A group founded and funded by retired Wall Street banker Bruce Lisman has accused a St. Albans Democrat of violating House rules by voting for legislation that would help his employer.
In a letter (see below) to House Speaker Shap Smith, Campaign for Vermont lobbyist Shawn Shouldice took Rep. Mike McCarthy (D-St. Albans) to task Thursday for supporting legislation that would expand Vermont’s net-metering program.
Net metering encourages Vermonters to produce electricity at home and work, in exchange for a break on their power bills. Shouldice said that the bill would benefit SunCommon, the Waterbury-based solar leasing company for which McCarthy works as a community organizer.
The legislation increases the amount of renewable energy utilities can buy from customers from 4 percent of the companies’ peak demand to 15 percent. The bill won preliminary approval Wednesday by a 136-8 margin and final passage Thursday by voice vote.
In her letter, Shouldice said the episode demonstrates the need for ethics reform, a cause Lisman and Campaign for Vermont have been trumpeting lately.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
“The Honorable Shap Smith”
I misread that initially as “The Horrible Shap Smith”, I was thinking; “Man the atmosphere in Montpelier is getting like Washington.”
Gotta watch those community organizers.
This is a direct violation of House Rule 75 and as a constituent of Rep McCarthy’s, I am extremely dissapointed in Speaker Smith’s cover up of this event!!! With the vote being so lop-sided, I would of thought any “good” Politician would have known better than to step in this Grey area!! I would think at least a review of the rules would be necessary!!
“We’ve got a citizen legislature,” says McCarthy, who went to work for
SunCommon in July 2013. “Farmers vote on farm bills. Teachers vote on
education bills. We have a doctor who votes on health care bills. That’s
part of what makes the state kind of special.”
Um yeah I guess it’s special when our legislature has zero inclination to follow the rules set forth in our consititution. You have to be a total retard to not realize that farmers should not vote on farm bills and that teachers should not vote on education bills.
For crying out loud even the morally devoid US Congressmen and women recuse themselves. It is just awe inspiring that a person thinks it’s actually ok. We really really need to have some type of intelligence test and criteria that people have to meet before they can actually vote.
Lobbyists, politicians, Lisman, it’s all bottom feeding behavior. All these people should be ashamed. Politicians should simply not meet with lobbyists, and recuse themselves from bills where there are clear conflict of interest.
I’m sure Mr. Lisman will be equally vigorous in demanding that an Representatives who own businesses that employ people be prohibited from voting on the legislation that would mandate sick days – after all, using the same standards he applies to McCarthy, they have even more of a conflict of interest.
Of course he could also argue that anyone who is an employee should also be prohibited from voting on the sick days bill – after all, they might benefit.
Using his logic, the only people who would be able to vote are the retired and the independently wealthy. Anyone who works for a living, owns a business or is otherwise engaged in economic activity is going to have a “conflict of interest” with much of what the legislature does.
Lisman isn’t actually concerned about “legislative ethics” – he’s just making a partisan attack and finds McCarthy a convenient whipping boy for his efforts to discredit Montpelier Democrats.
Ah yes, the non-partisan Lisman group. Right. I served in the ’80’s with a Rep. from Poultney, Danny Debonis. If anyone ever tried to not vote by invoking rule 75 he would jump to his feet and take that member to task. He would remind the House that everyone sitting in the Chamber was their to vote on behalf of their constituents and trying to use a rule to duck a vote was nothing short of chickens#%t.
The vote wasn’t even close so whether or not Rep. McCarthy voted would not have affected the outcome. McCarthy, like all members, are elected to vote on issues of importance to the state. It’s quite clear that Rep. McCarthy was voted how he saw fit and it’s equally clear that Lisman is doing little more than trying to draw more attention to himself.
Rule 75 is only used if a piece of legislation will cause the voting member to incur a direct financial benefit. That is clearly not the case here.
Mr. jcarter1 – the rules are not set out in the Constitution. They are House rules. You’d be well advised to sit quietly and avoid letting others know how little you know.
Dear tim with a T – FYI each and every person ever elected to serve in either body of the Vermont legislature is recognized as “The Honorable _____”. It’s been that way for a hundred years. Again, you would be well served knowing the facts before you make silly comments like the one above.
Should this apply in committees too? Should legislators on comittees recuse themselves from voting on bills that they have an interest in? I mean, Norm Mcalllister is a farmer, who grows GMO crops, and he voted against the honest labeling bill when it came before his committee in 2012, and now as senator, is set to vote against it again, despite the overwhelming public support for honest labels… or, do we accept that we do have amcitizen legislature, and that we do have a need for folks with direct knowledge and expertese in those fields to weigh in? Either way, it needs to be consistent. If Mcarthy is wrong, so is mccallister, if McAllister is ok, so is McCarthy…
And how about on local levels, like in Montpelier, where our mayor, John Hollar, is a lobbyist for the big banking industry… every day the city conducts business with those banks. As mayor, he makes three thousand dollars a year… 30 Benjamins. A good lobbyist with big clients can make that in a day. Where do his loyalties lie?
DISCLOSURE:I AM A MEMBER OF THE MONTPELIER CONSERVATION COMMISSION. THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED HERE ARE MINE AS A PRIVATE CITIZEN, AND SHOULD NOT BE INTERPERETED TO REPRESENT THE OPINIONS OF THE CITY OF MONTPELIER, NOR THE CONSERVATION COMMISSION.
Actually you are wrong. There should be evidence that financial benefit as a direct result of the connection between this person and the entity cited. Without such evidence this is merely a self-promoting (marketing) witch hunt and nothing more…
I would say his paycheck would act as evidence. Many utility companies have already stopped allowing net metering. If there is no net metering McCarthy is out of a job, by increasing the mandate on net metering that means there is more work for McCarthy. That’s a pretty clear direct interest.
I think it’s a great program and I’m glad the bill passed. But that doesn’t change the fact that McCarthy should have recused himself.