|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by Guy Page
You may have noticed that Governor 52 Vetoes has vetoed just one, count ’em one bill this year.
True, Gov. Phil Scott has vetoed it twice. The Budget Adjustment Act that added more $$ for housing the homeless into the current year budget was vetoed once on March 14 and then again (new number, same title, and still too-unacceptable content) on April 4.
Otherwise, it’s been a three-way meet-in-the-middle between the House, the Senate and the administration. Not always but often, legislation beloved by Democrat leaders of the once-a-supermajority are being made more palatable to the veto-sustaining minority and to the owner of the veto pen. Or else they’re just languishing on a committee wall somewhere.
For example, the House passed the General Fund budget 132-3 today Thursday May 15, with Minority Leader Patti McCoy saying the final number was closest to the Governor’s proposed budget than any time in her memory.
Safe to say the Democrats grudgingly learned their lesson after overriding the veto of last year’s hugely unpopular 13% property tax increase, which would have been even higher without the creation of two new forms of taxation to make up the difference between what was once a 20% tax increase.
Safe to say because this year’s property tax increase is a mere 1%. Once burned twice shy.
The Democrats also have resorted to another anti-veto trick: including veto bait into a bill with otherwise popular features.
It’s sort of like a hostage shield. Shoot the bad guy and you’ll probably take out a few innocent civilians.
Example: a $1.1 million allocation for the Burlington so-called ‘safe injection site’ into H.218, the opioid settlement bill allocating millions to about 20 other uncontroversial addiction prevention, treatment and recovery programs. The bill also seeks to perpetuate funding beyond the coming year:
“It is the intent of the General Assembly to continue to appropriate funds from the Opioid Abatement Special Fund through fiscal year 2028 for the purpose of awarding grants to the City of Burlington for the operation of the overdose prevention center, unless and until the Special Fund does not have sufficient monies to fund this expenditure.”
Last year the safe injection site passed as a stand-alone bill. Scott vetoed it. At a June veto session, the Legislature triumphantly overrode his vetoes of SIS, school spending and the Renewable Energy Standard. All three acts of hubris plagued Democrats at the polls in November.
This year, a SIS stand-alone bill would have suffered a humiliating veto failure, with likely electoral consequences next November. Hence the tuck-in to H.218. And it worked. When asked at yesterday’s press conference about the SIS inclusion into the opioid settlement bill, Scott said in effect that there were plenty of other worthy spending allocations in the bill that made it hard to veto.
At yesterday’s press conference, VDC asked Gov. Scott why all-time Vermont record holder for gubernatorial vetoes has been so restrained – thus far. We recorded his answer. (Apologies in advance for the lousy sound quality, we really do need to get a microphone to tape to the podium like, the radio and TV press do.) In a nutshell, Gov. Scott said:
Somewhat paradoxically, having an effective veto means he has less reason to veto. “They have to come to the table,” he said.
He’s had a lot of help from the new, enlarged minority and others. “We have a coalition of like-minded people in the House and the Senate that have worked with me to insure that we have a seat at the table.”
“Vetoing a bill isn’t something I look forward to,” Scott said. “I would rather come to agreement by negotiation. This year is an example of something that can happen if we all come together.”
Peace Through Strength?
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: State House Spotlight
It’s plain to seem (IMO) that if the majority plans to borrow use the principle “fruit of the poisonous tree” from legal doctrine, and apply it to bills in the legislature by appling poisoned fruit to bills that the really don’t want passed, a line item vetoe is needed .
I totally agree about line item veto. I know that you and I are in a minority about this subject, but here are good examples. I have always hated how they manage to “sneak” such issues into a Bill that they know the Governor will sign.
Line Item Veto is similar to Term Limits . . . the majority of the population are for them and the majority of politicians are against them.
I have to agree with you both on the line item veto, but where is the Governor’s back bone to veto a bill because of an item that doesn’t need to be in a bill. If they are willing to “come to the table,” they might as well redo the whole blooming thing for that one item and maybe they’d get the message! The message being: Enough with “sneaking” stuff in!! They all need to have another thrashing in November.
Governor Scott’s motivation aside (it’s irrelevant) – his only consideration should be the state of our State. As it is now, our condition has been deteriorating and is, if anything, getting worse on virtually every level. As one of my favorite economist said, “One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.”
So, Governor Scott. How’s it going so far? Will access to healthcare improve? Will property taxes actually go down? Will everyone finally have high-speed, inexpensive internet? Will homelessness decline? How about drug abuse and suicide rates? Will kids finally begin to learn the 3 Rs? Will the workforce improve? Will our streets be safer? Will we be able to afford to heat our homes and drive our cars?
So far, Governor Scott, the answer is still no to all of the above. So maybe, just maybe, you ought to sharpen your pencil rather than choose not to use it.
Who needs a supermajority when a governor sells us out at every turn?
It’s because King Philip the Scott 1st Eunuch King of Castrati who claims to be a Republican, but we all know is not. He does not veto any of these bills and whatever his excuse is not to because he does not represent any real conservative positions. He gets elected with the votes of the Commiecrats and he owes them like Biden was owned by China and the state is falling apart like the country was falling apart under Biden. The Vermont Republican Party is to blame by not running a real Republican. These lesser than two evils type candidates play right into the Commiecrats hands, and the sad part is they would elect him again. His not vetoing this bad legislation just shows how weak he is and what a tool he is for the opposition.
He’s a playa, pimpin for the nwo, To whom he swore allegiance in the previous presidential elections. Weak.