Committee may insist on ‘checkback’
By Guy Page
The Vermont Senate Appropriations Committee is scheduled to discuss and likely vote on S.5, the Affordable Heating Act, beginning this afternoon at 1:30 pm. The proceedings can be viewed via livestream.
Some observers say Appropriations is likely to approve the bill but with a ‘check-back’ giving the Legislature a chance, in a year or so, to evaluate the costs to state government and consumers following a Department of Public Service analysis.
With or without a checkback, S.5 would fund weatherization and electric thermal heat conversion programs with a fossil fuel surcharge – AKA a carbon tax – on heating fuel dealers bringing their product into Vermont. Since Vermont does not produce any oil, nor have any refineries, all fossil fuels must cross the state line. This surcharge would be passed along to the customer, in order to meet carbon reduction goals self-imposed by the Legislature’s 2019 Global Warming Solutions Act.
S.5 supporters say the bill would eventually save customers money as they convert to (they hope) less expensive, stable-priced electricity for thermal heat. Critics say the upfront cost of conversion would require anywhere from 70 cents/gal (the State of Vermont estimate) to $4/gal (Ethan Allen Institute). And that the cost of electricity is likely to spike as heightened demand outstrips supply.
Meanwhile, a lively email conversation has ensued between senators who support the bill and Vermonters who don’t. Some of these back-and-forths have been shared with the Vermont Daily Chronicle.
Bert Saldi, Barre: You legislators always say “we can fix it later if it is a bad Idea,” then you never do. We the people are tired of being used like cash cows for a legislature that can’t budget responsibly and gaslights us when we point out your failures.
Sen. Andrew Perchlik, D/P Washington County and a member of Senate Approps, responded: I hear ya, but I’m not saying we will fix it if it turns out to be a bad program, I’m saying let’s design it and see if the design is a good idea. If there is a better way to deal with our unaffordable and uneconomic over reliance on fossil fuels, I’m all ears.
Saldi’s’s single-word response, a dismissive reference to a methane-producing bovine waste product, is not suitable for a family newspaper. But a carbon-copied acquaintance of his, a Johnson resident, jumped in: As long as you continue to make the world far too expensive for real working Vermonters to survive, we will engage the truly Free Black Market and obtain BY whatever means necessary the things needed to feed, warm and house our families. If you want to know where to buy an illegal woodstove 5 and 10 years from now, don’t bother calling me…. I won’t sell to the enemy!!!
With all due respect….. Enjoy the brownouts and toilets that won’t flush!!!
Sen. Ruth Hardy (D-Addison) admitted in a recent email that hundreds of people have asked her to vote no – and then blamed it on fuel dealer lobbying.
Over the past week since I told my constituents that I supported S.5, the Affordable Heat Act, I have received hundreds of emails, calls, and notes asking me not to vote for S.5. This is largely because fuel dealers also sent messages to their customers intentionally misleading you about how the Affordable Heat Act would work and what it would mean for Vermonters, and they told you to contact me to tell me to vote no on S.5.
Annette Smith of Vermonters for a Clean Environment noted: VPIRG, VNRC, CLF combined report spending more than $30,000 in January. VBSR registered late in January so they didn’t report in January. Seems like calling out the fuel dealer spending on ads is a bit disingenuous when the enviro orgs are in the same ball park in terms of their spending.
Hardy then cited two arguments disputed by S.5 critics:
Over the past two years, the average price of fuel oil increased by over $2 per gallon or 85%, forcing you to spend more to heat your home while fossil fuel companies have recorded record profits. The reality is that fuel companies are the ones raising your prices, not the Legislature.
And
S.5 would not require you, or any individual Vermonter or household, to do anything differently, but it would require fuel dealers to change the way they do business. It would require them to be part of the solution and help you heat your home more efficiently.
Critics of S.5 concede no one is legally forcing conversion to electricity – yet, anyway. However, it would certainly increase costs, regarded by some as an intentional form of coercion. Also, most critics of S.5 acknowledge the higher cost of fossil fuels but blame President Biden’s anti-fossil fuels policies (supported in concept by the Legislature) and the war in Ukraine – not oil company greed. In fact, Big Oil – in the form of Irving Oil – supports S.5.
