Tag Archives: Larry Hart Sr.

You Know, Maybe We’re Better Off Without Larry Hart

2 Replies

Seven Days’ legislative reporter Hannah Bassett is out with a short piece about Larry Hart’s resignation as state senator from the Orange district, not named in honor of Donald Trump’s skin tone. Surprise, surprise, Hart couldn’t take “the frustrations of Statehouse politics,” which generally sideline the concerns and ideas of the minority party.

Yeah, how about that, elections have consequences.

And then we get to paragraph five, which is just an absolute stunner.

Hart also said he grew frustrated by measures advanced by the Democratic majority. He said many of the policies he objected to appeared to be driven by Democratic members who were not born in Vermont. Hart said he anticipates that Republican legislators will introduce a bill in January that would bar anyone not born in the state from running for public office.

[record scratch]

WHAAAAAAAAAAAT???!?!??!!

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 →

The Barons Take On a Junior Partner

1 Reply

It must be nice to have so much money that you can afford to crank out thousand-dollar checks by the bushel and hardly notice it.

Safe to say the Barons of Burlington are in this category, because they continue to broaden their roster of Republican state Senate candidates, each new one seemingly less likely than the last. The newest tchotchke in their collection: Larry Hart, Sr. — or alternatively Larry Wayne Hart — this year’s challenger to Orange County’s nearly perpetual incumbent Democrat Mark MacDonald.

Mr. Hart has previously featured in this space as a mystery candidate who had failed to submit any campaign finance reports. At first I took this to mean that he wasn’t doing anything and hadn’t even bothered to submit a No Activity Report. I heard later that he’d boasted of having $30,000 in the bank. Well, now we know, and the truth is just about exactly in the midpoint of those two speculations. And the bulk of his money came from, you guessed it, the Barons of Burlington. Some of ’em, anyway.

Continue reading →

The Barons of Burlington Are Trying to Buy the State Senate

3 Replies

Pictured above is a curious sort of politician: He presents himself as a simple farmer, a rural populist who gives voice to the voiceless — meaning people who live outside the Burlington area. But John Rodgers, former Democratic state lawmaker turned Republican nominee for lieutenant governor, has seen his campaign picked up off the mat by major backing from Chittenden County elites. The Barons of Burlington, you might say.

These same people are writing batches of four-figure checks to a handful of Republican candidates for state Senate who have some chance of winning. The goal, clearly, is to kill the Democratic/Progressive supermajority in the Senate and end the truly historic string of veto overrides in the current biennium. It’s a longshot; the Republicans would need a net gain of four seats to end the supermajority. But if Rodgers wins, they’d only need three because the potential tie-breaking vote would be in their back pocket.*

*Correction: THe tie-breaking vote might be useful but not for veto overrides. If there’s a tie on an override, it’s already lost.

A few months ago, this Barons of Burlington thing was kind of cute. Like, can you really expect to swing an election with a sprinkling of large donations? Now, it’s looking like a serious, coordinated effort beyond anything I’ve seen in my 12+ years of walking this beat. I mean, all these people writing identical checks to the same handful of candidates? It’s beyond anyone’s notion of coincidence.

Continue reading →