Category Archives: Vermont State Senate

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

2 Replies

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.

Continue reading →

Turns Out, Lawmaking is Hard

1 Reply

Vermont Sen. Larry Hart, Sr. has become the second rookie Republican state senator to tender his resignation less than a year after voters chose him to represent their interests. Hart’s reasons are less dramatic than Sam Douglass’, but his resignation letter reveals him to be one more Republican who couldn’t handle the reality of life in a legislative body.

In his resignation letter, Hart referenced “the loss of my daughter and grandchild to addiction” as motivation for his candidacy. He took office hoping to “help with substance use addiction legislation among many other goals I outlined in my Senate race,” but he’d found that “it became too difficult for me to accomplish any major goals in my first session.”

I do not question his motives for running or the depth of his personal loss, but c’mon, really? A freshman lawmaker had trouble accomplishing “major goals” in his first go-round? Join the club, man.

Continue reading →

I’m Not Ready to Say Scott Beck is the Smartest Person in the Legislature, But He’s in the Conversation (Updated)

3 Replies

Score another one for Senate Minority Leader Scott Beck. After his star turn manipulating the education reform process, he managed to wangle his way onto the School District Redistricting Task Force* established by H.454 (now Act 73). He’s one of five Senate appointees, and the sole Republican. Throughout the education reform debate, he was the most prominent Republican voice — and arguably the single most influential senator of any party.

*A name only a legislative body could concoct.

On Monday, the Senate’s Committee on Committees announced its five appointees to the panel tasked with redrawing school district lines. Beck will be joined by Democratic Sens. Martine Larocque Gulick and Wendy Harrison, retired Kingdom East Supervisory Union superintendent Jennifer Botzojourns, and Chris Locarno, retired director of finance and facilities for the Central Vermont Supervisory Union. (The House announced its five appointees on Tuesday morning; details below.)

Beck’s appointment capped off a remarkable rookie campaign as Minority Leader — in his first year as a senator. And in the “Way Too Early” parlor game of gubernatorial speculation, Beck has to be taken seriously as a potential Republican candidate whenever Phil Scott decides to step aside. More so, I believe, than everybody’s favorite maverick, Lt. Gov. John Rodgers.

You may think this a rash judgment, but let’s step back for a moment and describe the trajectory of Beck’s political fortunes.

I should make clear that this post considers Beck as a political actor without regard for whether I agree with him or, more often, not. He has shown himself to be a savvy operator, a respected member of the House who ran as kind of a centrist in his bid for the Senate, but has been a reliable spokesperson for Republican orthodoxy as Minority Leader.

Continue reading →

We’re About to Find Out, Yet Again, How Terrible the Legislature’s Ethics Regime Truly Is

5 Replies

Hey, look: Somebody filed an ethics complaint against two state senators!

We wouldn’t know this, of course, except that the complainant announced the action in a press release. You’d never hear anything about it from official sources, because the Senate’s ethics process is a black hole from which no light can ever escape. Likewise the House’s process, but that’s another story.

The complaint was filed by Geo Honigford of Friends of Vermont Public Education. The targets, familiar to devotees of this here blog, are Sens. Seth Bongartz and Scott Beck. Honigford points out that both men have strong affiliations with private schools receiving public tuition dollars, and both lobbied aggressively for the interests of those schools in recent negotiations over public education reform.

I suppose you could think of Senate President Pro Tem Phil Baruth as an unnamed co-conspirator, since it was Senate leadership that chose to install Bongartz and Beck on the House-Senate conference committee on education reform. Or maybe his right hand, Senate Majority Leader Kesha Ram Hinsdale, could be included as well. She must have had a role in choosing two pro-private school senators to the committee.

Oh wait, Ram Hinsdale is chair of the Senate Ethics Panel, which will consider Honigford’s complaint. Right, right, probably best to leave her name out of it.

Continue reading →

“This Broke the Democratic Caucuses”

5 Replies

First, the obligatory note about Famous Quotes. They’re all a lie, apparently.

This one is either an “Afghan Proverb” or it was said by Benjamin Hooks or John C. Maxwell or James M. Kouzas, take your choice. I’m just surprised it hasn’t been attributed to the Grand Champions of “I Didn’t Actually Say That”: Abraham Lincoln, Albert Einstein, and Yogi Berra.

Whoever said it, it applies here. The Democratic leadership of the House and Senate played a very dangerous game when they jammed through H.454, the “education reform” bill that’s all about squeezing the public education system and protecting the interests of Vermont’s big private schools. Yeah, they won. They got their grand bargain with Gov. Phil Scott. But at what cost?

It’s almost unheard of for a major bill to pass a legislative body with most of the majority lawmakers voting “No,” and that’s exactly what happened here. Virtually all the Republicans voted in lockstep with the governor, while most Democrats in the House and Senate spurned their leadership and rvoted against H.454.

There’s a reason such a maneuver is almost unheard of, and it’s expressed in my headline. “This broke the Democratic caucuses” is what one majority lawmaker told me, and added that House and Senate leaders “are isolated and insulated from their caucuses.”

Need I say that this is an unhealthy situation, and that it bodes ill for the 2026 session and the November elections? Need I add that leadership needs to put in some serious time mending fences? They should, but based on past performance I have little confidence that they will.

Continue reading →

I’ve Been Told That Elections have Consequences

3 Replies

Every spring there comes a moment when you suddenly realize, “Wow, the legislative session is just about over.” For me, that moment came last week, with a bunch of stories about progress on major bills. A look at the calendar made me realize that in many other years,adjournment would have already adjourned. We’re well into overtime already.

We’re also getting a pretty clear idea of what history will make of the 2025 session, and it’s exactly what we all could have predicted last November 6, when Republicans decimated the Democrats’ veto-proof legislative majorities. No longer was the majority secure in its ability to override vetoes.

And they have legislated accordingly, trying to pass major bills that would be acceptable to the all-time record holder for vetoes by a Vermont governor. Scott, meanwhile, has pursued his customary course: Sitting in the balcony, tossing Jujubes at the stage, and emitting a squid-ink cloud of uncertainty around what he’d be willing to accept.

The result is a disappointment to anyone hoping for progressive lawmaking, but an entirely predictable one. What else could the Legislature do, really?

Continue reading →

If Only There Was a Comparison in Literature or Film for How Avidly the Legislature Guards Its Autonomy

2 Replies

In yet another blow against ethics and good government, the House has unanimously approved a bill that would roll back a provision in last year’s ethics reform bill.

You heard right. Unanimously.

And the bill in question was H.1, meaning it was the first piece of legislation to be formally introduced in the House this year.

Priorities, you know.

Per VTDigger, last year’s bill would require the House and Senate’s own ethics panels — you know, the ones that operate as complete black boxes concealed from public view? — to consult with the state Ethics Commission under some circumstances.

The key word being “consult.” No decision-making power or authority would be conferred upon the Commission. But even requiring consultation was a bridge too far for The People’s Representatives. H.1 was drafted to “cure” the “problem” with last year’s legislation. And the House passed it without ever taking a roll call vote. Everybody wanted this thing, but nobody wanted to be on the record.

Continue reading →

All in All, Not a Bad Speech

Leave a reply

At the end of my previous post, I looked ahead to Gov. Phil Scott’s inaugural address (which I mistakenly dubbed “State of the State,” sorry) with these words: “We’ll see how much actual ‘coming to the table’ he does, and how much kicking the Legislature he indulges in.”

And now we know. The governor was sworn in and delivered his speech on Thursday afternoon. There was some definite kicking, to be sure. There was also a broad outline of an agenda that emphasized his usual talking points. But the final section of the speech was pure uplift. After ticking off the challenges we face, Scott listed some positive accomplishments not directly tied to anything partisan.

The first one, in fact, was a barely concealed slap at his fellow Republican, Donald Trump. “We’ve received over 1,000 refugees in the last three years and will continue,” Scott said, prompting one of two standing ovations that brought the entire chamber to its feet. (“Entire” as best I could tell watching the livestream, that is.)

His point was that Vermonters can tackle challenges and get hard things done. I may not completely share that optimism, but it was a positive, collaborative message.

At least for today it was. Scott’s budget address two weeks from now will contain the details of his 2025 agenda, and you know where the devil is.

Continue reading →

The Barons Didn’t Buy the Senate, But They Dramatically Increased the Price of Admission

1 Reply

Throughout the campaign season I wrote about the Barons of Burlington, a bunch of well-heeled men — well, almost entirely men — and their obviously coordinated effort to buy a bunch of state Senate seats. They wrote fistfuls of four-figure checks to six Republican candidates for Senate plus their choice for lieutenant governor, Democrat-turned-Republican John Rodgers.

So, now that the dust has settled and the campaign finance reports are nearly complete*, it’s time to answer the musical question: Did the Barons buy the election?

*Final reports are due December 19, but the bulk of the money has been accounted for by now.

The obvious straight-line answer is yes. Their seven chosen candidates swept the field, reducing the Democratic/Progressive majority from 23 seats to 17 with the tie-breaking LG vote going to the Republicans.

The less obvious answer is, well, not really. There is abundant evidence that their money didn’t swing the election — that the Republican gains would have happened anyway.

Continue reading →

A Rising Tide Lifts All the Flotsam

Leave a reply

This month’s Republican wave deposited some worthy members who can bring a socially moderate, fiscally conservative perspective to the Statehouse with some measure of dignity and open-mindedness. Not that I agree with them politically, but they should not be dismissed as extremists or nay-sayers. (Lookin’ at you, incoming Senate Minority Leader Scott Beck.)

But others who floated in on the tide will bring some truly out-there positions to Montpelier. There have always been a few of these folks, but too few to feel comfortable about spreading their wings and exposing their views. They have limited their participation to grumbles and grimaces and often departed after a term or two because they couldn’t stand being in a tiny minority. Or because the voters got wind of their views. (Lookin’ at you, one-term state rep Samantha Lefebvre.)

In the new biennium, there might just be a critical mass that will give them license to fly their freak flags. I can give you five names of far-right figures previously featured in my posts about “stealth conservatives” who won their elections and will take office come January. There are another eight on my suspect list who campaigned on the standard-issue “affordability & common sense” Phil Scott word cloud but showed signs of dog-whistling. I haven’t had a chance to dig into their histories. Yet.

Continue reading →