Category Archives: Vermont State Senate

It’s good to have a staff of tame lawyers on call

The Legislature continues to careen toward adjournment, the desire to skip town augmented by the looming specter of Norm McAllister, who officially refused to resign today.

One event worth noting from today’s action: the Senate Natural Resources Committee held a closed-door meeting in the office of Senate President Pro Tem John Campbell. Reporters were refused admittance. Later, the Legislative Council duly produced a memo validating the unusual move:

It is the opinion of the Office of Legislative Council that the General Assembly is not subject to the requirements of the Open Meetings Law.

If true, this is quite shameful, and ought to be rectified by… ahem… the General Assembly ASAP. But I have a feeling it’s a convenient fiction. For one thing, if Legislative committees could go into closed-door session whenever they wanted to, they’d do it all the damn time.

For another, this is a substantially broader claim than was made last year, when Seven Days’ Paul Heintz was denied access to a meeting of the Committee on Committees.

Continue reading

The vultures gather with unseemly haste

If Norm McAllister thinks he still has any friends in the political world, he should give it another think.

At last check, McAllister was technically still a member of the Senate. He has yet to submit his resignation, if that is indeed what he will do.

However, the lack of a vacancy hasn’t stopped some very ambitious folks from putting their names forward to replace him.

Out of, you understand, a selfless concern for the good people of Vermont.

"Pick me! I've even got a mascot!"

“Pick me! I’ve even got a mascot!”

Foremost among this unsavory horde is a guy who ought to posess a bit more sensitivity: Randy Brock, former state senator and auditor and candidate for Governor. Seven Days’ Paul Heintz:

“If [McAllister] resigns, I would certainly be interested in filling the seat, because I think it needs to be filled and I think it needs to be filled by someone who can get to work immediately, who’s up on the issues,” Brock said. “So I’m willing to serve, yes.”

“Willing to serve,” pssssh. “Desperately jonesing for a return to politics,” I’ll buy.

Continue reading

Somewhere over a quiet drink, two lawmakers are synchronizing their stories

Pity the poor Kevin Mullin, Senator from Rutland, and Tim Corcoran, Representative from Bennington. They had the misfortune to share a rental house with disgraced Sen. Norm McAllister (R-Siberia). And in that house, McAllister is accused of repeatedly raping a young woman who he presented to his colleagues as his “intern.” And now, Mullin and Corcoran find themselves on a hot seat of sorts. Or they ought to, anyway.

For his part, Mullin has claimed that the woman, 43 years McAllister’s junior, slept in the basement. Corcoran, however, seems to have a different recollection:

… Corcoran said Monday afternoon that, “as far as I know,” 63-year-old McAllister and the young woman he employed as a sort of legislative assistant were spending nights in the same room, on the occasions the woman stayed in the capital.

The young woman has said that McAllister raped her “just about” every time she stayed in the house.

Both Mullin and Corcoran seem to have adopted a relentlessly aggressive incuriosity about their roomie and his (cough) intern. Corcoran’s “as far as I know” is matched by Mullin’s “I assume [the basement is] where she slept.”

Continue reading

Who is this “Norm McAllister” of whom you speak?

It was a real pigpile in the Statehouse today, as every politician rushed to give their two cents’ on Sen. Norm McAllister. And while Friday’s reaction was shock and surprise and even a smidge of sympathy for Good Ol’ Norm, today it was the ultimate game of Hot Potato, starring McAllister as the spud in question.

But he was more than just a hot potato; he was more like a potato baked in the hot zone of a nuclear reactor, marinated in snake venom, glazed with a hobo-puke reduction and liberally sprinkled with powdered essence of skunk. Such was the unseemly haste with which Our Leaders sought to distance themselves from McAllister and his [alleged] crimes.

There were universal calls for his resignation, as if the presumption of innocence had withered and died under the sheer ick factor of the [alleged] offenses. And, quick as a bunny, Lt. Gov. Phil Scott announced that McAllister would resign within 24 hours.

The news of his coming resignation elicited barely-concealed sighs of relief and metaphorical mopping of brows all around. But there was one small problem: Nobody told Good Ol’ Norm.

Continue reading

No, John, that’s not how an ethics panel works

I feel so proud.

In announcing his complete reversal on the need for a Senate ethics panel, Senate President Pro Tem John Campbell put his finger squarely on the source of the problem.

The panel would also give a lawmaker accused of wrongdoing an opportunity to refute allegations made by “journalists or bloggers.” Campbell said lawmakers need a place “where people can go to clear their name if someone makes an accusation.”

Aww, John. I didn’t know you cared.

Continue reading

All of a sudden, the Senate needs an ethics committee

Less than two weeks ago, Seven Days‘ Paul Heintz revealed that Senate President Pro Tem John Campbell had gotten a job with the Windsor County State’s Attorney under what can only be called questionable circumstances.

Last year, Campbell actively lobbied for the job on behalf of the SA, who happens to be a neighbor of his. After the job went through, Campbell inquired about it, and was hired without any search process.

In the story, Heintz raised the issue of creating a Senate Ethics Committee, which currently does not exist. Campbell, sounding a lot like Bill Sorrell attesting to Bill Sorrell’s innocence:

“We really haven’t talked about it,” Senate President Pro Tem John Campbell (D-Windsor) said earlier this year. “I can’t remember the last time there was something that even came close to a question of someone’s ethics.”

Well, you can file that one in the Ron Ziegler Memorial “Inoperative” File. What’s changed?

Good Ol’ Norm, that’s what.

Continue reading

Good ol’ Norm, maybe not so good

When a prominent figure is charged with a crime, as with Sen. Norm McAllister being accused of sexual assault and trafficking, it might turn out to be a well-concealed aspect of his personality. Everybody has secrets, and some do a really good job of compartmentalizing.

On the other hand, maybe the dam bursts and you start hearing stories. Like this, from former State Rep. Rachel Weston:

Weston/McAllister

Oh boy.

Is this the first of many “Norm the perv” stories to be told? If so, I have to say the Senate did an awful job of policing members’ behavior. Need any more reason to set up an ethics panel, Mr. Campbell?

A Senator behind bars

The mugshot.

The mugshot.

It’s gonna be an uncomfortable day at the Statehouse, what with yesterday’s arrest — at the Statehouse, no less — of Sen. Norm McAllister on charges of sexual assault and human trafficking, blecccch. His friends and colleagues should be prepared for questions about it.

Some free advice, then.

You can always start with a generic “not enough information” approach. That’ll fly at least until his arraignment. After that, you can fall back on the “innocent until proven guilty” mantra, but be very careful about how you frame it.

Avoid anything that shows more sympathy for the (alleged) perpetrator than the (alleged) victims. Avoid coming across like a man who’s never given a thought to the reality of women’s lives. Avoid an overzealous presumption of innocence: “I can’t believe good old Norm would do this.”

Be absolutely sure to avoid casting aspersions on the (alleged) victims. Nothing about skanks or tramps or lowlifes or entrapment.

Continue reading

Is there going to be a health care bill? Like, at all?

The clock is ticking on the 2015 legislative session. We’re less than a month away from the usual adjournment, and a passel of “big bills” is just now crossing from the House to the Senate. These include the tax and budget bills, school reform legislation, the water cleanup bill, and the RESET  renewable energy package.

Conspicuous by its absence from this roll call of heavy lifting: the health care bill. It’s been dramatically downsized, and is still being batted around among three House committees. This week, the Ways and Means Committee barely managed to achieve a majority on a financing package after a lot of hand-wringing and internal disagreement. The Health Care Committee produced a scaled-down version of reforms costing about $20 million per year. But the Appropriations Committee, which has to approve the reform spending, has yet to weigh in. Approps chair Mitzi Johnson says her panel will hear testimony on the bill next week.

If that committee takes any route besides endorsement of Health Care’s bill, there may be a fresh round of back-and-forth between those two panels, just as there was between Health Care and Ways and Means on the revenue package.

And then, sometime next week at the absolute soonest, the health care bill will make its way, bloodied, bruised and limping, to the House floor.

If not “the absolute soonest”? We’re getting awfully close to mid-April.

Frankly, it’d take an uncommon outbreak of consensus in the House and between House and Senate for a health care bill of any kind to achieve passage in this session.

There’s a flood-stage ice jam of legislation forming in the Senate. This morning I watched one committee chair working with his staffer to find time to accommodate long and growing lists of potential witnesses. Can we assemble early some days? Can we schedule Monday meetings, an unusual and undesirable step, especially for lawmakers from distant parts of the state? The thought in my mind was, how can they possibly get all this done?

Breaking that jam and moving major bills will depend on the Senate running uncharacteristically smoothly, with unusually effective leadership (cough*John Campbell*cough) and widespread voluntary ego-suppression in Vermont’s Most Self-Important Deliberative Body.

The health care bill, if it gets to the Senate in some form, will take its place in line behind the other Big Bills. Most importantly, it will be the last of the big revenue bills to hit the Senate, and who knows how much appetite they have for tax increases. There’s a significant cohort of moderate-to-conservative Senate Democrats that can diminish or kill any tax measures, and they may be out for blood after pretty much having to approve new money for Lake Champlain and to fill part of the budget gap.

From what I’ve heard, the Senate’s outlook is even more of a mystery this year than usual, and that’s saying something. Big picture, the odds appear to be against any meaningful health care reform getting through the legislature this year.

Which would be a bad thing in three important ways:

— The bill would reduce the sinfully large Medicaid gap. The Shumlin plan would substantially reduce it; the House Health Care plan would make a series dent, at least for primary care providers.

— The bill, in either form, includes more money for proven cost-saving strategies in Blueprint for Health and the Green Mountain Care Board. Continuing to bend the cost curve is crucial to the long-term success of the reform project.

— And third, for those who insist on the humanitarian angle, is that either bill would ease access for thousands of working poor Vermonters.

Lawmakers and legislative leadership know all this. If they didn’t, the bill wouldn’t have gotten as far as it has in a difficult year. Improving health care is a serious priority — but so are a lot of other things. It’d be a shame if health care fell victim to the legislature’s time crunch, but it wouldn’t exactly be a surprise.

A pretty darn good day at the Statehouse

Wednesday was a big day for the legislature’s battle to get through a long and tough agenda. The House passed two huge bills, and the Senate approved a positive step in voter access.

Senate first. After Sen. Dustin Degree lost his repeated efforts to derail, slow down, or cripple the bill, the full Senate approved same-day voter registration on a voice vote.

Degree was pushing a mild form of the Republican “voter fraud” canard. The Bush Administration tried very hard for eight years to find and prosecute cases of vote fraud, and produced an average of less than one case per year. But there was Degree, acknowledging that “Fraud may be minuscule,” but insisting we ought to take steps to prevent this mythical plague upon our land.

If the bill passes the House, it wouldn’t take effect until 2017 because Vermont’s town clerks are creatures of habit who are loath to accept change or take on new responsibilities. They insisted on a two-year delay, and still want to fight for tougher rules. Our Public Servants, first and foremost guarding their own turf.

On to the House, which approved two bills that can be fairly described as “landmark.” Neither bill is perfect, but both represent substantial accomplishments.

The “water bill,” H.35, passed on a 126-10 vote, with only a handful of Republicans saying no. It establishes a Clean Water Fund and provides for $8 million a year in funding. This accomplishment is diminished by the fact that the state HAD to do something, or face the regulatory wrath of the feds. Because Vermont is, and has been for a long time, in violation of the Clean Water Act.

Still, getting almost 95% of lawmakers to support a bill that impinges on large segments of the economy and raises new revenue wasn’t a simple task. After a confirmatory vote Thursday, the bill moves to the Senate.

The education bill passed by a narrow margin, but still substantial: 88-59. This one was a tougher sell because education is near and dear to the hearts of every student, parent, grandparent, and community in the state. And near to the wallets of every taxpayer.

This was vividly on display in Wednesday’s Democratic caucus meeting. After an overview of the water bill drew only a couple of questions, the presentation of the ed bill had Dem lawmakers popping up all over the room. Many were specifically concerned about schools and districts in their own communities.

Any kind of education reform bill is a tough haul. This makes substantial reforms in funding and governance. Generally speaking, it’s a decent effort. I think we do have to do something significant to bend the cost curve, and some form of consolidation is almost inevitable. Student populations are declining, especially in rural areas; tiny schools are in no one’s best interest. Not students, not taxpayers, and not other government initiatives that might benefit if the public-school burden wasn’t so heavy.

Both bills will head for the Senate, which makes me cringe. Based on past experience, you never know what the hell they’re going to do. But maybe they’ll surprise me. There are some good folks in the Senate — definitely two more (Becca Balint, Brian Campion) than there were in years past. The atmosphere and legislative product will greatly benefit from the addition by subtraction of Peter Galbraith, whose voluntary retirement from the Senate was a blessing for us all. We should see a lot less capricious obstructionism, if nothing else.

Hard times still to come, many long days and debates — some dramatic, some tedious. But April First was a good day. No foollin’.