas for the G7, Janoo called on governments to “abandon the objectives of GDP growth (Gross Domestic Product).”
There is another word for when the economy is no longer growing, or experiencing an economic downturn, and that word is Recession. I have served in the legislature during economic recessions and lived through many others. Through that experience, I never thought this would be a desirable outcome for anyone, Democrat or Republican, let alone a deliberate part of a candidate’s platform. However, since we are at this point, it is worth reminding Vermonters, and Democrats down ticket, what an economic recession looks like:
• The last time Vermont’s economy shrank was 2013, impacting the fiscal years 2014, 2015 and 2016 budgets (my first year in the Legislature was in 2015, working on the FY16 budget); Vermont’s economy actually grew by 0.6 percent from 2014 to 2015 and we still faced these budget challenges.
• In FY15, General Fund revenues were downgraded by $41 million, which was addressed through cuts and one-time funds.
• In FY16, we started the budget process with a $113 million revenue shortfall. We cut spending by $53 million, used $25 million in one-time funds, and, over my objections and those of my Republican colleagues, raised $36 million in new taxes.
A shrinking economy has broader impacts than the state budget. Our state education fund is primarily balanced on property taxes and the sales tax. Beyond the broader impact of what less consumption (equating to less sales taxes) means for Vermonters’ well-being, less sales tax means an increase in property taxes to make up for the loss of sales tax revenue in order to pay for our schools. A recession, or a “degrowth” or “post-growth” economy, as Janoo’s Wellbeing Economy Alliance focuses on, is a terrible outcome for everyone: fewer jobs, lower wages, and strained public institutions.
I put this out there because it raises so many questions. Questions at the forefront are: Who wants this? And why? Are my colleagues, Democrats in particular, prepared to cut spending? Even a 2 percent decline in economic growth amounts to a more than $100 million revenue shortfall. Who do they plan to tax to fill this gap?
There is a clear choice in this year’s election and I hope Vermonters consider the full consequences of a recession when they go to the polls in November. Spin it any way you want; but “degrowth” or “post-growth” equates to a recession.
I will be voting for Governor Phil Scott, and Republican candidates down ticket. Vermont’s economy doesn’t need an economic experiment. It just needs a plan that adds up.
That is why I’m voting for Governor Phil Scott.
Pattie McCoy is the House Minority Leader and has served in the Legislature since 2015
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary, Elections
Janoo is a professional, life long NGO with a huge network of NGOs; maybe 49 or more. All have their own agenda and need her support. They are supporting her so obviously she will support their legislation.
Janoo will be owned by NGOs and progs.
The Janoo coalition as a four-legged progressive alliance:
1. RAD / movement organizing
2. organized labor
3. environmental/climate organizations
4. progressive economic/social-policy organizations
Considering her background as an economist with the UN and the likelihood of World Economic Forum (Klaus Schwab – “You will own nothing and be happy” phylosophy.) associations, she is the last individual any critical thinking voter should even consider. Vote Republican as if your life depended on it.
Thank you Pattie!!
Vermont is already experiencing the economic stagnation that Ms. Janoo would have us accept as a policy objective. Our housing shortage, declining affordability, workforce challenges, and shrinking opportunities for young people are not abstract economic theories. They are symptoms of a state caught in an increasingly dangerous economic doom loop.
For two decades, Democrats have held legislative majorities while Vermont’s housing shortage has intensified, the cost of living has climbed, businesses have struggled to expand, and young people have increasingly questioned whether they can afford to build a future here. After all those years, we must ask an uncomfortable question: Where is the evidence that the current approach is working?
The crisis is interconnected. Businesses cannot expand without workers. Workers cannot accept jobs if they cannot find affordable housing. Young people cannot establish themselves when homeownership is increasingly out of reach. Municipalities, confronting rising expenses and budget pressures, rely on property taxes that make housing even less affordable. Meanwhile, employers face higher costs, families have less disposable income, and opportunities for the next generation continue to diminish.
This is the doom loop: housing shortages constrain the workforce; workforce shortages constrain business growth; stagnant economic activity limits the resources available to government; and the resulting tax burden further undermines affordability and investment. Every turn makes the next more difficult to escape.
When 86% of Vermonters say the state is too expensive, that is not a call to manage decline. It is a warning that something fundamental is broken. Young people see fewer pathways to independence, families struggle to remain here, and businesses find it increasingly difficult to justify expansion. We are effectively handicapping our own future.
A shrinking economy does not automatically produce a more equitable or sustainable society. Without a viable economic foundation, we risk fewer opportunities, a narrower tax base, greater pressure on property taxpayers, and public institutions struggling to meet their obligations. We cannot sustainably fund education, maintain infrastructure, provide essential services, or create opportunity if we continue undermining the productive capacity that supports them.
Vermont needs a course correction on a scale commensurate with the emergency before us. That means treating our interconnected housing, workforce, education, and affordability crises as one statewide challenge rather than a collection of isolated problems.
This may require an emergency-level mobilization of state resources, municipal partnerships, private investment, and regulatory reform. A state of emergency or comparable statewide initiative should be considered if it can remove institutional barriers and accelerate solutions. The objective must be measurable: more homes, a stronger workforce, growing businesses, improved affordability, and a sustainable fiscal foundation.
A state that prices out its young people, restricts its housing supply, and makes it harder for businesses to grow will eventually find that the very qualities it seeks to protect are no longer enough to sustain it.
Vermont does not need a managed decline. It needs a managed recovery.
Electing leaders who embrace degrowth risks accelerating a trajectory we should instead be working urgently to reverse.
Very timely, thank you – Amanda Janoo was to have interviewed yesterday on WDEV with Amy Hornblas. Your article is insightful and timely. Thank you. Please continue to step up on this front. The GOP needs good leadership under the dome. I wish Jim Harrison were still there to support you, and I’m sure he will but from a distance occasionally.
Matt, the past 20 years have brought our State to a first stage of policy cancer. We must have a Senate Republican Majority. If we fail, there will be more misery.
Here’s what I’ve seen the past decade:
• Vermont’s 2015 budget was 5.5 billion. The SFY2025 budget was $8.57 billion; a $3.1 billion increase while population grew only 19 thousand. Democrats controlled the State House and Senate during that time.
• The Majority wrote, passed and overrode the Governor’s veto of The Global Warming Solutions Act and created the Climate Council that advocated for the defeated Clean Heat Standard written to “save the planet”. It ignored the fact our forests sequester about 6.1 million tons of CO2 annually of our 8 million tons emitted.
• Then there is the State education budget. In 2015, it was $1.5 billion and increased in 2025 to $2.323 billion while enrollment went from 87,311 to 81,398 (a decline of 5,913 students). Per-student expenditure went from 2015’s $17,188 to $28,543 last year.
• Executive Branch employees, in 2015, totaled 7,607 and increased to 7,842 last year. Total compensation went from $652 million to $1.05 billion and average comp went from $85,728 to $134,121.
• Act 181 of 2024 revived a form of Act 250 road restriction that Vermont had eliminated in 2001. Before the Road Rule could take effect in July 2026, the General Assembly reversed course and repealed it through S.325 or Act 152.
Here’s what I’ve seen this past decade
:
• Vermont’s 2015 budget was 5.5 billion. The SFY2025 budget was $8.57 billion; a $3.1 billion increase while population grew only 19 thousand. Democrats controlled the State House and Senate during that time.
• The Majority wrote, passed and overrode the Governor’s veto of The Global Warming Solutions Act and created the Climate Council that advocated for the defeated Clean Heat Standard written to “save the planet”. It ignored the fact our forests sequester about 6.1 million tons of CO2 annually of our 8 million tons emitted.
• Then there is the State education budget. In 2015, it was $1.5 billion and increased in 2025 to $2.323 billion while enrollment went from 87,311 to 81,398 (a decline of 5,913 students). Per-student expenditure went from 2015’s $17,188 to $28,543 last year.
• Executive Branch employees, in 2015, totaled 7,607 and increased to 7,842 last year. Total compensation went from $652 million to $1.05 billion and average comp went from $85,728 to $134,121.
• Act 181 of 2024 revived a form of Act 250 road restriction that Vermont had eliminated in 2001. Before the Road Rule could take effect in July 2026, the General Assembly reversed course and repealed it through S.325 or Act 152.
The person running against Mr Scott has ZERO name recognition. My travels over the last 2 weeks I have asked people I bump into “who’s running against the Governor” As of yet I have not found anyone who could answer the question.
Oh and another thing,
Amanda Janoo’s recent endorsement by California Congressman Ro Khanna raises another question worth asking: when progressive politicians call for taxing the rich, do they apply that principle consistently, including to the wealthiest people within their own political circles?
Khanna appeared alongside Janoo on October 8, endorsing her progressive platform, including taxing billionaires. Yet he has a family fortune potentially exceeding $340 million. That is a striking juxtaposition for a politician who advocates higher taxes on the ultrawealthy.
Not that wealth is inherently wrong. But a political movement demanding that others contribute more should be willing to scrutinize the tax advantages and financial arrangements available to its own wealthy allies.
And Vermont has its own examples of progressive leaders whose personal circumstances differ considerably from those of ordinary working families.
Senator Bernie Sanders and his wife are among Vermont’s top two percent in income.
Before asking Vermonters to accept a philosophy that abandons economic growth, Ms Janoo should explain how her policies will lower the cost of living, create the jobs, homes, and opportunities this state so desperately needs.
Common sense. Gotta love it. i blame those teacher’s Unions…..and a lot of dumber than dirt legislators.