|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Either pass laws that will meet GWSA mandates or repeal the mandates.

by Rob Roper
Vermont Democrats passed the Global Warming Solutions Act in 2020 over the veto of Governor Scott and the Republican legislative minority. That law mandates strict targets and timelines for greenhouse gas reduction set at 26% below 2005 levels by 2025, 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. And, so the law allows, if Vermonters fail to achieve those targets, any individual or organization can sue the state at taxpayer expense.
That was nearly five years ago. And since then, the party that passed those mandates has done pretty much nothing new to meet them. The 2025 deadline has come and gone, and Vermonters are currently being sued by the Conservation Law Foundation as a result. 2030 looms with no realistic proposals on the table to meet that even more challenging target either.
Vermonters have spent multiple millions of dollars on bureaucrats, consultants and studies done through the GWSA created Climate Council (not to mention the per diem payments and expenses for this 23-member unelected entity), the Agency of Natural Resources, the Department of Public Services, and the Public Utilities Commission. What policies have emerged and been enacted as the result of all this time and expense? Not… a… darn… thing.
Behind the Lines is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a subscriber. Thanks!Upgrade to paid
The two main sources of greenhouse gas emissions in Vermont are the thermal sector (home heating) and transportation. The only new policy Vermont Democrats have considered so far has been the Clean Heat Standard for the thermal sector. This they passed in 2023, again over the veto of Governor Scott and the Republicans. It spent three years in the making and is now considered dead (or “dormant”) – judged too expensive, too complicated, too regressive, and totally lacking in public support. What’s the alternative plan of action? There is none.
For the transportation sector, the Climate Action Plan of December 2021 recommended joining a thing called the Transportation Climate Initiative, which would have created an alliance between a dozen or so Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states to essentially tax gasoline and diesel fuels to discourage their use. But the pact collapsed in November 2021 when every state but one (Massachusetts) backed out due to public backlash at the cost. What’s the transportation plan for Vermont now after four years of naval gazing? There is none.
The only discussion happening now around transportation concerns a recently completed study (more taxpayer dollars out the window) looking at joining a California based “cap and trade” program that would add, according to the State Treasurer, Mike Pieciak, “at least” 26 cents per gallon of gasoline and diesel. Pieciak, recognizing that at 26 cents or more gas tax would go over like a lead balloon, is recommending that the legislature not do this. And, as there isn’t any legislation that would do so under consideration or even tacked to the wall of some committee, it appears they won’t. So, again, they’ve got nothing.
Given this state of all talk no legislative action, Governor Scott has proposed, and Vermont Republicans have put forward, bills that would eliminate the mandates in the Global Warming Solutions Act (most comprehensively H.289), restoring them to goals, and remove the lawsuit provision that gives standing to anyone who wants to sue the state at taxpayers’ expense if we don’t meet those goals. Instead, the Governor wants to put together a new plan based on what Vermonters can realistically afford and what our tiny state can realistically accomplish with the resources we have available.
But the Democrats are balking. In an interview with Vermont Public Manchester Rep. Kathleen James (D-Manchester), who chairs House Committee on Energy and Digital Infrastructure, said “rescinding the emissions reduction mandates, and eliminating the private right of action, ‘remove a primary mechanism for making sure that the work is getting done.’” Here’s the problem with that statement: no work is getting done. Not a bit.
In fact, James’ committee is not considering a single piece legislation that would put Vermont even part way on a path to meeting the 2030 GWSA reduction targets, and she does not plan to. Nor is her senate counterpart Anne Watson (D-Washington), chair of the Senate Natural Resources & Energy Committee. Yet, if they don’t pass something this year, there is no realistic chance of meeting that 2030 deadline (if it was ever a realistic possibility). Vermonters will get sued.
So, here lies the challenge to Vermont Democrats: Put up or shut up.
If you really believe meeting the greenhouse gas reduction mandates you established in the Global Warming Solutions Act is something a majority of Vermonters want you to do, that it will save Vermonters money, and will actually have a meaningful impact on climate change, then grow a spine and pass the laws necessary to do it. Certainly saving the planet for future generations is more important than potentially losing an election!
But if you don’t really believe any of that — have neither the plans nor the fortitude to live up to the expectations of your own law – then repeal it. Admit you were wrong and chart a new course that your constituents support. But to do nothing is irresponsible and unconscionable, putting Vermont taxpayers on the legal hook and wasting money on legal fees for not meeting mandates you have no idea how to or intention of even trying to meet.

Rob Roper is a freelance writer with 20 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.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary, Energy, Environment, Legislation, State Government









The Green Dems in Vermont need to hustle knowing that on average, two coal powered electric generating plants come on line every day in China.
It’s almost as if rep. james along with sen. watson are encouraging these GWSA lawsuits by their collective inaction. One could almost conclude a connection between the plaintiffs and payments, donations etc. to these legislators re-election funds and their pet NGO’s and charities- but a lack of ethics rules and enforcement makes that quite a task. rep. sibilia too, seems to be very active in her quest to place a stranglehold on Vermont’s economy and citizens. james and watson, it has been reported- have “pinned to the wall” any bill that threatens the ClimateChange™ status quo.
All the spending, tens of millions of dollars has yet to eliminate even an ounce of co2 from Vermont’s atmosphere.
Oh, for sure! Check out the video of Senators actually encouraging CLF to sue the state. https://youtu.be/8MYm7yO-YSA . Happily three of them are gone this year. Let’s hope the same fate awaits Watson, James, etc and so on.
Thank you Rob. Well done, as usual. This whole mess is concerning, and esp. the amount of money that has (apparently) “gone down the drain”. Over spending is, or should be, a concern, BUT with NO substantial results?!I agree with f:”ish or cut bait”!
“multiple millions of dollars on bureaucrats, consultants and studies” to put lipstick on a pig. There is no solution, at least one that Vermonters can afford. But part of me hopes they do implement something that is sure to be super expensive so they will be voted out of office so fast their heads will spin. Then we can finally all this garbage.
Washington is being forced into a massive spending diet in all departments, the good news is all of the cash that WAS flowing to the grifter class here in Montpelier is soon going away. When it does and the NGO’s and the non-profits suddenly don’t have the money to power this endless cycle of taking from the taxpayer, we will see a natural correction (think gravity). You will know it’s close when Vt Digger starts with the teary eyed stories about people being let go.
Is it logical, let alone possible, to reason with entrenched, well compensated belligerent occupiers? The Dem/Progs emboldened with their super-majority and fraud-laden super-pacs are simply going to concede and play ball, nicely? I commend the optimistic, see the light-let’s work together olive branch – the reality is they seeth, double-down, and call for violence in the streets. Doesn’t sound to me like they are willing to debate or find common ground. We are in war – officially undeclared, but it is a war. The People didn’t start it, but war is what they salivate over daily – so be prepared and watch them collapse under the weight of their fraud and corruption. The ivory towers are falling. No honor among thieves.
I totally agree. I thought from the start that the idea of voluntarily setting yourself up for lawsuits was bat-poop crazy, let alone tying this to meeting stretch goals than may be unachievable. Sadly, this isn’t the only example of “innovative” thinking that is too convoluted to be practical. I consider myself to be an independent, liberal voter, and rarely find myself voting with the Right, but the Global Warming Solutions Act literally has me seeing red. Let’s set ourselves tough goals but then trust the people to hold ourselves to them, not the lawyers. Ditch the legal exposure, carbon credits, and all the other twisted sticks and replace them with the carrots of incentives and making it more attractive for people to change their energy usage patterns. Don’t do this by artificially raising the costs of existing energy sources; do it by making the alternatives more attractive.
Do you know that you were dealing with college educated crooks that can not find a real productive job in this economy. They need to stay in the state house all summer just to survive. More massive layoffs coming in 2025.