On Wednesday night, eight freshman Democrats in the Vermont House played a key role in the most dramatic act of the 2017 legislative session.
Along with eight other Democratic representatives, they broke ranks with their party leaders to support Republican Gov. Phil Scott’s proposal to negotiate a statewide teachers’ health insurance contract.
“The reason we were in the position we were in was because of the freshman Democrats,” said Rep. Heidi Scheuermann (R-Stowe).
“Most wayward freshmen class of all time,” said Rep. Sam Young (D-Glover), sounding somewhat exasperated.
The GOP coup was short-lived. As Republicans were about to triumph by a 74-73 margin, House Speaker Mitzi Johnson (D-South Hero) cast a rare vote, resulting in a tie that killed the proposal. Still, all anyone could talk about Thursday was the Democratic defections.
Under former House speaker Shap Smith, Democrats were a disciplined unit and the outcome of votes was almost always preordained: If a bill made it to the floor, Smith had made sure it had the votes to pass.
Johnson has either lost control of her caucus or deliberately given lawmakers a longer leash, depending on whom you ask. Intentional or not, it created an awfully close call.
“I probably have just a more collaborative style than people are used to here,” Johnson said Thursday. “I don’t want to make them choose their loyalties.”
“I don’t get pressure from them,” said Rep. Linda Joy Sullivan (D-Dorset), a first-year legislator who voted for Scott’s proposal because, she said, it was “fiscally responsible.” Rep. Jessica Brumsted (D-Shelburne), also a newcomer, said she wasn’t pushed to vote with the Democrats either.
More seasoned lawmakers, including Rep. Maureen Dakin (D-Colchester) and Rep. Kathy Keenan (D-St. Albans), agreed that Democratic leaders had given them free rein. “They knew what I was doing,” said Keenan. “Our caucus allows individuality.”
Even Rep. Matt Trieber (D-Rockingham), who is close friends with both Johnson and House Majority Leader Jill Krowinski (D-Burlington), felt comfortable voting against the majority. He said he texted Krowinski over the weekend to tell her he where he stood, and she thanked him and told him she’d be in touch Monday, but they never ended up talking.
Not everyone, however, felt so liberated. In at least one case, the Democratic leadership’s efforts at persuasion backfired. “They didn’t take no for an answer,” said Rep. Jay Hooper (D-Brookfield). “It pissed me off, to be frank.”
He said he voted for Scott’s proposal because it would address his constituents’ concerns about property taxes. “I think that my party, the left, hasn’t done enough to embrace the most important issue to all voters, even liberal Democrats: affordability,” said Hooper, who, at age 23, is the second youngest lawmaker in the building. His seat mate, Ben Jickling (I-Brookfield), is the youngest, at age 22. The latter also voted with the Republicans.
As Hooper spoke, seated on a couch outside the governor’s statehouse office, Rep. Jim Harrison (R-Chittenden) walked by and gave the young rep a sympathetic pat on the shoulder.
“I’m paying for it dearly,” Hooper said. “I can tell that there are certain individuals of authority in this building who are really not happy with me right now,” he explained. “And I am slowly becoming more OK with that because I don’t believe in this process being so scripted.”
Scheuermann is among the many Republicans encouraged by that sentiment. “I’ve been here 11 years and last night gave me a fresh perspective. For the first time in a long time, I felt we were having an open debate and honest debate that was not in the back rooms,” she said.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Glad to see some younger Democrats voting with their brain instead of following the party line. Look where such behavior has gotten us so far. Our real estate sales, taxes, health care and our educational system are all suffering while other less dependent states are prospering.
Wow, this just goes to show how many Republicans and these young Democrats don’t understand the laws and systems that they are writing and affecting! The savings that Scott is projecting is fiction and these people aren’t doing their homework. It’s scary to see all the “good work” and go get ’ems” in the comments here too. Wouldn’t it be better to have educated representatives?
Why did these people run as democrats? If they really believe that this issue is about fiscal responsibility and cutting taxes, they have been snookered; or perhaps it’s just ignorance. If they want teacher’s benefits and salaries reduced, then they should change party affiliation to Republican.
They need to understand that the teachers are now into the new health care system in Vermont, and the only negotiating will be how much the teachers contribute from their salary to pay their share of the premium. The health insurance plans were preselected by the School Board majority VEHI.
There has been and will be tax savings, more in some districts, less in others. Those tax savings will accrue to each local district, to be spend or reallocated as their board and community so vote.
These new Republicans, and new Democrats represent the new neoliberal-Vermonters, who have enough income such that they do not receive any income sensitivity, and have to pay their full property tax, as they should.
The property tax is the only tax that rich folks can’t finagle out of, and many don’t like it. They would be happy to a return to pre-Brigham days, where their paid property tax stayed with them in their town.
Compare some of the new DINO’s with the (gold) town they represent.
Is there a way to block people here?
Democrats should understand school costs need to be brought under control or they will not stay a majority party for long. What happened to Sue Minter because of her apparent support for industrialy wind on ridge tops can happen to the state legislature as well. People are sick of politicians catering to special interests of any ilk, and not just on the right. Take heed Democrats.
Our legislators need to put all their political posturing aside and get control of the education spending. Property taxes in Vt are out of control. There are going to be a lot more freshmen in Montpelier after the next election if the voters don’t see some real progress on this issue.
“He said he voted for Scotts proposal because it would address his constituents concerns about property taxes.” What a concept, voting the wishes of the people who elected him. There may be hope yet.
Thanks, Jay and Ben… this issue won’t be going away, and it’s good to see independent thought coupled with constituent sentiment.
I support a budget veto if the Gov’s proposal does not become law. #VTNEABUYSVOTES
Good for them — the Governor’s insurance idea is a positive and should help contain property tax increases.