A former House speaker once told me that they never brought a bill to a floor vote unless they were certain of the outcome. Otherwise they’d put it off while they nailed down the necessary votes.

Last Wednesday, Speaker Jill Krowinski fell afoul of that maxim. Or ignored it, or didn’t care.

The full House was considering Act 181 dismemberment reform, which turned out to be a lengthy floor debate with plenty of amendments. And something happened that only rarely happens: the minority Republicans won a couple of votes. They actually had an impact on the process.

“In all of my 18 years, I can’t remember that happening,” Republican Rep. Mark Higley told the Vermont Daily Chronicle — the only media outlet to report on Wednesday’s events as a noteworthy, standalone story. Which is a depressing statement on the health of our media ecosystem, but we’ll get to that later.

This account comes from the House Journal for May 6 (downloadable from the Legislature’s website), because even the VDC account didn’t tell the whole story. The House was considering S.325, the Act 181 reform bill. One of the sections would provide a vaguely-defined concession to “agricultural and forest industries” in a bill designed to encourage housing. Republican Rep. (and farmer) Greg Burtt of Cabot wanted to specifically include “homesteading” (shout out to the Raneys, my favorite reality TV personalities) in that provision. That amendment won on a 142-2 vote. No problem there.

And then Burtt offered another amendment, offering a broad exemption from Act 250 permitting for a number of improvements to an “on-farm business.” This amendment was kind of off-topic in a housing bill and did not have the blessing of House leadership…

But it passed on a 77-66 vote, which meant that 18 House Democrats went against caucus leadership (three Dems were absent). The line-crossers were a mixed bag, from rural reps like David Yacovone and Leanne Harple to relatively progressive members like Conor Casey and Mollie Burke. (Also Kevin Scully, the “Democrat” appointed by Gov. Phil Scott to fill Bob Hooper’s seat.)

Now, here’s a thing that went entirely unreported. The Burtt amendment is in a list of definitions for Tier 1 — the most development-friendly areas of Vermont, and the least rural and agricultural. This is not a rural vs. urban issue. It also means the actual impact of Burtt’s amendment will be fairly minimal. Unless maybe your suburban neighbor wants to raise ducks or something, hmm.)

After this vote, the House adjourned for an hour and fifteen minutes. Maybe everybody needed a pee break. Or maybe leadership needed some time to lick their wounds and regroup. Later, the House defeated a couple of Republican amendments — including one from Republican Rep. Tom Charlton that would have delayed all of Act 181 until the year 2030, just a tremendous galaxy-brain idea for addressing our housing crisis — and the final vote on S.325 was unanimous.

The Burtt amendment isn’t going to make much difference in the long run, assuming the Senate concurs or it survives a conference committee. But it was a significant misstep by House leadership, and a sign that the Democrats don’t have their act together when it comes to priorities, agendas, and party discipline. That’s a troubling indicator for the coming election season, no?

As for media coverage, it was paltry and inadequate. None of our media outlets, VTDigger included, have enough Statehouse reporters to cover the waterfront and keep an eye for unexpected developments. This would have been a hot steaming plate of red meat for political columnists — but of course, there are no political columnists in Vermont anymore.

VTDigger did play a bit of catch-up the following day. Reporter Carly Berlin, who covers housing for Digger and Vermont Public, wrote a piece the following day, published by both outlets*. Her brief account of the Burtt amendment ran to three paragraphs and was wedged into the broader narrative. The political dimension of a big political story was given the briefest of mentions: “…in a ding to Democratic leadership, a slim majority of House members sided with Burtt and approved the amendment.”

*Elsewhere, there was no coverage at all in Seven Days. The teevee stations ran brief items that didn’t mention the House floor drama. Need you even ask if The Burlington Free Press or The Times Argus/Rutland Herald reported on the S.325 votes? Of course they didn’t.

About that. It’s more than a “ding.” It’s a substantial blow. It discourages Democrats and it encourages Republicans. It signals divisions within the majority caucus, and a continuing Democratic struggle to come to terms with the 2024 election and effectively counter Republican attacks. Where does this leave the Dems on other issues like education reform, the budget, climate change, and taxation? Still floundering, it would appear.

But that’s outside of Berlin’s remit. Her story was fine on the broader issue of Act 181, but it downplayed the political dimension of last Wednesday’s floor debate. And politics are kind of important. It’s too bad nobody covers it anymore.