Updated at 9:02 p.m.
The Vermont House passed a package of emergency bills Wednesday to help the state deal with the impacts of the COVID-19 virus, but only after the effort was thrown into disarray by a lawmaker who demanded a quorum be present for the vote.
The parliamentary move forced dozens of legislators to rush to the Statehouse to pass bills House leadership had hoped — to reduce the risk of infection from the rapidly spreading coronavirus — a handful could address.
Ultimately, 94 House members drove to the Statehouse, filtered into the chamber and — many wearing masks, bandanas and scarves over their mouths — passed the bills nearly unanimously.
The irony of having more than 100 lawmakers, staff and media crowding into the House chamber to address a growing pandemic when Gov. Phil Scott had called for people to stay home and not gather in groups of more than 10 was plain.
Wearing a surgical mask from the podium, Speaker Mitzi Johnson (D-South Hero) praised her colleagues for going the extra mile to help Vermonters in their time of need and expressed regret that it became necessary.
“I am very sorry that we all had to put public health at risk today to come here,” Johnson said.
After closing the Statehouse two weeks ago, lawmakers have been working largely by conference call to craft emergency measures to help with the mounting health and financial crisis and to figure out how to pass that legislation.
The 30-member Senate met its quorum requirement Tuesday by having 17 senators return to vote in person, spaced well apart from one another in that body’s chamber.
The Senate passed bills that included allowing people to collect unemployment if they’d quit due to coronavirus concerns, making it easier for retired and out-of-state health care workers to work in Vermont or remotely, and making changes to election law that waived the need for candidates to gather signatures for 2020 races.
But the 150-member House didn’t want to bring a quorum of 76 members back to its chamber because of the risk of spreading the virus, which had infected 123 people in Vermont as of Wednesday.
The only way such a vote would work was if none of the members present called for a quorum.
“It is assumed that there is a quorum unless someone calls for a quorum,” Johnson later explained.
That’s exactly what happened. Just a few minutes into the session, with just 15 lawmakers present, Rep. Cynthia Browning (D-Arlington) asked if a quorum was present. Johnson quickly called a recess, strode down from the podium and over to Browning’s seat, and soberly tried to convince her to change her mind.
“Bringing 76 people back here puts the health of Vermonters at risk,” Johnson said to Browning.
But Browning was unmoved. She said one of the bills — which would allow the House to vote remotely on legislation in the future — could only be approved by a quorum present in the building. At that time, House rules didn’t allow remote voting, but it is envisioned it will be needed in the coming weeks and, possibly, months.
At one point, Rep. Robert LaClair (R-Barre) approached Browning and began speaking, but Browning cut him off.
“What are you doing right now? Are you negotiating with me?” she said.
LaClair tossed up his hands and walked away.
Outside the chamber, Browning said she was trying to ensure that the House followed its own rules.
“I understand the severity of the situation we’re in,” the 66-year-old lawmaker said. “But if you start cutting corners on parliamentary procedures and Democratic processes in an emergency, you’ll very quickly find that you’ve thrown something overboard that you can’t get back.”
Browning said she thought lawmakers could safely return to vote in person, just as the Senate had done. “I think Vermonters want things to be done properly,” Browning said. “I think the House chamber, big as it is, can accommodate members six feet apart.”
Her colleagues returned, but many were livid.
“I think people were put at risk because she’s self-centered,” said Rep. Sam Young (D-Greensboro), who was one of the original members in attendance. “She called 76 or more people into this room, against the advice of the governor, so that she could have her way.”
Young, who called Browning “theoretically a Democrat,” said he couldn’t fathom what she hoped to gain by the move except, perhaps, attention.
Rep. Kari Dolan (D-Waitsfield) said she was willing to make the trip when asked because getting the bills passed quickly was too important. But she agreed a small number of House leaders should have been able to take the vote.
“I think it was irresponsible, when you think about the members of the House exposing themselves unnecessarily and their families and those that they come in contact with,” Dolan said.
Johnson fumed. After setting the wheels in motion to have lawmakers travel to the Statehouse on short notice, she addressed the media and called Browning’s actions reckless.
“I do believe this is principle over public health, and for me, the safety of Vermonters is of paramount importance here,” Johnson said.
Members of all parties had been consulted about the limited voting plan, and Johnson noted that Browning had not raised her concerns until she arrived at the Statehouse on Wednesday. Lawmakers had specifically closed the building to ensure that it was virus free, and that effort was jeopardized by the return of so many lawmakers at once, Johnson said.
It wasn’t initially clear whether leaders would be able to rally enough members on such short notice, but Rep. Dylan Giambatista (D-Essex Junction) predicted the needed reinforcements would arrive.
“We’re calling in the tripartisan cavalry, and it’s going to be at least 76 strong,” he predicted.
He was right. Over the course of about two hours, members steadily trickled in and took seats throughout the chamber — in the window seats, cushy red seats reserved for visitors, and even up in the balcony with the handful of media allowed in to cover the event.
Members with health issues or risk factors such as age were told to remain at home, Johnson said.
Not everyone was upset with Browning. Minority Leader Patty McCoy (R-Poultney) said she, too, had concerns about the remote voting and hoped that the speaker would limit it only to crucial, must-pass bills such as the budget. In a compromise, Johnson agreed that when the House conducted its first vote remotely, three-quarters of members would have to agree to do so going forward.
In the end, Browning was the only member to vote against any of the measures.
Majority Leader Jill Krowinski (D-Burlington) said the message she and Vermonters should take from the whole episode was not one of discord, but of a coalition of lawmakers willing to do whatever it takes to help in a crisis.
“Over 80 of us got in our cars and came to the Statehouse immediately to make sure we got these bills passed,” Krowinski said. “That kind of commitment and dedication is inspiring to me, knowing that we have a lot of work to do in front of us to protect and support Vermonters during this unprecedented time.”
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Saw my State Rep. picking up beer at a local brewery a couple of days ago.
Apparently it’s safe enough for legislators to get their beer and for the cashier to work the store checkout.
Soooo, I think its pretty reasonable for Vermonters to expect our legislators to follow their own damn rules and head to Montpelier for a vote.
#VPIRGSUCKS
Hope Browning isn’t going to run for re-election…
Hey Legislative dimwits: ever hear of teleconferencing?! Oh, wait, I forgot, VT STILL does not have statewide cell service. (E.G. Route 22A)
So far left, like DC, they can’t get their act together to help VT business and citizens.
What a mess. Shame.
Nothing more than grandstanding from a legislator known for grandstanding.
Go back to Arlington and stay there.
Rep. Browning did the right thing.
How can the anonymous person above say that Browning “did the right thing”? She had ZERO support. Like all of the members she knew the hard work that had been done to make quick passage of this bill possible. She knows lives are at stake, yet no of that mattered. All that mattered to her was her OPINION of what the bill did. As she knows, or should know, if there’s a big problem with any bill it can be dealt with at a later date. In the meantime, she put all of the General Assembly at risk for no other reason than….what? To make a point? Great.
This is astonishing. Schools figured out distance learning and they couldn’t televote?
Browning should be ashamed of herself. Her grandstanding put hundreds and ultimately maybe thousands of Vermonters at risk for nothing more than some attention. She’d fit right in with the petulant man child in DC who has happily put 320M people at risk, not caring at all for human life.
To @4mervter… in case you forgot, the white house and senate, in DC, are controlled by ultra right wing nut cases, one of whom is happily pushing the idea of letting thousands of Americans die just so he can make sure his businesses and those of his friends and big republican donors, are adding to their largess at the expense of ‘the people.’ The leaders of the VT legislature and most of the members are and have worked very hard to help people like you and me. Maybe you should pay attention and get your head out of fox news’ rear end.
Rand Paul walked around for a week in a highly contagious state before getting the results; positive for Covid19.
Perhaps we need to send Browning to DC. While waiting for a quorum she could use the gym and the pool.
Sadly, there is no vaccine for stupidity.
“she said one of the bills –which would allow the house to vote remotely on legislation in the future”
This quote says it all. Can you imagine the house being turned loose with that, after this crisis is over. Remote voting would allow the house to sneak all kinds of legislation through, for example a bill to double the tax on home heating fuel which was never passed because voting in plain sight for the bill was something most legislators couldn’t bring themselves to do. We do have a crisis now and relief is needed but it will pass and we need to keep the house rules, like voting from a seat in the chamber in view of constituents. Cynthia Browning was DOING HER JOB. If the speaker of the house can’t keep her ducks in a row we need more of Rep. Browning. She has my vote.
Time for that self-centered idiot Browning to be voted out of office!!
Well leftrightandcenter, I love it when generalities and fake news cloud someone’s thinking, typically from the left. Some call it TDS. “… letting thousands of people die…”
Did you see all the stuff Nancy added to the Federal economic package? NPR funding, Kennedy Center, Planned Parenthood, solar and wind subsidies, to name a few. I believe she specifically called out any Trump property to not get any aid. I didn’t get any of this from Fox News, I simply read the highlights of bill.
Now to the article, it would be extremely informative if the writer included what the legislature voted on, that BTW, Ms. Browning voted against. I do love the one line in the article:
“The irony of having more than 100 lawmakers, staff and media crowding into the House chamber to address a growing pandemic when Gov. Phil Scott had called for people to stay home and not gather in groups of more than 10 was plain.” What did they actually accomplish? A clear example of do what I say, not as I do. Kinda why I have a jaded view of folks in Montpeculier.
Well leftrightandcenter, please name the top 3 things this bunch has done for us as you say:
“The leaders of the VT legislature and most of the members are and have worked very hard to help people like you and me.”
To Walter Moses above, You do realize that the remote voting issue only pertains to this time when we have a virus contaminating people, right? Browning was not “doing her job”. Her demand to call everyone back only had ONE VOTE….and that was her’s. No one of any party thought that it was wise to bring back all of the members to address a crisis situation in which we’re supposed to be isolated. You’re well within your rights to support whoever you want, no matter how egotistical, arrogant and self-serving they may be.
It would be nice if our politicians were able to get together and get something done!
Quit bickering and work for the people of Vermont!!
Ah jeez, the article said Future Voting. Now if Stannard has other info by osmosis or other means all well and good. As far as egotistical, arrogant and self serving people in the state house are concerned, I only think of those people that are paid to buttonhole and bully our legislators to vote their self serving way. Lobbyists are the bain of our government, know what I mean?
Sorry, read “bane” not bain.
Perhaps it is because while finishing up some fruit tree pruning I have been listening to a series of lectures on Thucydides,Plutarch,Gibbon and Lord Acton on why democracies rise and fall, that I have a bit of sympathy for Rep. Browning’s stance. Emergencies, some valid and some not, have often been the justification for the curtailment of liberty.
It will be interesting to see how the national elections play out this fall should this crisis continue and proposals are presented to change the process. Those now condemning Rep. Browning the loudest for holding to proper procedure in the face of some minor risks may find themselves advocating for a similar position in November.
We either have a public safety crisis or we don’t; this as been one of the biggest public safety failures of all time. If this was test run on future government public safety crisis management systems then it is obvious the world will just vanish of human beings because it will take three months to get our act together and the priority of money as seem to trump safety.
This is the most telling sentence of the entire article: “Members of all parties had been consulted about the limited voting plan, and Johnson noted that Browning had not raised her concerns until she arrived at the Statehouse on Wednesday.” Had she raised this in advanced, they could have ensured that there were enough present without people having to scramble. But, of course, that wouldn’t have allowed her grandstanding move and the resultant media attention. She also knew that she would be the only one wanting this, so bringing it up in advance as she should have would have resulted in a lot of pressure that she obviously didn’t want to have to endure.