An Especially Unsettling Spin of a Familiar Revolving Door

4 Replies

There’s nothing illegal about this. It happens all the time. But this particular instance has a bit of a stench about it.

I’m talking about Sarah Mearhoff’s departure from VTDigger. Mearhoff has been the Statehouse bureau chief for Digger, the lead author of its “Daily Briefing” newsletter and its top political reporter throughout this campaign season. She announced her departure last Friday on the accursed platform once known as Twitter. She did not reveal her next professional destination.

But now we know. Mearhoff is crossing over to the dark side. She’s been hired as director of advocacy and communications for the Associated General Contractors of Vermont.

Chief lobbyist, in other words. For one of the most powerful and connected interest groups in Montpelier. Until December 14, Mearhoff was reporting on the doings of our representatives under the Dome. In less than three weeks, she’ll be trying to influence those same people on behalf of Vermont’s road builders and construction magnates, a.k.a. Phil Scott’s favorite people in the whole world.

Continue reading →

Bookshelf: Cutting Through the Bull on Homelessness

3 Replies

I have to say, it’s the first book I’ve ever read that gave away the conclusion right there in the title. I also have to say this isn’t the best-written book ever published — but it’s also an absolutely vital contribution to the discourse. In a fairly slim volume (204 pages plus extensive notes), co-authors Gregg Colburn and Clayton Page Aldern examine the various theories about the causes of homelessness and, with comprehensive evidence, dismiss all of them but one: as the title says, Homelessness Is a Housing Problem.

It’s not crime or mental illness or opioids or laziness or liberal policies or conservative policies or family strife or poverty or unemployment. Homelessness becomes an issue whenever and wherever there’s a shortage of housing. Like, for instance, here in Vermont.

That’s it. Case closed.

Continue reading →

John Rodgers Has Even More Work to Do

1 Reply

When last we looked at Lieutenant-Governor-Elect John Rodgers’ campaign finances, we saw that he was nearly $53,000 in the red as of the November 19 filing deadline.

Well, now the final numbers are in — and Rodgers’ deficit has grown even larger.

His December 15 filing, which is the last one for the campaign cycle and is officially attested to as his FINAL REPORT all caps, shows total fundraising of $216,468 and total expenditures of $284,588.01.

That’s a shortfall of $68,120.01.

In percentage terms, Rodgers overspent his income by 31.5%.

It’s a curious situation for a common-sense fiscal conservative “balancin’ the books around the kitchen table” kind of guy.

Continue reading →

There’s Still Not a Lick of Evidence That People Are Fleeing Vermont

8 Replies

We Vermonters tend to have a sunny view of ourselves and our B.L.S. Sometimes it’s justified, sometimes it’s overblown, sometimes it’s horse hockey. But there’s one consistent idea in our politics that reveals a strain of self-loathing. Funny thing is, it’s an idea that happens to be untrue.

I’m speaking of the notion that people are fleeing the state. I’ve been hearing this as long as I’ve been covering Vermont politics. It most often comes from conservative politicians bitching about high taxes. People are leaving Vermont in droves, they say, because the Democrats are out of control and taxes are too high. This is usually accompanied by an anecdote featuring an anonymous Vermonter planning or contemplating a move.

Funny thing is, I have yet to see any actual evidence for the claim. If people are fleeing Vermont, they leave no trace in the data.

Continue reading →

You Got to Know When to Hold ‘Em

9 Replies

The House and Senate Democratic caucuses took six of the best in this year’s election, losing their supermajorities and being reduced to, well, plain ol’ majorities. (As old Statehouse hands have noted, their “defeat” reduced them to the kind of solid partisan edge that used to be normal.) Most of the losses came in rural precincts, and the remaining rural Dems are in their feelings about it. As Rep. John O’Brien of Tunbridge put it, “we had nothing to run on.”

Given the situation, caucus leadership had two choices: Rein in their ambitious agenda or stay the course and try to craft better messaging. Recent votes for leadership positions show the majority supports option number two. Rather than try to accommodate rural discontent, House and Senate caucuses each decided to make their leadership teams more strongly Chittenden-centric. (Hat tip to Rising Young Blogger Matthew Vigneau for calling the House changes a couple weeks in advance.)

House leadership also seems determined to ignore independent Rep. Laura Sibilia’s bid for Speaker, as they went ahead with renominating Speaker Jill Krowinski while voting to prohibit non-Democrats from seeking the caucus nomination. The issue will be settled in the full House come January.

Clearly, the hatches are being battened. While it might seem as though the Dems are ignoring the lessons to be learned from their November beatdown, their actions make a lot of sense in two ways: The True Believer and the Machiavellian.

Continue reading →

It’s the Department for Children and Families, Not the Department for Adults with Disabilities. Or Its Own Workers.

1 Reply

It’s been a hell of a start to the holiday season for the Vermont Department for Children and Families. Shortly before Thanksgiving, it ordered more than 100 Economic Services Division staff members to return to office duty. They’d been allowed to work remotely since the pandemic, but no more.

The Department put this in terms of improving service to clients. Maybe so, but (1) that’s never been much of a priority for a division notorious for its lack of communication with clients, and (2) these orders are often deployed as a way to cut headcount, as some workers opt out rather than return to the office. And there’s precious little evidence that the Scott administration puts much stock in the quality of its human service programs.

Next we have the ongoing humanitarian crisis triggered by cuts in the General Assistance Emergency Housing program. According to the folks at End Homelessness Vermont, who do a damn sight better job of keeping in touch with clients than DCF, there have been at least seven deaths among former recipients of state-aid motel vouchers. Also, at least seven others have been hospitalized for hypothermia. Many more are at severe risk of illness or death.

And now we have a change in the GA housing program that will unshelter a new set of very vulnerable recipients. Merry Christmas, everybody!

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 →

Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you

2 Replies

I rarely trumpet the “Donate” feature on this blog. The timing rarely seems right, especially in this year of an ongoing — and worsening — crisis of homelessness made worse by Our Betters’ deliberate policy choices. But Giving Tuesday offered an opportunity.

Which I took. And wow, did you ever respond.

Between Giving Tuesday and the day after, my income for the entire year went up by more than 20%.

All I can say is, thank you. Your response is heartening and inspiring.

Continue reading →

Five. And Counting.

1 Reply

Since Thanksgiving Eve, at least five Vermonters have died after being turned away from the state’s General Assistance Emergency Housing program. Three deaths have been publicly reported, but at least two more can be added to the list. We’re up to five. And counting.

Or shall I say, in the words of End Homelessness Vermont’s Brenda Siegel, five “that we know about.” There is good reason to take her word for it; EHV has done a far better job than the state at keeping in touch with unsheltered people, assessing their needs, and trying to keep them safe and warm. And yes, Siegel is an advocate, but she has no need to exaggerate or embellish; the crisis is quite bad enough as it is.

There may have been more deaths that we don’t yet know about. There may be more by the time you read this post. This is an emergency. If the Scott administration was operating with less pride and more compassion, there would be an immediate summit meeting of state officials, key legislators, shelter providers, and housing advocates to find ways to help more people with available resources. The governor is right about one thing: The motel voucher program is a stopgap. It’s too expensive and doesn’t address any issues beyond roofs over heads.

There are options. There are ways to handle the situation — not perfectly, but better than we are now. The Scott administration has failed to explore other ideas. Instead, its policy has been to use whatever money is on hand to prop up the voucher program while making no provision at all for a better, longer-term solution. “It doesn’t have to be the motel program,” Siegel said. “There are other options. But we cannot keep unsheltering people.”

End of sermon. Now, more grim details.

Continue reading →

People, Not Props

10 Replies

In my recent post (since amended) about the deaths of Lucas and Tammy Menard, I was guilty of the very thing I have accused state officials of doing: Treating real people as symbols or statistics or props. My post caused further distress to the people who knew the Menards. And I apologize for that.

I ventured beyond my knowledge in depicting their situation, which was terribly unfair to them, their family and friends. I painted them as hopeless poster children when, according to Lucas’ sister, they had agency, they had help from those closest to them. They addressed their situation with intelligence and grace, and handled it far better than I could possibly imagine myself if I were in their situation.

The sister’s account can be found in the Comments section under the post originally entitled “How Many More Menards?” (Hell, the title itself reflects my thoughtless presentation of Lucas and Tammy as props for my argument.) I won’t quote the comment here; I’ll leave her words in the way she expressed them.

I should have known better. The people I’ve met who are struggling to find security in this world are not victims; they are smart, resourceful, and enterprising. They have their challenges, but they do their level best to adapt and rise above.

I write about political issues from a 30,000-foot perch, which has its advantages but risks losing sight of the real people in the crowd. That’s what I did in this case, and again, I apologize.