Update (from Maggie): The House just successfully voted to override the Governor's veto.
The override vote was 100-50 in favor of overriding the Douglas veto. Key votes included Peter Peltz, D-Lamoille-Washington 1, back from the Greek islands. Tim Corcoran, D-Bennington, and Dick Howrigan, D-Fairfield, who had been considered to be on the fence, also voted in favor of the override.
UPDATE # 2: For those who need a power dynamics visual, GMD presents Shapzilla preparing to dine on a species of potted, and potbound, plant native to Montpelier (Vetofistulosus Overridaletum)
——————————-
Dear Republican members of the Vermont House of Representatives,
You, along with the House Democrats, Independents and Progressives, will be voting on whether or not to override the Governor's veto of the budget (and for the benefit of GMD Republican fan endoftherange in the comments, this means you'll be voting as to whether or not you would prefer to enact the Legislative budget, or would rather support the Governor's proposal. This – after the veto and Mr. Douglas's refusal to compromise as the Legislature has already done repeatedly – is the real choice now before you). We've discussed the gov's budget a lot on this site, and laid out some of its individual shortcomings (to put it nicely) as well as its overall failure as an expression of good government.
One of the things we haven't really mentioned up to this point, though, is the catastrophic effect the Governor's budget would have on middle class taxpayers through the property tax. The Governor would remove the property taxes income sensitivity accomodation for homes with combined incomes between roughly $75,000 and $96,000. These aren't rich people and they're not poor people – and in many cases, they are a lot of the folks being hit hardest by the current recession.
So it strikes me as bizarre that you of the GOP would champion such a tax increase on your own district.
Oh sure, the Governor's hope is that the sticker shock will cause a radical rolling back of school budgets that will collapse the school system as we've come to know it in order to get that pesky teacher's union. But is the “we had to destroy the village in order to save it” approach, really in your best interests? You are, after all, the people in the villages who will have to face these very villagers to explain why you supported such disastrous tax policy.
For example, let's consider just what the number crunchers are predicting for your towns. In your districts. Full of your voters. All things being equal, what kind of tax increases will you be voting to inflict on middle class taxpayers in this income range in your own district if you support the Governor's plan?
Republican leader Patti Komline (BEN-RUT 1), one wonders if your middle class constituents who have been used to being included in the income sensitivity provisions will be pleased to learn that you voted to increase their property tax bills by an average of $1218 (averaged between your five district towns of Danby, Dorset, Landgrove, Mount Tabor and Peru) – and that the full range of the increase goes as high as $7,593?
Or Representative Heidi Scheuermann (LAM 1). Your constituents, who no doubt expected that voting in a Republican would be voting in a sure vote against higher taxes, may be surprised to learn that in your district (Stowe), your vote to sustain the Governor’s veto will cost these middle class taxpayers a whopping $2140 property tax increase on average, with a range up to $7549?
While Rep. Gregory Clark (ADD 3) might be able to tell his five towns of Ferrisburgh, Addison, Panton, Vergennes and Waltham that he’s voting to increase middle class taxes in this range by a relatively meager (except to those who have to pay it, of course) $738, with a full range that reaches all the way to $7598, he’s still gonna have some ‘splainin to do.
There are some people who will be able to find silver linings to all this; whatever Democratic opponents emerge to run against each and every Republican on this issue, because each and every Republican voting to uphold the veto Tuesday is voting their preference to sock property taxpayers with a combined household income between $75,000 and $96,000 with a similar whopping tax increase. All to cover the ass of a Governor who has always looked out for number one over the interests of you folks in the Republican caucus, and is once again going to stand by and let each and every one of you take the fall for this.
Because, believe me, come what may of the override, we’re gonna be reminding your constituents of your vote on this every chance we get. Especially some of you folks who might be eyeing higher office. I can just see the campaign ads now against Rick Hube (WIN-BEN-WDM 1). Will there be much enthusiasm for a Republican lawmaker who would so easily votes to raise middle class property taxes across his district’s towns of Jamaica, Londonderry, Stratton, Weston and Winhall by a stunning average of $1087 – and with an upper end all the way up to $7432? We aint talking about rich people, here.
So vote away, folks. Just remember – we’re watching. And for the record, that means all of you:
Joseph Krawczyk, & Mary Morrissey: Average increase $305 and up to $3376.
Leigh Larocque: Average increase between towns $237 and up to $2213.
Gerald Reis: Average increase $214 and up to $1741.
Howard Crawford and Richard Lawrence: Average increase between towns $334 and up to $2100.
Kurt Wright: Average increase $523 and up to $7262.
Linda Myers: Average increase $639 and up to $5244.
Patrick Brennan: Average increase $591 and up to $6374.
Ronald Hubert & Donald Turner: Average increase $418 and up to $4671.
Janice Peaslee: Average increase between towns $599 and up to $4784.
William Johnson: Average increase between towns $322 and up to $1415.
Carolyn Branagan: Average increase between towns $343 and up to $2321.
Lynn Dickinson: Average increase between towns $374 and up to $2734.
Peter Perley: Average increase between towns $228 and up to $1777.
Brian Savage: Average increase between towns $409 and up to $2355.
Norman McAllister & Chuck Pearce: Average increase between towns $172 and up to $1817.
Rich Westman: Average increase between towns $444 and up to $3668.
Philip Winters: Average increase between towns $452 and up to $4177.
RObert Lewis & Scott Wheeler: Average increase between towns $410 and up to $5716.
Duncan Kilmartin & Michael Marcotte: Average increase between towns $450 and up to $5892.
John Morley: Average increase between towns $507 and up to $7361.
Mark Highley: Average increase between towns $277 and up to $2209.
Andrew Donaghy: Average increase between towns $243 and up to $1868.
Joseph Baker: Average increase between towns $223 and up to $7149.
Robert Helm & William Canfield: Average increase between towns $202 and up to $6566.
James McNeil: Average increase $541 and up to $5573.
Peter Fagan: Average $76 and up to $1514.
Margaret Flory: Average increase between towns $579 and up to $3156.
Joe Acinapura: Average increase $254 and up to $1748.
Anne Donahue: Average increase between towns $419 and up to $2755.
Patricia McDonald: Average increase between towns $237 and up to $2120.
Topper McFaun & Thomas Koch: Average increase $200 and up to $2672.
Pat O'Donnell: Average increase between towns $231 and up to $637.
Steve Adams: Average increase between towns $750 and up to $7371.
John Clerkin: Average increase $445 and up to $5242.
David Ainsworth: Average increase between towns $381 and up to $2382.
And finally, Dennis Devereux: Average increase between towns a whopping $1114 and up to a huge $7530.
Just to show that I'm not a bad guy, I rounded to the nearest dollar downward.
And although I'm certain Paul Poirier will vote to override the veto, I shouldn't forget the other two independents who are wavering:
Will Stevens: Average increase between towns $385 and up to $3325.
Adam Greshin: Average increase between towns $1567 and up to $6749.
So. Good luck with that.
Excellent, excellent, excellent.
The vote tomorrow is whether to override the veto, not to adopt the Governor’s budget.
This is akin to hitting a home run over the Green Monster and onto the Mass Pike! Good job.
Thanks for an amazing effort.
John,
Cannot recall if I have asked this before or not, however do you or any of the other front pagers have a Twitter account and are active with it?
If not, you or someone else should consider setting one up either for yourself or for GMD in general.
That said, while it may not hurt to also set things up to allow for GMD posts be fed to the account using the RSS feed and tools allowing one to do so, it is better to also tweet regular posts whenever possible, since using just as an RSS feed does not really work or is the best use of Twitter either.
In my opinion, a Twitter account would help GMD reach various people in both a timely and complimentary manner that the blog alone may not be able to do on its own.
It is just a thought.
For the time being though, I’ve tweeted a link to this blog post of yours via @vtwatch.
It gives lie to Douglas’ claims about tax increases in a very strong and vivid way.
Odum wrote (his emphasis):
But that’s not true! People earning $75,000 to $96,000 are most definitely NOT being hit the hardest. As a matter of fact these folks are part of the population that can afford to pay more in taxes to help maintain government and work off that federal debt.
If you want to find those being hit the hardest, look to the low wage jobs that make it possible for others to buy all sorts of goodies on a $75,000 to $96,000 salary.
As a state and nation we seem intent on pandering to those who don’t really need the extra help at the expense of those who do. Middle class tax cuts? No. Drop farmers and loggers out of closing capital gains loophole? No.
We should be lowering the property tax income sensitivity. We should be increasing income taxes. We should be looking to reduce governmental expenditures. We should be moving to a single payer health/medical system.
These are rough times … we either deal with it or pander to it. Fawning on $75,000 to $96,000 is pandering in my opinion. And pandering is just code for “kick it down the road”.
the Tax Dept. tells us how many families will be affected in each town (2007 filers earning between $75,000 and $99,999); for example
58 Addison
456 Bennington
1115 Burlington
834 Colchester
146 Ferrisburh
28 Jamaica
61 Londonderry
598 Rutland City
935 S. Burlington
204 Stowe
105 Vergennes
see http://www.state.vt.us/tax/pdf… for more
The Douglas strategy here is simple, go after the Education Fund any way you can. If the Republicans can finally destroy the Ed Fund then they can unseat the NEA, basically eliminate public schools for a choice plan of some sort and ensure that the children in some towns will always have superior schools over those in other communities. This is not about taxes, it is about control over the schooling offered to Vermont children and which set of children should get the best education and which set should be left behind.
I know this is not adressed to me as a House Democrat who will vote for override.
I don’t understand why Republicans, and Douglas for that matter are distancing themselves from their recent budget proposal.
I woner how many house members would vote for the Douglas budget propose only two weeks ago.
I would guess not many. What would you guess?
Whooo hooo! Lame duck people lame duck!
cheers to odum, cant measure how much impact this letter had, but your argument is airtight, presented respectfully, and no repub wants to alienate the demographic you highlighted.
The house had an addendum to this bill that they were going to vote on– do they still plan to vote on it?
Will Douglas veto it (not for any reason other than spite)?
may have just woken up in a blue state.
Funny what a majority can accomplish when lead.
This letter to the Edirot was published in Bradford with some of the Orange County numbers:
I had my doubts, but I tip the hat when the hat should be tipped. That Lunderville guy is 0-2. McCain is still retiring debt. That might be a better fit.
The biggest “Yesssss!” moment for me was hearing Dick Howrigan vote for the veto override. He’s one of the infamous Franklin County conservative Democrats, and he voted with the Caucus.
It might have been Patricia McDonald who snapped out a reminder that the issue at hand was the Legislature’s budget as vetoed by the Governor, not the Governor’s proposed (ahem) “budget.” But she closed at least one speech with this Freudian slip: “Please vote to sustain the Governor’s budget.” It was certainly she who caused a minor stir by trying to shut down another legislator’s comparison of the budget they had passed with the Governor’s proposals as “not relevant to the question at hand.” After consultation, Speaker Shap Smith ruled her objection (a “point of order” for you Rogers Rules zealots) as “not well taken” (the equivalent of “out of order”).
If you haven’t been to the legislature, it’s interesting to be there. No one is addressed by name, but only as “the member from” their town. They almost never address each other, but are allowed to speak only to the Speaker, even when “inquiring” of a committee chair about a bill.
Duncan Kilmartin’s speech was built on a mispronunciation: “Duplicious.” VDP Chairwoman Judy Bevans whispered in my ear, “Does that mean two scoops of Ben & Jerry’s?” He was fulminating about “duplicious taxation.” Of course he meant “duplicitous,” meaning deceptive, dishonest, or misleading. He went on at some length about his aged mother in a nursing home. “Thirty-seven cents of every dollar paid out of her estate goes to support somebody on Medicaid,” he grumbled. I wondered whether others caught the import of his wording: “her estate,” rather than “her pocket,” or “my family’s savings.” He contradicted himself by complaining that the Legislature’s budget threatened to “tax our citizens into servitude,” while at the same time extolling the “income sensitivity” provisions of the property tax, targeted for the major increase under Governor Douglas’s proposals. I hope he runs for higher office soon. He’d lose badly and then retire from politics.
Ran into Progressive David Zuckerman (whose speech followed Kilmartin’s on the floor, as he put it, “from one extreme to the other”) in the Card Room after the vote. He made a point of mentioning that while two Democrats changed their votes on the budget for the override, THREE Progressives changed theirs in order to achieve the necessary two-thirds vote.
And, unfortunately, Independent Will Stevens of Shoreham voted against the override — and it was also his wedding anniversary (which point came up later in the afternoon).
Senators milled outside the chamber, making occasional forays into the ornate red seats along the East wall (which are actually their seats when a joint session is held) or the window wells. Sen. Shumlin was in evidence, as was Sen. Susan Bartlett. And Lieutenant Governor Brian Dubie occupied a window well on the north side of the chamber for part of the debate, while Neale Lunderville paced anxiously out in the hallway.
NanuqFC
To tax and to please, no more than to love and to be wise, is not given to men [and women]. ~ Edmund Burke (1729-1797, Irish philosopher & statesman)
Certainly a tremendous victory for the dems and Shap.
And certainly a disastrous budget.
And much better than the Douglas one.
But really no victory at all.
PJ