This is basically the Governor’s choice of moves regarding the budget:

1. Fold: Play it safe and cut his losses for the session. Choose not to veto it, despite his previous threats. This would  be another sign of weakness from the backpedaling alone (which may have already begun). Legislative leaders would firm up their empowerment narrative and criticism of the compromise budget from the left would fall off, as it would appear they absolutely nailed the fine line between veto and acceptance and got the best budget they could after all.

2. Go all in. Veto. A special session gets called. If the veto is upheld, Douglas has reaffirmed his power and legislative leaders are in deep doo-doo, as they already offered a “compromise” budget and will have absolutely no place to go. Liberals will be pissed at what comes next – and rightfully so.

If, on the other hand, the veto is overridden, the Governor has just graduated the hit he took from the rest of the session to a full-fledged knock-down wallop. Headlines will question his power and relevence – as well as his re-election prospects. It would be huge – and the legislature would, again, mitigate liberal complaints by being seen as finding the fine line representing the best we could expect to achieve. Plus the victory would be energizing.

And the prospects are there for an override. It was suggested to me the other day that there may be five republicans who may vote for an override. Why? Because at this point, the Governor’s budget would represent higher tax increases by shifting a greater burden onto local property taxes by dipping further into the education fund. Add to that, the momentum-stealing argument that a special session would be an unexpected extra cost to taxpayers, and the Governor (despite his best efforts otherwise) will have the responsibility for that expense squarely in his lap – and that responsibility will be compounded exponentially if the veto is overridden, which will give the appearance of Douglas simply flushing money down the toilet in a pique of vanity and futility.

PS: On another note, I couldn’t help but notice this quote from Douglas at the announcement of the retirement of Marselis Parsons of WCAX, which has been colloquially known as WGOP (ht Freyne) for some time, given its often routine bias towards all things Republican (emphasis added):

“As a reporter, then anchor and news director, he has shaped Vermont history with intelligent coverage and piercing insight.

Reporting the news? Sometimes.

“Shaping” the news. Yep, that’s what he did all right. And I’m sure the Governor is sincere in his praise of Parsons’ success in that department.

I, for one, am glad to see a change. Good luck to the new guy. I’ll be rooting for ya.