As you’ve probably already heard, the attempt to override Governor Shumlin’s veto from last May – a veto of what had been a non-controversial, bipartisan bill to require newly drilled wells and wells being sold with a home purchase to be tested for contaminates such as arsenic – failed. At the time, lawmakers expressed shock at the move, as the administration could have expressed concerns at any point in the process, but instead opted for the last minute veto.
Shumlin’s objection was that the $100 or so cost this imposed on new wells and home sales was too much. Since $100 on a new home sale is barely a drop in the bucket, it’s more likely that the Governor saw it as an opportunity to get some press on his no new taxes commitment.
When the veto override came up for a vote, Majority Leader Campbell asked Senators to vote against in, and instead support a new version of the legislation which will be more to Shumlin’s liking.
All but one Senator dutifully did as they were told – the one exception was blogmeister Philip Baruth, Democrat of Chittenden County. I asked him about it afterwards, and he told me he simply saw no reason not to vote in support of a good bill – even if he’s going to vote for the new version as well.
Actually, he put it more concisely than that. Said Baruth:
“Call me crazy, but I’m anti-arsenic.”
…LIKE A FOX!
Good on our fine friend, Philip.
did Shumlin just tame and rope the state senate in half a day!
Arsenic and no grace.
I believe Senator Baruth’s concise statement actually represents a fallacious argument. I’d argue that it’s logically possible for an elected representatives to be anti-arsenic and against this bill (or, any legislation in this area) without being considered “crazy”. The senator is quoted as saying that he “simply saw no reason not to vote in support of a good bill”. Being the lone no vote, against the expressed wishes of leadership to sustain the Governor’s veto, while harmless to the eventual outcome of some potential “other bill” in it’s stead, could be viewed as political grandstanding which may have an unnecesary impact on the Senator’s ability to deal with, and be trusted by, his fellow members. Apart from a thumb in the eye of his party’s leadership, and potentially harming relations with his fellow members, what purpose did this “no” vote actually serve the senator besides ensuring that his name is mentioned in the Free Press and on GMD?
Disclosure: I’d vote for Philip Baruth twice in every single election if I could. I even sent him money to support his inagural campaign. Unforunately, I can only vote once, and I’m only allowed to vote in Addison county, but I will be sending him more money and good wishes for his next election, too.
What I wrote above was just plain dumb.
I’m sorry Philip.