( – promoted by GMD)

Interesting Mark Johnson show today. Mark interviewed both Geoff Norman, Editor of Vermont Tiger, and economist Art Woolf. First, Mr. Norman talked a lot about economic growth… but not wind power development. He didn’t want to spoil his view. Even though it would create jobs, new tax revenue, and, well, economic growth (not to mention a long-term, sustainable source of renewable/carbon-free energy). But, he does support installing new cell phone towers so he and his vacationing friends from New York can have cell phone service. Hmmm. So much for the NIMBY argument.

Equally interesting was the discussion with Art Woolf who said that gas taxes should be raised to pay for our roads and bridges. And, he said that he would favor eliminating the VEGI program which hands out taxpayer dollars to private businesses who promise to expand or create new jobs in Vermont (the trade-off, he said is that instead Vermont should reduce the corporate income tax). Still, it’s nice to see at least one of the folks at Vermont Tiger finally talking about new revenues, public investment, and ending corporate welfare. I’m sure it won’t take long to back track and/or explain away these statements.

Finally, I noted with some interest the session at the Vermont Tiger conference led by Tom Evslin. Mr. Evslin’s session is called “What the stimulus giveth, Challenges taketh away.” This is a shocking admission from the Governor’s point person on stimulus money and Challenges for Change. It is a clear signal that the Administration recognizes that its efforts are at best counter-cyclical and worse, may be counterproductive in terms of emerging from the recession.

It calls into question the Douglas/Dubie team’s obsession with budget-cutting. Instead of enhancing efforts to stimulate the Vermont economy and ensuring a permanent budget solution using new revenue, the Administration’s constant cut-backs are jeopardizing public investments. Vermont is facing the possibility of a $120 million budget deficit next year and there has been next to no real discussion of making the necessary adjustments to find the revenue to deal with it. If Vermont leaders fail to design a balanced approach to Vermont’s budget woes it will mean ushering in an era of near-permanent budget crisis which will lead to even more draconian cuts to essential programs and services.  The result of focusing solely on budget cuts is that we are left fighting this recession with one policy arm tied behind our backs, and with reduced ability to seize economic opportunities when they arise as we emerge from the recession. It’s worth noting that most other states are raising the revenue they need, so they will be better positioned to rebound faster than Vermont.

This kind of flip characterization is really stunning, especially in light of the fact that we are not supposed to “take away” from the impact of the stimulus package… that is precisely why much of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) money came with strict rules attached that said states must show “maintenance of effort” rather than cutting back on programs when the federal funds came in. While Vermont presumably complied with those requirements where specified, if the cumulative effect of the budget cuts reduces Vermont’s ability to maintain effort across state government in a variety of related essential programs and services does that not compromise the rationale for why those requirements were imposed in the first place?