There’s an old Dilbert cartoon in which the pointy-headed boss tells his employees that they’ll get a positive evaluation if they eat a bug. A bug of the boss’ choosing. A nice big bug.

I envision a similar conversation on the fifth floor of the Pavilion Building between the Governor and a group of child-care advocates and providers. Because on Monday, they marched to a podium in the Cedar Creek Room and ate a bug.

Not literally, but metaphorically; they endorsed the Governor’s proposed cut in the Earned Income Tax Credit, with the money going to better child care subsidies for the working poor. It was clearly another effort by the Shumlin team to save his extremely unpopular proposal. But it was pretty clear the advocates were having trouble getting their bugs to stay down.

Julie Coffey of the Building Bright Futures Council, as quoted in VTDigger:

“I thankfully don’t sit in the Legislature and have to make the decision, the tough decision that they make every day in where to find funding … it’s the time to prioritize, and we appreciate the governor’s commitment to prioritize early childhood investments,” she said.

May I pause here and highlight a comment posted beneath this story by Sen. David Zuckerman?

When I had breakfast at an event sponsored by many early childcare providers, including Building Bright Futures, most of the providers I spoke with were not supportive of the EITC cut to fund the proposal. Many wanted an increase in funding, but the vast majority did not support the funding mechanism.

I am wondering whether building bright futures and other early childcare groups actually polled their members (thoroughly) to come to the conclusion to support this, or whether it was a board decision?

I am wondering, too.

Returning to our bug-eating theme, here’s a quote reported by Peter Hirschfeld behind the Mitchell Family Paywall:

“This is what was put in front of us,” said Jody Marquis, owner of a child care center in Newport.

Yeah, eat that bug!

I can understand the advocates’ position. They’re in an underfunded business, and they’d like to do more. The Governor is offering them the chance — but only if they go along with his “take from the poor and give to the poor” funding scheme.

After offering her version of a one-star Yelp review — “We ordered the poached salmon, but this is what was put in front of us” —  Marquis went on to parrot Shumlin’s EITC talking points almost word for word:  

“We are all being asked as a society to look at budgets, not spend more and not raise taxes. … This is the best way to take those funds and redistribute the money in a way that they get a better return on their investment.”

Methinks she was well briefed. And then there’s this interesting tidbit from Hirschfeld:

Child care providers are putting more than words behind their advocacy. Vermont Birth to Three, one of the groups represented at the news conference Monday, has hired the Statehouse lobbying firm KSE Partners to push for the cuts to the tax credit.

Hmm. Can’t say I’m familiar with Vermont Birth to Three, but from a review of its website, it doesn’t look like it has the resources to hire Montpelier’s leading Democrat-connected lobbying shop. Perhaps they’ve gotten a generous donor to pick up the tab, eh?

If someone from VBT would like to disclose KSE’s fee and how they’re paying it, we’d be happy to pass along the information. But wherever the money is coming from, one thing is clear: the Governor is beginning yet another phase of his sputtering campaign for the EITC cut. This time, it’s a power play.

___________________________

p.s. I can’t resist this little howler from the VTDigger account. Its penultimate paragraph:

State officials say they don’t know what percentage of families that receive the EITC would benefit from the increased child-care subsidies.

Funny, that. Because earlier in that very same story, we learn that the EITC “benefits about 45,000 low-income working families,” and that Shumlin’s proposed changes in child-care subsidies “would make roughly 900 additional families eligible.”

This is not new math. The Public Assets Institute pointed it out months ago, and I’ve previously mentioned it in this space. If state officials “don’t know,” it’s simply because they choose not to know. Or they’re just lying.