As we enter the second half of the 2025-26
biennium, the shadow of federal action is mingling with Vermont’s own economic
crisis over its budget shortfall and the ongoing growth of school budgets and
the cost of healthcare.
The strong Governor’s statement this week about
ICE actions in Minnesota contrasted with his earlier focus exclusively on the
budget and education funding reform. The legislature, however, has already been
grappling with some of the specific impacts of federal actions. The budget
crisis has significant drivers from federal cuts (a third of our 9.4 billion budget
is federally funded.)
That budget is presenting newer
legislators with a first-ever reality: cuts to existing programs may be
necessary to a balanced budget, and the governor has proposed many in his
budget. Our state revenue forecast is slightly down, yet $139 million is needed
just to maintain current operations. The stress of this session has barely
begun. Capturing all the moving parts in one update will be difficult – feel
free to ask for details on topics that are not discussed here or summarized too
briefly.
Human Services Committee
In my Human Services Committee, we started
paring back the onion on the budget. In the Health Department, the proposal is
to eliminate forgivable loans that enable students to pursue degrees critical
to the healthcare workforce. We have had huge cost pressures for years by
having to use “travelers” to fill essential jobs. Another nursing home
announced closure last week from this pressure. It drives some of our
highest-in-the-nation healthcare insurance costs.
Though some have been in place longer,
many of these programs were funded through the infusion of the COVID federal
dollars. As I warned at the time: it is easier to not start a program than to
cut it. We started a lot of initiatives – good ones – with all that money, but
now it’s gone. Across every department, the legislature will have to support
the administration’s cuts, find other equally unpopular others, or raise taxes;
raising taxes has not been part of the discussions, especially given the overall
affordability crisis.
There is a perception that Vermont nears the
top among states in spending on social services, yet we still have huge gaps.
Our entire child welfare system relies on a 48-year-old computer system, the
oldest in the country. As my committee heard last week, it has failed for
several days at a time, putting kids who are in our care at risk. Yet we keep
deferring the multi-million investments for upgrades.
A part of my committee’s work that has
significant budget implications is a new bill to reshape how we address
homelessness. The governor vetoed last year’s bill. We are trying to achieve
compromise moving forward. The area of common agreement: the hotel/motel
program is both unsustainable and a bad program. I firmly believe in our
communal responsibility to offer a “roof over the head” of anyone who is
without any shelter, and not to limit help to a subclass of “more vulnerable”
people nor to have more expansive services as a first priority. Current rules
only create access to all for shelter when the temperature reaches minus-ten
degrees. Addressing that should come first, no matter what.
Policy Pushback
Not everything is about money. The House
passed my committee’s bill last week to substitute our state Health
Commissioner for federal guidance on identifying recommended immunizations.
There were only nine dissenting votes.
The Centers for Disease Control has dropped
five recommendations from its list of 17, based on comparing other countries.
Any vaccine that was not included by 20 of 20 other nations was removed,
without regard to the reasons or medical basis. In a particularly blatant
example of wordplay when adding up the number of vaccines to compare what American
children receive, the federal report stated that our youth get 18 COVID
shots. “Get” is used as current tense, but the 18 is based upon one per year
through age 18. No child has yet received anything close to that… the vaccine
has only been around for youngest ages since 2022.
Is shifting to state expertise the best
policy move? I’d say, probably not, if it were not for the current political
status of a crucial healthcare issue. That’s why we placed a sunset on the
change, which forces a new review. In six years, it will have to be
affirmatively re-enacted, or it will self-repeal.
Important note: this bill is about the
recommendations for access for those who want them. It is completely unrelated
to the more controversial issue of mandates for school attendance.
Speaking Out
For much of current federal action, there
is little more we can do than speak out. However, two important bills are
moving related to ICE enforcement in Vermont, and I support both of them.
The first would ban any law enforcement
(no discrimination) from wearing masks in performing duties, except in limited,
necessary situations. To me, the first and continuing deep gut-punch has been
the “secret police” nature of masked ICE agents, something the governor first
spoke out against last year.
The second would expand our existing
prohibition against civil arrests (versus criminal ones) in “sensitive areas.” The
law currently protects courthouses; the Senate bill would add state, county, or
municipal building; schools; shelters or emergency housing; and health care facilities.
The House variant would block access to federal immigration authorities in
nonpublic areas of schools, health care facilities, polling places, public
libraries, or childcare facilities.
There are also two resolutions underway
that I have co-sponsored: one protesting illegal actions regarding Venezuela
and the other addressing Greenland. I have never much believed in the symbolic
act of a resolution telling the federal government what it should be doing, but
these are different times.
I think it is worth reprinting the
governor’s statement from this past Sunday, where he has moved from a position
of low-key opposition (avoidance of angering the President appears to be
central to protecting one’s citizens, these days) to vocal anger after the
killing of Alex Pretti. For those who have not read it in its entirety, I suggest
doing so:
“Enough…it’s not acceptable for American
citizens to be killed by federal agents for exercising their God-given and
constitutional rights to protest their government.
“At best, these federal immigration
operations are a complete failure of coordination of acceptable public safety
and law enforcement practices, training, and leadership. At worst, it's a
deliberate federal intimidation and incitement of American citizens that’s
resulting in the murder of Americans.
Again, enough is enough.
“The President should pause these
operations, de-escalate the situation, and reset the federal government's focus
on truly criminal illegal immigrants. In
the absence of Presidential action, Congress and the Courts must step up to
restore constitutionality."
Education Fund
Education reform efforts underway last
year have become mired down in internal dissent, while a possible average
increase of 14% in property taxes looms. I continue to believe that some of the
major components of last year’s reform bill are critical if we want to change
our trajectory to make statewide funding more equitable and less subject to
individual community tax choices that then impact other towns.
It also seemed fairly clear last year,
given very mixed support and all of the “off ramp” opportunities, that Act 73
would not survive more than a year. The governor has now said he won’t sign a
budget if Act 73 does not move forward and wants to shift $105 million from the
general fund into the education fund as a continuing stop-gap against larger property
tax increases. That shift would put even more pressure – ergo force more cuts –
of other essential services. What I fear even more is that it would contradict
movement towards reform, because it would immunize voters from facing another
tax increase and thus reduce the urgency towards reform and the very hard
choices that reform creates.
There is a long way to go to see where
this debate ends up this year. In the interim, school budget votes will be
taking place, and could forecast what pressures the legislature will face.
Your questions and input matter. Reach out
to me (adonahue@leg.state.vt.us) or Ken Goslant (kgoslant@leg.state.vt.us) at any
time.
