Jim Douglas’s usual MO at the outset of a session is to put out a few lame, marginally-significant-at-best proposals under a cliched title that he’s lifted from some politician somewhere else as his way of having a message base from which to scuttle or sabotage Democratic policy proposals (which, of course, doesn’t stop him from taking full credit for whatever Dem initiatives slip through).
This time is different. Douglas has gone right for the two third rails of Vermont politics – education and Act 250 (in Republicanese – the same language that brought us the heretofore unseen term “partial birth abortion” – the latter is dubbed “permit reform”). Douglas has said he wants to undo the Act 60/68 regime, raid the education fund, do away with income sensitivity, and in the process dump that much more of the state shortfall onto local property taxes. He’s also said that Act 250 should be eviscerated by bringing in criteria that would completely alter its purpose and function in favor of development interests.
The question on many people’s minds is – is Douglas dramatically overreaching, or is he just going whole-hog right-winger because he’s not planning on running again in 2010?
Personally, I think its overreaching, but perhaps not as much as it might appear, as I have this crazy, wildly-speculative notion that there may be method to his madness.
(I wont touch the policies, here, as it gets into the work my employer does, and I would neither want to appear to be speaking from that position, or let drop any points of disagreement I may have with them, but I do want to make a comment on some of the political machinations that may be underway…)
Although both are big issues, the education attack has – and will continue to – get more ink. It’s more straightforward and everyone understands it better. Douglas’s proposals are also DOA. Anybody can see that. They run counter to the economic zeitgeist and pander to his hardcore base, while at the same time will have the effect of healing the rift between the Vermont NEA and the Democratic caucus, blown open last year over the “two-vote” law and the subsequent endorsement of Anthony Pollina over Gaye Symington, by thrusting them onto the same side of a full on policy assault.
So what the hell is he doing?
A theory: perhaps his education proposals aren’t supposed to go anywhere. Education is the easiest, most pavlovian base-roiling issue for the left and the right, but Douglas has never given that much of a damn about the issue beyond soundbite base-fodder. What he does care about is giving free rein to developers. If you look at many of the croneys he taps for campaign assisstance and situates close to him, they aren’t the Libby Sternbergs and the Curt Hiers of the GOP-education wing, they are folks like Tayt Brooks from the development crowd. When he had a chance to fill a legislative vacancy in Montpelier, he went for development lawyer Jon Anderson. This is his crowd.
Going after Act 250 as he’s doing was bound to make a big noise. He also has enough allies he might get somewhere with it under the guise of economic development in an economic downturn. It may have occurred to him that making a bigger noise might give him room to maneuver among legislators, the press and the public. And unlike his education attack, his Act 250 attack may have some chance of getting somewhere.
One of my favorite moments in Vermont-native Frank Miller’s miniseries The Dark Knight Returns is when Batman is asked why, if he’s trying to be all sneaky, does he have a bat image on his chest in a bright yellow circle for all to see. Batman responds that, since his head is not armored and his chest is, he wants to give the bad guys something to shoot at.
I find myself wondering if Douglas isn’t simply giving us all something to shoot at while he pursues his primary goal.