Saturday, August 22, 2020

August 22, 2020 Legislative Update

 Let me start this update with a PSA: please, if you haven’t yet, fill out your census information. You can save the hassle of someone coming to your door. More importantly, you can make sure you don’t get missed in the count. This stuff really matters! It matters for how much of a fair share we get of federal funding. It also matters for fair voting representation when Vermont does re-districting to align with town census numbers next year. It only takes a few minutes, and the questions are not invasive. Just go to my2020census.gov/

***

The Month Ahead

People sometimes ask me in October how the legislative session is going. Just to be clear, Vermont has a part-time legislature which normally goes from January to early May. Of course, nothing is ordinary this year. We stretched into the end of June, nearly crippled by the constraints of functioning on Zoom and trying to do a rational job in allocating federal relief money, while at the same time holding off on the budget for the year ahead in order to have a firmer financial picture.

We are coming back into session now to pass the budget for the remaining ¾ of the fiscal year. There will be public hearings on the budget this Thursday, August 27, from 5 to 6 p.m. and Friday, August 28, from 1 to 2 p.m. via videoconferencing. For the link to sign up to testify and to see the budget information, go to legislature.vermont.gov/

Because of the overlap between this unique late session and early voting by absentee balloting, it will be the first time – to my knowledge, anyway – that we will actually be in session while voting has already begun. It will undoubtably inject new levels of political posturing into debate and votes. I will pledge to do my best to keep my updates as objective as possible so that they do not double as campaign messaging. It will be a strange campaign year for everyone, since going door-to-door, which I consider to be an obligation if one expects voters to put their trust in you, is off the table due to COVID precautions.

Our financial picture remains fuzzy, because we had hoped to know what to expect from the federal government in terms of further relief, and we do not. The revenue shortfalls are dire, but thankfully, not as dire as was feared back in May. Late tax returns from 2019, when the economy was still stable, brought in more than expected. While we are still more than $100m in the red, it now looks as though next year is when the greater impacts of the economic shutdown will be felt. The governor has proposed a budget that maintains services without raising taxes, but the devil is always in the details. Over the next few weeks, the House will analyze the proposal, counter with its own, and send it to the Senate. What is usually a four-month process will have only four weeks, since the budget needs to be signed before the end of September when the second quarter of the budget year begins.

***

The Rest of the Agenda

There is some tension – both political, and reality-based – about what other business should be done in these next five weeks. Some argue that we should address only the budget and get out. We’ve already overspent the budget for the legislative session itself, and doing serious business by highly limited Zoom committee testimony and even more limited Zoom “debate” on the virtual House “floor” does not do justice to the issues or our constituents. On the other hand, a great deal of work was done on important issues back in January and February. Many finished the process in either the Senate or House, and now sit in the other body, awaiting action. Since we are at the end of a biennium, anything not passed now has to start from ground zero with a new legislature in January. If they can’t be fully vetted in the opposite body, it would defeat the checks and balances built into the bicameral legislative process to rush them through now. But if a few of them can, it wouldn’t be fair to bump them solely on the basis that we have to function in impaired ways.

Everything is impaired right now. We still have to make the best of it. So, while I oppose trying to pass legislation that can’t get a reasonable level of analysis (that’s what leads to bad law being passed), I also think that it isn’t reasonable to say that everything that had to be dropped in March has to be abandoned. I might not like some of those bills and wish that the disrupted process means they die, but that’s not a legitimate reason to not move forward.

What are some of the major bills on the list for consideration in September? The climate change bill (establishing a council that will have broad authority to set state standards); a bill on revamping our Act 250 development standards (which has had mixed reviews on its drawbacks and benefits); and the tax-and-regulate marijuana bill (which did pass both houses, and is now in the hands of a six-member conference committee to seek compromise between the different versions.)

***

Police Reform

Another item on the agenda is police reform, tied into the larger issue of addressing systemic racism. Vermont is not immune in needing to address this. In response to some rapid-fire action by the Senate, we passed a bill in June that was very incomplete. It was consciously incomplete. It carried a multi-layered message from the House, along these lines: the Senate did not use a deliberate enough approach and we don’t have time to fix its work; we recognize the need to take some kind of action to show good faith; we are locking ourselves in to coming back and doing better work in August. It did that by including sunsets in the law: dates less than a year away by which parts of the new law will be revoked. So further action must be taken, or the effort comes to an end.

One of the pieces the House recognized was the importance of hearing the voices of Vermonters before making major changes. Over the past several weeks, there have been three public hearings and a broadly disseminated survey. A total of 1,446 responses came in from all over the state, a pretty phenomenal response. I feared that the survey might get limited or skewed exposure, but having skimmed the many comments that people added in their responses, it is clear that a broad range of perspectives were captured. There were some great insights shared. The full survey will be shared publicly in short order. I got a preliminary look because I am part of a coordinating group that was helping to organize the public outreach.

I’m sorry, however, to see some of the divisiveness that seems to exist right now across so many subjects also becoming entrenched in the policing issue. One Facebook meme articulates my perspective well. It has three circles that overlap in the center: one circle says, “Supports good police officers,” the second says, “Believes that black lives matter,” and the third, “Upset at police brutality.” In the center overlap it says, “Me,” and notes at the bottom, “Guess what? It’s okay to believe all three.” Recognizing that our police are overwhelmingly sincere and well-intentioned, doing a tough job and under a lot of pressure doesn’t mean not recognizing that there are areas of change that are needed, particularly in accountability and often in attitudes towards the public. It’s hard for anyone to maintain a positive and collaborative attitude when you see so much of the darker side of society, but it’s part of the job.

We also need to understand that just because not all of us feel intimidated or bullied does not mean it is not the valid experience of many, particularly members of minority groups. Those experiences matter. As a member of a disenfranchised minority group – people with a history of mental illness – I have shared that experience personally.

That extends to the broader issues of the criminal justice system, education, employment and all sectors of society. Slavery was legal in our country for almost 250 years; the era of widespread public lynching ended only in about 1950; brutality against civil rights leaders was within the lifetime of even more of us. It shouldn’t be a surprise that we still have much to overcome.

No one is being asked to apologize for being white, but rather to simply recognize that we have benefitted historically and still benefit from the systems that evolved as a result of slavery. Saying black lives matter isn’t saying white lives don’t. It is saying that our social systems still treat black lives as though they don’t matter as much, and that’s wrong. The focus should not be on being defensive. We should be thinking about what each of our personal roles should be in helping to build a more equitable society.

And yes, it impacts Vermont. The debate shouldn’t be whether or not we need this to be on our agenda as a state; it should be, instead, a healthy dialogue about what the best means are to move forward – which also means listening to our friends and neighbors who live with these impacts.

Vermont is offering us a good opportunity for starting that discussion in this year’s “Vermont Reads” program of Vermont Humanities, which is now in its 18th year. The program invites people across the state to read the same book and participate in a wide variety of community activities related to the book’s themes. The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas was chosen last year as the book for 2020, and it was a prescient choice. This year the Brown Public Library and the Northfield Equity Awareness and Justice Group will be collaborating to host the Community Wide Vermont Reads Book Discussion as an outdoor, socially distanced event on Tuesday, September 29 at 6 pm. A limited number of copies of the book are available at the library by phone or email request.

***

Please feel free to contact Rep. Ken Goslant (kgoslant@leg.state.vt.us) or me (adonahue@leg.state.vt.us) at any time with you inquiries or input. It is an honor to serve you. 

No comments:

Post a Comment