This communication is about my work in and
perspectives on the Vermont legislature, not the national or world scene, but
this session, they could overlap in unprecedented ways. Because of the “small
state minimum” in federal grants, fully one-third of Vermont’s budget revenues
come from the federal budget, including more than half of our direct health
care spending. If there are significant cuts in the pending federal budget, we
will have holes far vaster than anything we could backfill.
For now, we carry on in developing the
state budget based on the current status quo. The House is in the final weeks
of work on its budget for the year ahead and at the end of last week,
committees provided their perspectives on the governor’s proposed budget. In my
Human Services Committee, we look at what the ideal would be to fully support
our network of social supports, and then list the priority areas that, “to the
extent funds allow,” we recommend that the Appropriations committee add.
Our biggest concern this year was that
while the governor’s budget included basic inflation increases for
government-run services so that they can maintain current functions, the
government services that are contracted to be provided by community agencies
were level-funded. If income stays level in the face of inflation, balancing
the budget means cutting back, not maintaining the same services. So, a major
disparity is created among different services.
One of the largest gaps – which I
discussed in my previous update about the budget adjustment bill – is in
addressing our crisis in providing temporary shelter to those who homeless in
light of a crisis in available housing. People cannot move out of homelessness
if there are no places to move to.
The week after town meeting, as we reach
the half-way point of the session, is the deadline for bills to be voted out of
committees in order to cross from House to Senate or vice-versa if they are to
be passed this year. The major bill from my committee will be a proposal for
restructuring the emergency housing program.
***
The Big Five
The crossover deadline means that we will
be getting the first look at concrete proposals to address our major pressures.
Often, we start a session with a “headliner” top issue. This year, there are
five that are competing in urgency: Education, Housing, Climate; Public Safety;
Health Care. The Governor has presented proposals for the first four of those
issues. They are getting a mixed reception. The proposals are summarized below.
Education
The most attention thus far has been on
the major restructuring proposal for K-12 education. The legislature is
charting its course to revise some pieces and reject others, but the majority
appears inclined to move more slowly than the governor’s two-year phase-in.
The Speaker’s Office has issued a public
input site, which can be accessed at: https://bit.ly/VoiceVermontEducation. Much
of it is free-form response to very open-ended questions, not check boxes. This
avoids the inevitable bias of the wording of questions but will present a real
challenge in compiling responses into an intelligible and accurate document of
the opinion of Vermonters. Results will be shared with districts, so I will
report on Northfield and Berlin responses.
The governor’s plan includes a base grant
per child to each district, adjusted for particular types of student need, in
order to ensure equal resources for all students regardless of town. The
statewide tax rate will be uniform, but with income-based deductions for
homesteads. Much larger districts (maybe as few as five) are proposed to
achieve common standards, including state oversight of maximum class sizes and
graduation standards. Vermont has the smallest classes sizes in the country while
not performing as well, so significant costs might be saved there. Reinvestment
would go into teacher salaries. There is also a school choice component
that has produced some strong objections and is not likely to survive the
legislative process.
The initial proposal sets the base grant
at about the current average per-child spending in the state. For context, Northfield’s
current district is below that spending level, though if this year’s budget
passes, it will come closer to the average. Berlin’s current district is a bit
higher than the average.
Housing
There is consensus about continuing to
invest heavily in housing, though the amounts available to spend will be
debated. There is no question that, despite major funding over the past several
years, we are not on track to meet needs. The Governor’s proposal include
targeted funds for local infrastructure to support housing growth. The governor
wants to see more progress on easing red tape that increases construction costs,
such as standards for local appeals, as well as adjustments to last year’s three
“tiers” that revised Act 250 review.
Climate
The “Clean Heat Standard” from last year appears
to have died an untimely death. Once firmer numbers were assessed, it turned
out that the naysayers were right: the potential benefits were far outweighed
by the clear drawbacks and high costs. But the Global Warming Solutions Act
(passed in 2020) remains law, so achieving its targets in other ways remains
ahead of us. The law was passed in 2020 and it includes binding greenhouse gas
emission reduction targets.
Looking back a few years, the
transportation sector goals of the Act rested heavily on our collaboration in
the Northeast Regional Transportation Initiative, in which 12 states looked at
reducing carbon emissions by addressing the fossil fuel market collaboratively.
That failed because other states backed out, not Vermont. I don’t believe these
types of initiatives are ever feasible by a single small state – it’s why the
Clean Heat Standard never had a chance. As the Senate Pro-Tem Tim Ashe said
about the transportation initiative in 2019, “banding together with the entire
Northeast region all the way down to the mid-Atlantic protects us from a
go-it-alone strategy."
So, we’ve had two well-intended, major
efforts that have not met hopes or expectations. Meanwhile, the clock has kept
ticking. Staying locked into targets on an unchanged timeline that is no longer
achievable seems like making false assurances, particularly since we granted
the right for anyone to sue the state for failure. I think we need to maintain
the goals of the Act, but not at levels that we cannot now achieve. We need to
also consider some of the governor’s proposals for better management of the
process.
Public Safety
Public safety debates have focused on bail
reform for repeat offenders and repealing the “Raise-the-Age” law that would
add 19-year-olds to the definition of a child for juvenile court purposes. The
House Judiciary Committee did vote Friday to defer that step for another two
years. We have also passed a number of laws that fully erase criminal records
after set periods of time. The governor is pushing back to have them in a
“sealed” status instead, which would make them confidential but still allow
access for law enforcement purposes.
In the category of, “NewSpeak,” a bill was
introduced last week that sets out when a person who was convicted of a crime
is “eligible to recidivate.” This is on top of inmates no longer being released
from prison; an inmate “releases” from prison. It’s in line with another change
that annoys me, in health care. You are no longer discharged from a hospital;
you “discharge.” Maybe I’m getting too set in my ways.
Health Care
Speaking of health care, it seems to be
the fifth wheel despite how it cuts across all sectors. Vermont has risen to
having some of the highest costs in the nation. It isn’t just about an aging
population, because an increasing need for care does not mean that each episode
of care needs to cost more. The University of Vermont Health Network says they
are being forced to cut services because the Green Mountain Care Board has
required them to stay within their revenue cap. They assert that volume (the
people needing care) is what is driving the increase in revenue, so to cut
revenue they must cut volume by cutting services. But revenue is the
combination of volume plus price. The Green Mountain Care Board is telling the
Network that it must reign in prices, not cut services. There are no clear
proposals emerging yet for alternatives on how to stem the trajectory of cost
increases.
***
A Note on Advocacy
Persistence pays. Northfield’s Mary Nadon
Scott was back in the Human Services Committee lobbying for a Vermont Rare
Disease Advisory Council last week, and was there to hear the committee chair
say that we will be taking up the bill later this year.
***
Words from the Governor
If you didn’t see it elsewhere, I’m
pleased to share the comment that Governor Scott made on the third anniversary
of the invasion of Ukraine:
“On February 24, 2022, Russian military
forces crossed the eastern border of Ukraine. Russia’s unprovoked aggression
escalated a years-long conflict into outright war, threatening the sovereignty
of a free nation, and the hard-won peace of the European continent.
“These are facts, and it’s important to
repeat them when the truth is threatened. Three years later Vermonters still
stand with Ukraine. We still hope for peace and a just end to this senseless
war. We still hold fast to the most American of ideals: liberty,
self-determination and the restoration, preservation, and expansion of freedom
around the world.”
***
Thank you for the honor of representing
you. Please stay in touch with me (adonahue@leg.state.vt.us) and with Rep.
Ken Goslant (kgoslant@leg.state.vt.us). We welcome your
input.
