We know this because history and math.
by Rob Roper
The proposed Constitutional Amendment, Proposal 3, that Vermonters will vote on this election began its journey in 2023 as part of the Democrat Supermajority’s radical, all-you-can-pass smorgasbord of policy-payoffs-to-special-interests agenda, along with the Clean Heat Standard, Renewable Energy Standard, the new pre-k payroll tax, Act 181, etcetera. And, what does it have in common with all those other policies: it will cost us non-special-interest Vermonters a lot of money. Only this time, we actually get a vote!
Prop 3 is the amendment that proponents assure us just reaffirms a worker’s already existing right to join a union. That sounds nice and it’s the part spoken out loud. The quiet part mumbled into their sleeves — the real reason they want this – is that it would constitutionally take away a worker’s right to NOT join a union or pay dues or fees to said union without losing access to employment opportunities. That does not sound nice because it isn’t. It’s thuggery. And neither is it good policy, especially if making Vermont more affordable is your objective.
Vermont is already heavily union friendly. In fact, for example, a Fordham University study ranks Vermont’s teachers’ union, the VTNEA, the most powerful of its kind in the United States. Number 1! What has that resulted in for the rest of us? Have you looked at your property tax bill lately? Wondered where all the sales tax money is going, and that new payroll tax, the lottery money being gobbled up, etcetera and so on? Yup, it’s being hoovered up by too powerful union special interests. And what does this powerful union give us in return? The fastest falling student test scores in the country.
This is because a union’s mission is to get the greatest amount of salary and benefits for its members for the least amount of work and the least amount of accountability. That’s fine. This can function as a proper balance to employers seeking the most amount of work for the least amount of money. But the key here is “balance.” Prop 3 would take Vermont’s already union-favored playing field – one that already costs Vermont consumers and taxpayers — and make it entirely, constitutionally one sided, totally unaffordable, unaccountable, and legislatively unfixable.
How can we be sure Prop 3 will drive up Vermont’s unaffordability ratings? History and math are good indicators. According to a recent in-depth analysis by the Vermont Fiscal Alliance Foundation cites the MERIC “2025 Annual Cost of Living” report:
… not one of the 15 highest-cost states [aka unaffordable] has a Right to Work law. Meanwhile, nine of the 10 lowest cost-of-living [aka affordable] states protect employees’ Right to Work.
And,
A National Institute for Labor Relations Research analysis of the MERIC data showed that, last year, the 24 forced-unionism states combined had a population-weighted cost of living 16.6% above the national average. The 26 Right to Work states combined had a cost of living 4.3% below the national average.
That’s an 20 percent-plus overall cost of living premium paid by citizens in states with Prop 3 adjacent/sympathetic policies. Chickenfeed not.
Moreover, regarding incomes…
…residents of Right to Work states in the aggregate took in $65,746 per capita last year. That’s nearly $3,500 higher than the forced-dues state average.
And then there’s the tax impacts. Again, referring to the Fiscal Alliance Foundation report, this time citing a Heritage Foundation study,
… state laws foisting union monopoly bargaining on all types of state and local workplaces result in “an additional tax and spending burden of $2,300 to $2,900” a year “on an average family of four.”
So, big picture, folks in states that have rejected policies like Proposal 3 earn more money on average (meaning more union power does not lead to generally higher incomes), get to keep more of that money due to lower taxes, and can see those dollars go further because goods and services, on average, cost less. This, dear reader, is the recipe for an affordable economic landscape. It is the opposite of what we are doing in Vermont, and Proposal 3 would constitutionally lock us into these bad policy choices for a bleak foreseeable future.
I keep referring to lopsidedly pro-union policies as “like” or “adjacent” to Proposal 3 because only one other state has been stupid enough to pass a similarl constitutional amendment: Illinois – and, as you might expect having read this far, it has been a disaster. Amendment One passed in 2022, and has made it not only impossible for that state to fix its out of control state employee pension crisis (not unlike the one Vermont is experiencing), it has thrown gasoline on the fire, driving up costs and leaving taxpayers on an even bigger sharper, more expensive hook.
Even Democrats in deep blue Virginia with its newly minted radical leftist Governor Spanberger recently rejected union-backed Proposal 3-like legislation (just a bill, not a constitutional amendment) because, in the words of Babur Lateef, Prince William County School Board Chairman, it would have resulted in “The single largest tax increase in Virginia history . . . . It would ‘bankrupt local governments and bankrupt school divisions.’” Which should really give Vermont voters serious pause.
Vermont already has a well-deserved reputation for being business unfriendly. This is why companies that can provide good paying careers don’t come here bringing jobs and are leaving here and taking jobs with them when they go. Workers go where the jobs are, so Vermont is experiencing an alarming decline in our working aged population via outmigration. Just the signal sent by passing Prop 3 would make this dynamic far worse.
Prop 3 can either be the final nail in our economic coffin, or, by shooting it down, Vermonters can send a common sense signal that we’re ready to be serious about opening our doors to economic opportunity. Let’s hope voters are paying enough attention to do the latter.
Rob Roper is a freelance writer with 25 years of experience in Vermont politics including three years service as chair of the Vermont Republican Party and nine years as President of the Ethan Allen Institute, Vermont’s free market think tank.