Part 1 of a probable miniseries on the latest state budget developments.

In record time, Governor Shumlin has gone from equanimity to agita, from smoking jacket to crankypants. As recently as Wednesday’s news conference, the Gov was praising the Legislature for its hard work and progress on a variety of issues, and expressing confidence that everything would come out just fine in the end.

Then came Friday, when the House Ways and Means Committee approved a tax package quite different from Shumlin’s own.

“I disagree strongly with the manner in which the Ways and Means Committee has chosen to raise revenue,” Shumlin said. “I have repeatedly opposed increases to income, meals, and sales taxes, and yet this proposal hits all three. Rather than reallocating existing funds more efficiently to achieve better outcomes as my budget recommends, the committee proposal increases Vermont’s already high tax burden. Luckily, we are only part way through this legislative session and I look forward to working with the legislature to ensure that we end up with a responsible budget acceptable to all of us.”

So the Ways and Means budget is “irresponsible”? Ouchie.

Well, all I can say is, the Governor brought this on himself.  

We entered 2013 under single-party rule. The Democrats controlled everything except Phil Scott’s bully pulpit. I don’t know what went on behind the scenes as the Governor prepared his budget plan, but here’s what it looked like from the outside:

Shumlin came up with some decent ideas for improving key programs in education and energy, as well as moving forward on health care reform. At the same time, he put out some ideas for higher revenue and budget cuts that were pretty much D.O.A. in the Legislature.

Was there no consultation with key lawmakers? Was there no effort to find mutually acceptable solutions, or ways to bring legislators on board? Was the Administration so confident, so arrogant, that it believed the Legislature would roll over and adopt its budget in exchange for a nice belly rub?

From this vantage point, the answers seem to be no, no, and yes.

What’s worse, the Governor made misleading (if not downright untrue) arguments for his unpopular proposals. Arguments that were easily debunked by Your Unpaid Blogger, let alone by experienced budget-writers in the House and Senate.

He claimed that slashing the Earned Income Tax Credit was not really a cut at all because the EITC line item had risen by 49% in ten years — when all of that growth was due to (a) inflation and (b) an increase in qualified recipients.

He glossed over the fact that only a fraction of EITC recipients would benefit from the expansion in child-care benefits that would be paid for by the EITC cut.

He proposed a tax on break-open tickets with an overinflated revenue estimate, which the Joint Fiscal Office reduced by nearly two-thirds.

And, instead of working with the Legislature on finding acceptable revenue sources, he tried to put lawmakers in a box by (1) claiming that his entire plan was a single indissoluble “package”, (2) claiming that a wide range of alternative revenue sources were off-limits in his own personal definition of “broad-based taxes”, and (3) endlessly repeating the Republican talking point that Vermont’s taxes are already too high.

Even as he was proposing to raise some of those taxes himself.

When you make transparently false or misleading arguments, you don’t exactly build trust with your colleagues.

Shumlin’s plan also put lawmakers in a naysaying mood because it left Vermont in a dangerously exposed position going forward, as VTDigger reported:

Joint Fiscal Office estimates show that next year’s budget has a built-in $50 million gap because the Shumlin adminstration has heavily relied on one-time funding to balance the fiscal year 2014 budget. The governor also eliminated all of the state’s reserves – about $30 million worth. That leaves state coffers almost completely empty at a time when federal cuts will be $5 million to $10 million in the near term and further reductions to the state’s $1.8 billion in annual federal funding (out of a total budget of $5.15 billion) are unknown and likely.

The result of all this? The Legislature and the Governor are headed in different directions. The Governor tried to back the Legislature into a corner, and now they’re fighting out of it. And he’s surprised?

He shouldn’t be.

And, if he really believes in those new policy initiatives he’s touted since the beginning of the year, he’d better be ready to compromise on revenue sources. Otherwise, we’ll wind up with a flatline budget and a lot of unhappy people in the executive and legislative branches.

And a whole lot of unhappy people out here in the real world, who contributed to, worked for, and voted for Democrats in the hope and expectation that they’d make a positive difference. We’re still hoping, Governor.