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 →

Two Vermonts, Again, Again

2 Replies

The phrase “Two Vermonts” has a long and storied history. Its roots run deeper than the origins of Vermont itself. Way back when, our B.L. Not Yet S. was the tattered rope in a tug-of-war between New Hampshire and New York. And then, for much of the Vermont Republican Party’s 100-year-plus hegemony, a governor from the eastern side of the state was inevitably succeeded by someone from the west. There was a very clear division between the two Vermonts tracing the spine of the Green Mountains.

If you do an Internet search for “Two Vermonts,” you get a staggering quantity of hits. It’s been a long time since the line was about east versus west; instead, various divisions are drawn by a writer or speaker in service of the argument they are making. The two Vermonts have been defined as, among other things: The places, rural or urban, where people are prospering versus those whose inhabitants are struggling to get by; The places where real people work hard at real jobs versus the realms of the picture-postcard; The locales struggling with drugs and crime versus the enclaves of the well-to-do and the tourists; Rural/parochial areas versus urban/cosmopolitan ones.

There are also non-geographical conceptions of Two Vermonts: A simple divide between prosperity and poverty, or between a Vermont that seriously engaged with climate change and another where harmful emissions are still on the rise.

I’ve got a new spin on this concept based on this month’s election results. If you follow I-89 from Burlington to White River Junction and I-91 from there to Brattleboro, you will have traversed one Vermont. The rest of the state, or most of it, is the other Vermont. Neat, eh?

You can see this most clearly in the incoming state Senate. There are 17 members of the Democratic/Progressive caucus, and fourteen of them hail from counties on that freeway corridor: Chittenden (6), Washington (3), Windsor (3), and Windham (2). The other three hail from Bennington (2) and Addison (1).

Continue reading →

However Much We’re Taxing the Gambling Industry, It Isn’t Enough

3 Replies

There’s a fire raging somewhere out there, and it’s only a matter of time before it arrives on our doorstep with devastating consequences. And we are not ready for it, not at all.

As you might have gathered from the headline, this isn’t about an actual forest fire, but about America’s biggest growth industry: Online gambling. There was a fair bit of coverage in our media earlier this year after legalization took effect, as initial returns suggested that the business was a big hit in Vermont. But what finally got me to write was a recent episode of The Distraction, a studiedly goofy sports-themed podcast with occasional forays into more serious stuff.

Like the November 14 edition, featuring football writer Arif Hasan. He’s a lifelong gambler himself, but he has a clear-eyed view of gambling’s impact on individuals, the sports world, and society in general. There’s a whole bunch of scary stuff in the interview, and more in an article he recently published (which is partly behind a paywall). But here’s the thing that prompted me to write.

Continue reading →

The New State Senate Will Be… Something

1 Reply

Last May, I wrote a piece entitled “What Will the State Senate Be in 2025?” The idea was that for the second straight election cycle, the stodgy ol’ Senate was going to see an unusual quantity of churn:

This, in a body that values age and seniority above all else, and normally consigns junior members to purely decorative status. It’s gonna be interesting.

Well, the results of this month’s election will bring even more change to the Senate. It’s kind of staggering when you put it all together. By my count, 18 of the 30 senators will be freshmen or sophomores come January. That’s an amazing number. There were 10 newbies in 2023, and nine more will be new senators in 2025. (One 2023 newcomer, Irene Wrenner, lost her bid for a second term.)

The class of 2025: Democrats Seth Bongartz, Joe Major, and Robert Plunkett; and Republicans Scott Beck, Patrick Brennan, Samuel Douglass, Larry Hart Sr., Steven Heffernan, and Chris Mattos. Class of 2023: Martine Gulick, Wendy Harrison, Nader Hashim, Robert Norris, Tanya Vyhovsky, Anne Watson, David Weeks, Becca White, and Terry Williams.

What’s more, in a body known for very long tenures, only four senators will have served continuously since 2015 (Phil Baruth, Ann Cummings, Ginny Lyons, Richard Westman). Historically, you’d need to serve at least that long before the John Bloomers of the world* would consider you to be a Real Senator.

*Kidding. There is only one John Bloomer per planet.

Continue reading →

John Rodgers Has Some Work to Do

3 Replies

John Rodgers still looks to be our next lieutenant governor, absent some history-defying hijinx in the Statehouse. But he can’t close the books on his successful campaign — not without some serious post-election fundraising.

Because according to his latest campaign finance filing, Rodgers is nearly $53,000 in the red.

He raised a total of $214,218, very respectable considering that as of July 4 he hadn’t raised a damn dime. He attracted a veritable tsunami of four-figure donations from the Barons of Burlington and their friends.

But he also spent like a drunken sailor — $266,942 in a four-month period, a breathtaking pace for any office this side of the governorship. That leaves him with a campaign deficit of $52,724, meaning he overshot his revenue by about 25%.

Hell of a thing for a guy who ran on affordability and common sense.

Continue reading →

We Are Unsheltering You For Your Own Good

4 Replies

I circled back to Gov. Phil Scott’s November 13 press conference because I was interested in the coverage of his comments about our burnt orange president-elect. VTDigger reported that Scott was urging people to give Donald Trump a chance:

“For the sake of our country, we need to tamp down the division and fear, and we need to at least give him the opportunity to do better and do the right thing.”

It sounded like the pundit class’ evergreen hopes that any minute now, Trump was about to start acting presidential. But when I listened to Scott’s full remarks, I got quite a different impression. Yes, he urged a wait-and-see attitude, but he was also sharply critical of Trump and rested his hopes more on “those who are coming into power with him” than on the president-elect himself. That’s a bold thing to do with a leader who has a proven capacity for vengeance. I thought it was more than a bit courageous on Scott’s part, actually.

Not so much with his comments on the newly-opened, grossly inadequate, and budget-bustin’ family shelters. On that score, he was deeply disingenuous — and the assembled reporters let him get away with it.

Continue reading →

Are We Sure the Green Mountain Care Board Knows What the Hell It’s Doing?

5 Replies

Shots fired!

In response to revenue cuts ordered by the Green Mountain Care Board, the University of Vermont Health Network is slashing services at multiple locations. Most egregious, to me, is the closure of Central Vermont Medical Center’s inpatient psychiatric unit.

Reminder that we’ve had a chronic shortage of inpatient psychiatric space more or less continuously since 2011, when Tropical Storm Irene put the final nail in the old Waterbury state hospital’s coffin. And now we’re cutting eight beds?

A cynical observer might infer that UVMHN disagrees with the Board’s mandate, and is forcing the issue with unpopular and/or unworkable reductions. Seven Days’ Derek Brouwer wrote that the Network’s announcement “ratchets up a long-simmering tension” between the Health Network and the Board.

The Board was in a ratcheting mood itself. It issued a huffy statement Thursday afternoon expressing deep concern with the cuts and asserting that it “was not consulted on, and did not approve, these reductions.”

Well, boo frickin’ hoo.

Continue reading →

Zuckerman’s End?

8 Replies

Barring an extremely unlikely vote in the Legislature, we may have seen the last of David Zuckerman on our political stage. Maybe not; he’s only 53 years old, a full generation younger than the guy we just elevated to the White House (and 30 years younger than our senior U.S. Senator). But if we are seeing the end of the Zuckerman experience, it’ll go down as one of the more curious public careers of our time. He is one of the most loved and hated politicians in Vermont.

Zuckerman was 25 years old when he was first elected to the Legislature in 1997. He’s been in office ever since, except for a two-year hiatus from 2021-23. He won 12 consecutive elections, a streak only broken when he took on the undefeated Phil Scott. You don’t compile a record like Zuckerman’s without smarts and talent, which he has in abundance, but there’s also a bit of tone-deafness about him. The latest indicator of this is his dalliance with Ian Diamondstone’s demand that the Legislature return him to office. He doesn’t seem to get that the longer this goes on, the sourer will be the end of his tenure.

Throughout the Phil Scott era, Zuckerman has been the most successful Democratic* politician this side of the Congressional delegation — and yet, many in the Vermont Democratic Party have ached to be rid of him. He’s the most high profile Progressive figure of his day and he has a formidable donor base, but he just got beat by a guy who didn’t even start campaigning until July. He is seen by many as a champion of progressive causes generally and women’s rights specifically, but others see him as untrustworthy if not a little bit squicky.

*Yes, I know he’s a Prog, but he was on the Democratic ticket. We’ll get to that.

Continue reading →

Those Temporary Family Shelters Are Costing How Much Now?

8 Replies

We already knew that the Scott administration’s pathetically inadequate family shelters were a Potemkin village meant to project the image of concern without making any effort to address the scope of the homelessness crisis.

And now we know, thanks to VTDigger, that this sham effort is also a colossal waste of resources.

The shelters, which can house up to 17 families for up to five months, will cost at least $3 million. The bulk of that money, some $2.6 million, will go to an out-of-state contractor that will provide staffing for the shelters because, well, local service agencies are already stretched to the max.

You may recall that the motel voucher program, deemed too costly to continue intact by Gov. Phil Scott and the Democratic caucuses in the Legislature, had a maximum cost of $80 per motel room per night. If you divide $80 into $3 million, you’ll see that the money spent on these family shelters — really, spent almost entirely on well-compensated staffers from a for-profit company — could have paid for 37,500 nights of motel shelter.

Can you say “boondoggle,” friends? I know you can.

Continue reading →

The Diamondstone Caucus Will Not Save You

3 Replies

Lt. Gov. David Zuckerman has kinda-sorta-almost conceded his race for re-election. But he did leave a side door open, just a bit, and he should cut it out.

Zuckerman got 44.5% of the vote, while Republican John Rodgers got 46.1%. When no candidate gets a majority, the Legislature technically chooses the winner — although traditionally the top vote-getter is awarded the office.

Zuckerman’s almost-concession came after Peace & Justice Party candidate Ian Diamondstone issued a self-righteous press release calling for Zuckerman to be installed. Seriously, you should read the thing. (It’s attached at the end of this post in all its sniffy, stuffy, Old Left glory. The late Peter Diamondstone would be proud.)

While Zuckerman did concede, or got about 99% of the way there at least, he gave some weight to Diamondston’e argument. The LG’s explanation was, frankly, an exercise in tortured logic, long on the former and short on the latter. Let’s see if I got this straight. According to VTDigger, Zuckerman called Rodgers to acknowledge he’d won… but he thought the Diamondstone statement raised some good points… but he wouldn’t contest the election in the Legislature… but he thought the statement “probably will keep that discussion alive.” Note the passive tense. He won’t keep the discussion alive, but he hopes it will continue without his help.

It’s understandable that a politician facing a shock defeat might try to wriggle off the hook, but the Diamondstone thing is a dead end that can only drag Zuckerman further down. Really now, how much influence do you think the Peace & Justice Party has in Montpelier?

Continue reading →