Warning: This post contains quite a lot of bad, offensive language. It all comes from the subject of the post. I feel that it must be presented in unexpurgated form because it illustrates the mindset of the subject. The worst of the language will be in quote boxes and preceded by trigger warnings.
Hey everybody, get a load of Hank Poitras, d/b/a Planet Hank, video artiste and right-wing provocateur who is scheduled to share a platform on Friday with state Rep. Michael Boutin of Barre and Vermont Republican Party chair Paul Dame.
And I’m here to tell you that Vermont Republicans would be well advised to sever all ties with Poitras because he is provably a “misogynistic, narcissistic sociopath,” in the words of New Hampshire progressive videographer “Kyle from the Shire.” That characterization is fully warranted, given the flood of online content produced by Poitras himself. It includes plenty of racist, misogynistic, and hateful material, the kind of stuff that makes disgraced former senator Sam Douglass look like Mr. Rogers by comparison.
Oh, and he also has a criminal record from his time living in New Hampshire.
Best strap yourselves in, folks, because this is going to be a bumpy ride. Complete with trigger warnings.
First, a necessary caveat. Treasurer Mike Pieciak remains the betting favorite to become governor whenever Phil Scott decides to ride off into the sunset in his #14 race car. Pieciak is popular and well-connected in Democratic circles and is a proven fundraiser. He’d also be a fine choice, given his financial and managerial expertise; the next governor is going to inherit many challenges from our risk-averse incumbent. It’ll be kind of a “12 labors of Hercules” situation, and Pieciak has the necessary administrative muscle.
But you know, if we find ourselves in the year 2032 and Charity Clark or Molly Gray or Kesha Ram Hinsdale or Tanya Vyhovsky (or, if you prefer, John Rodgers or Scott Beck) is governor and Pieciak is nowhere to be seen, having pulled a TJ Donovan and abandoned politics in favor of a cushy corporate job, you might look back on today — Wednesday, February 11, 2026 — as the first step down that long sad trail.
I refer to the new issue of Seven Days, featuring Kevin McCallum’s fine writeup of the Democrats’ failure, so far, to identify even a single candidate for governor. It raises the single biggest question in Democratic politics: “Why isn’t Mike Pieciak running?” and provides some unflattering answers.
In politics, you can go from “The Next Big Thing” to “Who Dat?” in the blink of an eye. And while it’s way too early to be writing political obituaries, you’re starting to see a few brown spots on the Pieciak banana.
Regular VPO readers are well aware of my feelings about Vermont exceptionalism: Too often, it’s an unmerited sense of self-regard and an unwarranted obstacle to progress.
But there are times when Vermont really is exceptional in a good way. Like Tuesday morning, when a blessedly small cohort of anti-vaxxers and anti-maskers assembled in the Statehouse for “Children’s Health Day,” an event aimed at spurring legislative action to, um, preserve “health care freedom” which means fighting vaccine and mask mandates. Thanks to Trump, people like them are now in charge of America’s public health programs. But in Vermont, they’re a tiny, ineffectual band of whiners.
Pictured above: guest of “honor” Mary Holland, head of Children’s Health Defense, the anti-vaxxer organization founded by, you guessed it, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. The local organizers included Amy Hornblas*, notorious anti-masker who is STILL sounding the alarm over mask mandates that expired more than five years ago, and Alison Despathy, purveyor of Anthony Fauci fanfic conspiracy theories.
*Hornblas, a perpetually smiling grandmotherly type, approached me** before the press conference and asked if I’d ever written about her. She introduced herself only as “Amy,” so I didn’t immediately put two and two together. Now I can say, yes indeedy, I have written about her. And I suspect she knew that.
** She was one of three women*** to approach me at the event. One woman offered me a Children’s Health Day sticker. I replied “I’m media, so no.” Then she said “It’s just to show you’re for the children.” Sure.
*** The third poked my elbow during the event and asked who I was writing for. “Myself,” I said.
The fact that I was wearing an N-95 mask and holding a notepad probably didn’t endear me to anyone else in attendance.
Gov. Phil Scott has chosen to address Vermont’s health care affordability crisis in seemingly the only way he knows how: By proposing a modest deregulation of the marketplace.
The situation as we know it: Health insurance costs are skyrocketing and have been for years. Like many other challenges we face, it’s gotten worse during Scott’s time in office. It’s hitting everybody in the pocketbook. It’s driving the increase in property taxes and putting the squeeze on government operations. Our hospital system is close to collapse. Well, except for the University of Vermont Medical Center, which has become the designated whipping boy for rising costs.
And now we’re facing a dramatic rise in uninsured Vermonters thanks to the Republican Congress’ termination of federal subsidies. Per VTDigger’s Olivia Gieger, more than 2,500 Vermonters have already dropped their insurance plans — a decline of nearly eight percent. In the first two weeks of no federal subsidies!
And a Department of Vermont Health Access official has said that even more people will decide to go bareback as they face the harsh reality of through-the-roof premiums.
This is terrible news for our struggling hospitals, which will almost certainly have to absorb higher costs for charity care as uninsured Vermonters avoid seeing the doctor until they resort to the most expensive kind of care there is — emergency room visits.
The state Senate Judiciary Committee pulled a rather Jesuitical maneuver on Thursday. It voted not to recommend the nomination of Michael Drescher to the Vermont Supreme Court, but not to oppose it either. The committee effectively punted the nomination to the full Senate, which is scheduled to debate the matter on Tuesday, February 3.
We’ll get back to the funny business in a moment. First, the background.
Drescher served as U.S. Attorney for Vermont under Donald Trump. In court he defended the notorious detentions of Rümeysa Öztürk and Mohsen Mahdawi, battles he eventually lost. In testimony before Judiciary, he explained that it was his duty to represent the federal government in such cases and his work didn’t necessarily reflect his own views.
That gets a little too close to Nuremberg territory for me. Just following orders, eh?
Now, it’s not that simple when it comes to officers of the court. Take the state attorney general; the office’s duties include representing the state. Our AGs often find themselves arguing positions they might personally disagree with. U.S. Attorneys are in the same boat.
Still. At a time when protesters are being gunned down on the streets of Minneapolis, it seems strange to be elevating someone who acted officially in support of Trump’s immigration crackdown.
Gov. Phil Scott’s budget address was larded with the customary straw-man punching. Irritating, predictable, grind your teeth and move on. But one of those throwaway lines implied the abandonment of a policy idea that’s appeared inevitable for quite a long time. See if you can spot it:
…for those looking for a quick and easy fix to the [Transportation Fund] short fall, I want to be crystal clear, I will not support raising the Gas tax.
Okay, first of all, NO ONE is even suggesting, let alone supporting, an increase in the “Gas tax.” I haven’t heard a single person in Vermont politics even mention such a thing. (Leave the straw man alone!)
What I have heard for years, from everyone involved in transportation policy, is that we will need to transition to a broader tax mechanism that includes electric vehicles and hybrids. Cars and trucks are more fuel-efficient than they used to be, and we are embarking on a massive shift away from gas-powered transportation. Gas tax revenues are down and will keep on declining. We’ll still be using the roads, and we’ll still need to pay for their upkeep.
Various ideas have been tossed around. Most involve a miles-driven assessment (clunky acronym MBUF, see below) where you pay based on how much you drive, not how often you get gas.
But the idea was absent from the governor’s presentation, replaced by a boilerplate rejection of an idea that nobody has proposed. Given how he frames every tax reform proposal as a tax increase (because there’s always somebody who might pay more even if the aggregate impact is a tax cut), he’s implicitly signaling his opposition to any kind of transportation tax shift. If the Legislature did approve a new tax regime that properly assessed electrics for their use of the roads and highways, I believe the governor would veto it.
Gov. Phil Scott has belatedly rediscovered some of the political courage he occasionally displayed during Donald Trump’s first term but has kept well-hidden through Trump II: The Empire Strikes Back.
And all it took was two cold-blooded killings on the streets of Minneapolis by Trump’s masked and heavily armed thugs. Well, it also took critical statements from a number of other Republicans, up to and including Texas’ archconservative Gov. Greg Abbott. Scott was far from the first to tiptoe out on that limb.
Note that Scott didn’t say a word about the first killing, that of Renee Good more than two weeks ago. A second senseless murder, that of Alex Pretti, had to happen before the governor’s moral gag reflex was triggered.
So… congratulations?
For the past year-plus, Scott has minimized any public criticism of Trump’s many excesses. And in his budget address, he sent a not-terribly-subtle message to the rest of us to Please Shut the Hell Up About Trump:
…today, even the traditional funding we’ve come to expect from Washington is uncertain. And from what I’ve seen, no amount of political posturing or strongly worded statements will change that.
Listening to Phil Scott talk is like bathing in a vat of Malt-o-Meal: Sleep-inducing, no stimulative properties, somehow comforting and discomfiting at the same time. If you don’t believe me, just look: Scott’s buddy Lt. Gov. John Rodgers is fixin’ to nod off.
Seriously, this is the second time in a month I took notes on a gubernatorial address only to barely scratch the surface of my legal pad. (Yes, I’m old.)
Which stands to reason. He was never an orator by any means and he’s been in office for nearly a decade. If he had anything new to contribute, he would have done so long ago.
He did try to pretend there was new wine in those old, moth-eaten wineskins but it wasn’t nearly enough to persuade. Every governorship has an expiration date, and this speech was one more sign that Scott’s has come and gone. Not that he won’t win another term if he tries, since all the top-tier Democrats seem to be scared out of their minds to confront him and far too many Dems are happy to keep on voting for him because, I don’t know, he handled Covid pretty well (six years ago) and he’s not Donald Trump?
I mean, he talked about permit reform as the fix for the housing crisis. He complained about the cost of public education. He emphasized enforcement in his approach to crime, juvenile offenders, and substance use. He called for rollbacks or repeal of Democratic initiatives on climate change. Blah blah blah.
Oh, and he had the brass balls to blame Peter Shumlin for our crisis in health care costs. Shumlin, who hasn’t been in office for a decade and who abandoned his single-payer plan in The Year of Our Lord 2014. Scott cited Shumlin’s failed effort and the regulatory regime he did implement as the wellspring of our health care woes.
To which I say, well, who the hell has been governor since January 2017 and why hasn’t he done anything to counteract the alleged poison of Shumlin’s doomed reform plan?
One of Scott’s core efforts to lipstick his pig of a record was his call for reinvention of how state government does its work. As precedent, he cited reforms initiated under Dick Snelling and continued under Howard Dean, and said it was time to refresh that effort for a new era.
You know what it reminded me of? When Scott was first running for governor in 2016, he touted lean management at every opportunity. Lean management, he said, was the key to unlocking huge savings in state government:
I believe we can reduce the operational cost of every agency and department by one cent for every dollar currently spent, in my first year in office. Saving one penny on the dollar generates about $55 million in savings.
The link above is to a piece I wrote in 2020, by which time the phrase “lean management” had long been assigned to the dustbin of bankrupt political schemes. When asked about it in early 2020, Finance Commissioner Adam Greshin said “It’s not necessarily about savings, it’s about maybe spending the same amount of money and providing better value.”
Okay, fine. But that’s not what candidate Scott promised. And if he had made good on his promise, that’d be more than half a billion dollars we could have returned to taxpayers or invested in addressing some of our many challenges.
That was the unfulfilled promise of Scott, the businessman who knew how to make government work better and cheaper. And just like all the other businessmen-turned-politicians before him, he found out that the real-life work of managing government was a hell of a lot harder than he thought.
And now he’s coming back with a vaguely-described plan to reinvent state government. I’ll believe it when I see it. No, wait, I won’t believe it when I see it — I’ll believe it when it produces real, tangible savings. Not holding my breath.
I think Phil Scott has had his chance. He’s had many chances, thanks to his easy-going Real Vermonter charm and the failure of top Democrats to mount the least resistance, to put in the effort needed to rough up his Teflon coat. But it sure looks like we’re stuck with him for a while yet.
I tell you what, the next governor is going to have a massive job on their hands to clean up all the messes Scott leaves behind and all the crises he’s allowed to get worse and worse.
Gov. Phil Scott’s Education Secretary sent an opinion piece to VTDigger echoing the governor’s talking points from his State of the State Address last week. But the original bore an unfortunate headline, and the text wasn’t any great shakes either.
Headline Number One, as published by VTDigger on the evening of Monday, January 12:
“Stupid,” eh? I get the callback to James Carville’s most memorable concoction, but it bore an unpleasant whiff of condescension toward the governor’s critics. Now, Saunders’ boss has no problem with condescension toward his critics, but apparently someone thought better of the headline. Because by the next morning, “Stupid” had been excised:
It’s a shame, isn’t it, that a sharp-eyed correspondent noticed the original headline and sent me a screenshot before it could be altered?
I can’t say for certain whether the first headline came from Team Saunders or someone in Digger’s editorial room, but I suspect the former. Seems a stretch that a Digger functionary would attach a potentially offensive headline to an essay by a prominent state official.
(There’s an editor’s note at the bottom of the essay that says “Correction: Due to an editing error, an earlier version of this story contained a misleading headline.“It doesn’t identify the source of the headline. Also, “misleading’ is a funny way of saying “offensive.”)
But even without the “Stupid,” there’s something off about that headline. “It’s Not All About Taxes” carries the implication that it’s mostly about taxes, right? And I don’t think that’s the argument the Scott administration wants to deploy.
I’ll say this much for Gov. Phil Scott: He understands the assignment.
Scott delivered his State of the State address Wednesday afternoon, and virtually every one of its 40-odd minutes was devoted to a single subject: Following through on Act 73, the widely unpopular education reform law of 2025.
Speaking in purely political terms, if he wants the Legislature to keep on track with Act 73, he’s going to have to get out in front and spend heavily from his Scrooge McDuck levels of political capital trying to persuade a reluctant public that his vision is the right one. This speech indicates that he’s well aware of the assignment.
It’s only the first step, of course. If he wants to sell Act 73, he’ll have to get out there, criss-crossing the state, lobbying the Legislature, and attaching his name and image to the process. Phil Scott is the only person who can make chicken salad out of the Act 73 chicken shit.
The Vermont Political Observer. 