I’m Not Predicting a Legislative Exodus, But It Wouldn’t Surprise Me

State Rep. Jim Harrison, one of the most respected members of the House Republican caucus, will leave the Legislature shortly after the new year. Harrison has represented his district in rural Rutland County since 2017; before that, he’d been a Statehouse fixture for decades as head of the Vermont Retail and Grocers Association. He told The Rutland Herald that a move to Wilmot, New Hampshire is in the works simply because he and his wife have decided “it’s time to move on.”

Well, this is sudden, definitive, and puzzling. A Statehouse lifer and loyal Republican is bugging out for no particularly compelling reason. And I have a feeling that Harrison is an early canary in the coal mine. The conditions are right for a wave of resignations and retirements among Democrats and Republicans alike.

For starters, the Statehouse is a grind. The hours are long and often tedious, the demands are great and the financial rewards laughable. Honestly, it’s a wonder that anyone sticks around for very long. And then you get to the fact that this year’s session was tougher than usual, and next year’s is likely to be worse.

The 2025 session was dominated by an education reform debate that ran on and on, and ended with a bill that deeply divided the majority caucuses. Many Democrats felt bullied and ultimately betrayed by their leadership. The resultant bill, Act 73, made a lot of lawmakers unhappy, and the blowback from constituents must have been fierce.

2026 promises more of the same, only more so. The dominant issue will be the actual implementation of Act 73, which means that real, hard decisions will have to be made. They’re gonna spend weeks and weeks drawing maps that will drastically reduce the number of school districts while making everyone upset. Whatever they come up with is going to be roundly criticized.

Not to mention that crafting a budget is going to be a long exercise in blood-letting and disappointment. And unlike this year’s session, the 2026 Legislature will be operating in an election year. The voters are already in a foul mood, and there’s no prospect of any outcomes that will raise their spirits.

I have to think there are plenty among the rank and file who are questioning whether the not-very-tasty juice is worth the neverending squeeze.

On the Republican side, they’ve got a bunch of freshman lawmakers who were clearly unprepared for the realities of legislative life and had no desire or capacity to learn. Many were impatient with the typical fate of rookies — their bills and their input ignored, and little to show for trudging to the Statehouse day after day for months on end. How many of them will sign up for another two years of frustration? I mean, if a pro’s pro like Jim Harrison has had his fill, how many less experienced, less patient, and less intelligent Republican lawmakers will decide it’s easier to sit on the sidelines and bitch about government instead of tackling the often unrewarding work of operating within the system?

I haven’t talked to a lot of people about this. It’s just a strong sense based on the number of red flags I see flying. Let’s see, there are 180 legislative seats… how about we set the over/under for total resignations and retirements (including those already in the books) at 45? How’s that taste?

2 thoughts on “I’m Not Predicting a Legislative Exodus, But It Wouldn’t Surprise Me

  1. basementalmost73a6152d2c's avatarbasementalmost73a6152d2c

    What’s curious to me is that the Governor — flanked by six-figure-earning, full-time staffers — insists that it’s part-time legislators who must come up with the killer app for school funding.

    How quickly he has forgotten: lawmakers tend to be booked 9 to 5 in meetings (Tuesday thru Friday) during the session, and have a hundred emails to tackle on a good day. In addition to reading bills before voting on them, composing and rehearsing remarks, and researching bills they’ve been asked to draft.

    Oh, and many legislators squeeze in some simultaneous attention to their “real job”, which may pay closer to a living wage and offer health / retirement benefits.

    Does anyone who’s been there think the system isn’t broken?

    Does anyone have the courage to insist that changes be made?

    As I recycled back issues of 7D, I was struck by Phil Scott saying the same things in 2017 that he’s saying now. (He was new to the fifth floor back then.)

    Over the past nine years, he and his staff themselves have not produced a successful health care scheme nor a popular ed funding plan. (Meanwhile, he leaves scores of open positions unfilled … to save money?)

    But he’s quick to scold the revolving door of citizen legislators for failing on such challenging fronts?

    Can’t say I blame Jim or Larry or anyone else who chooses sanity over dysfunction.

    Reply
  2. Walter Carpenter's avatarWalter Carpenter

    Something still strikes me as funny about this education thing, Act 73. I can’t quite get it, but while I think saving money is, of course, part of it, it is who would be saving the lion’s share of it that makes me wonder about it. It certainly won’t be the working/middle classes, but what the VPO has correctly called “The Barons of Burlington,” who have been so lavishly funding the GOP, would probably make out pretty well for their investment in this bill that has been sold to us as this “consolidation.” I also wonder if this would break up the teacher’s unions, which generally vote Democrat, and if this doesn’t have something to do with it.

    Reply

Leave a reply to Walter Carpenter Cancel reply