Crossposted @ www.vermontbloggernaut.blogspot.com

So I guess I have a different opinion of what to with the State Of Vermont’s Rainy Day fund. The total I’ve heard tossed around is like $60 million, but I could be wrong. That’s a lot of money when social programs and jobs are being slashed because of budget shortfalls. Should we use up this reserve? I really don’t think it’s time yet.

If the state needs to dip into the fund to do some triage work, that’s one thing. Options and plans are what we need most right now. Some of that money could be used, and wisely so, to keep the state, and some programs running in the interim. But I think to exhaust the fund would be a grave mistake. We have not hit rock bottom yet, and that is when we’ll need the rainy day fund the most!

Maybe make a quarter to a third of the fund available for the next year, but preserve the rest intact. Our turmoil right now is a result of Vermont’s broken system. How we tax, build revenue and provide money to programs and run the state needs to be overhauled. This is obvious, but no one seems to want to take the lead and provide some good foresight. This is why I say use at most only a portion of the fund as a crutch to limp us along into the next year.

We can’t raise the tax burden on people already struggling to get by. At the same time I don’t think we should have to bail out every jerk that’s decided to live beyond their means. It’s no fault of the rest of us. There has to be some sort of balance. I chose to go to college, I chose to hang that noose of of loan payments around my neck. I accept that. Other people with their expensive new cars and enormous homes need to accept they did that to themselves as well.

We as an American, and Vermont society are at an impasse. Free market capitalism has been replaced with social capitalism, as we all shoulder the burden of irresponsible people and their failed American Dreams. I’ve heard so many people say that they make all their payments on their mortgages, and live within their means, why not just stop paying the mortgage and get bailed out as well? I totally see their point.

So getting back to the rainy day fund, I think we need to have some foresight and look beyond the budget shortfalls of 2009, to 2010, 2011, and 2012. If we use all the money now, there will be none for the future shortfalls. As a state, Vermont needs to tighten it’s belt, and reduce spending. But at the same time, address how we will fund the state of Vermont in the future as obviously what we have been doing does not, and will continue not to work.  

They say the true measure of someone’s character emerges during times of crisis. Well, the crisis is on, and a nervous Democratic caucus is starting to show that it’s character is, indeed, Democratic.

From the Times Argus/Rutland Herald (no link found because their websites remain maddening):

“we know there will be revenue proposals coming from the Administration,” said (incoming House Speaker Shap) Smith …and while there will certainly be additional cuts in state government “it will only be in the context of revenues as well

From the AP (I dont link to them anymore and I aint paying them their extortion fees for excerpting… sorry Wilson, it’s not you…):

“It has to be on the table; taxes have to be on the table, bonding has to be on the table, every option available to us because this is a crisis,” said Rep. Floyd Nease, D-Johnson and the incoming House majority leader. “We can’t just cut our way out of the crisis.”

From VPR (Finally! A link!):

Smith and Senate President Peter Shumlin said the administration and the legislature need to consider all options, including tax increases. Shumlin recalled that in 1991 Republican Governor Richard Snelling worked with Democrats to cut the budget and raises taxes temporarily.

Douglas, of course, is digging in, but in a phony way by steadfastly rejecting “taxes” while talking “fee” increases. Whatever. Douglas at one level clearly would like to see Government drowned, but it does gives him and a lot of his political allies a pretty good life. In any event, with the Snelling model on the table, Dems can push hard to keep it there and control the conversation.

It seems clear that the combination of Smith and Nease in Legislative leadership has the potential to be a potent collective force, and rather than looking at whether Nearly-Speaker Smith himself has the tenacity to stand up to the Governor and keep the House a full partner with the Senate, its looking like we should look at the two of them as a Lamoille County Dynamic Duo.

While the early signs coming out of the tail end of the week’s news cycle bode well for mixing it up and promoting a clear distinction between Ds and Rs, there are signs that it could be a decent combination for progressives as well. Smith has a lot going for him in this role, and we should expect great things (well, we should always expect good things, I suppose). My big concern is that his eagerness to demonstrate right off the bat to the business community and the Chamber crowd that he’s one of them could make him problematic in a lot of critical policy areas. Such eagerness could also make him more easily manipulated on policy matters. Nease as a political and policy partner will help keep him grounded.

In other words, the pair has the potential to be greater than the sum of its parts.