If the first forum featuring the two major-party candidates for Vermont governor is any indication, the 2016 general election campaign will be a relatively civil debate with stark differences between the Democrat and Republican running for the state’s top job.
Amid the differences, the candidates had similarities, too, including some that seemed to surprise the audience Monday night in Randolph at a forum sponsored by the Vermont-NEA teachers’ union and televised live by Vermont PBS.
Asked whether transgender students should be able to use the bathrooms of their choice in schools, both Democrat Sue Minter and Republican Phil Scott said they should.
“Absolutely,” Minter answered.
“The answer is yes, I believe they should,” Scott said, followed by murmurs from the crowd — suggesting some hadn’t expected the Republican to agree.
Scott and Minter agreed, too, that the state shouldn’t prohibit public school teachers from striking.
But when it came to many of the key issues the next governor will face — state budgeting and taxes, the future of the Vermont Health Connect insurance exchange, and wind power — Minter and Scott gave markedly different answers.
Monday’s forum, moderated by Vermont Public Radio reporter Peter Hirschfeld and Rutland Herald reporter Lola Duffort, was the first since Scott and Minter won their parties’ August 9 primary elections.
Both resolutely stood their ground as each challenged the other. Scott, who sometimes struggled to clearly defend himself from blistering attacks in the primary election from rival Republican Bruce Lisman, showed signs that he had found new footing.
Scott, 58, of Berlin, repeatedly said he would oppose any effort to raise taxes. Minter, 55, of Waterbury, said she may raise taxes to address the state’s challenges, defending her plan to increase a bank franchise fee to help fund two years of free public college tuition for Vermont students.
Throughout the 90-minute forum, the discussion kept returning to taxes and spending.
Did Minter regret voting, as a state representative in 2009, to raise taxes by overriding former Republican governor Jim Douglas’ veto of the state budget? Scott asked her.
“I don’t regret that decision — that we not cut programs for the most vulnerable Vermonters,” Minter said.
Both candidates were asked if they support expanding up to age 26 the state’s Dr. Dynasaur program, which covers children’s health care. The program is currently available to children under age 19. Minter called the expansion a “great idea.” Scott said if it required raising taxes or fees, “I’m not sure it’s the right approach to take … I go back to look at things very simply. Is this raising taxes on Vermonters?”
Scott also said it is “time to pull the plug” on the Vermont Health Connect insurance exchange, which has suffered technological troubles under retiring Democratic Gov. Peter Shumlin. Scott said he would look to move to the federal exchange or work with other states, contending that Democratic legislative leaders had too readily rejected his suggestion to join Connecticut’s exchange.
Minter said that moving to another exchange would leave hundreds of Vermonters with less coverage. She said she would make Vermont Health Connect “fully functional,” then resume efforts to work toward universal health coverage.
Minter tried to poke Scott about his position on climate change, accusing him of refusing to acknowledge it is driven by human activity. At a July candidate forum, Scott had hedged on the issue, saying then that climate change is real, but could be “for many different reasons.”
Scott on Monday sought to shut the door on Minter’s argument. “I think you’re getting confused, Sue,” he said. “I actually believe, myself, that climate change is real and it’s manmade,” he said, adding that because not everyone agrees, his focus would be on solutions rather than debating the causes.
“I’m so glad to you want to move forward,” Minter said before hitting back at Scott over wind power. She said that by calling for a moratorium on industrial wind projects, he was removing a job-creating tool that would also fight climate change.
“Why not take it off the table?” Scott responded, arguing that the issue “is fracturing Vermont … We can do better. I think solar is actually really the future.”
At least six more forums between the candidates are scheduled, with more in the works. Scott set a list of parameters for future debates, saying he would agree only to those broadcast to a statewide audience, that include an invitation to Liberty Union candidate Bill Lee and that are not sponsored by special interest groups.
Outside of Monday’s debate, Liberty Union Party activist Ralph Corbo of East Wallingford protested that Lee, a former major-league pitcher, hadn’t been invited to the forum.
The next scheduled debate, sponsored by the Vermont Commission on Women and the League of Women Voters of Vermont, is on September 22 in Montpelier.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
“Asked whether transgendered students should be able to use the bathrooms of their choice in schools, both Democrat Sue Minter and Republican Phil Scott said they should.”
Good news, this, but the term “transgendered” implies something happened to change a person. In fact, a person identifying as transgender (there is no “-ed” suffix) is describing who they already are.
Minter is supporting a bank franchise fee. This taxation of finance capital is, structurally, the only thing that can meaningfully re-shape the politics of merciless budgetary austerity which are crucifying populations from Anchorage to Athens.
You pay taxes on everything. Banks and investment groups pay no taxes on any transactions whatsoever. This is the elephant in our den.
Nobody in either party actually really cares about any of the other issues in politics… the order of the day is to shield financiers from anybody exposing their hostility to the American system of political economics.
Our job us to push the Democratic Party away from the banking industry that has caged them and push for robust taxation and regulation of finance capitalists–the banks–that rest at the true center of power in our society today.
Push her avidly to initiate a full frontal assault on the banking industry and you won’t have to worry about or remember Mr. Scott’s name for much longer.
Cheers! Bless you all! It’s our America–not theirs!
No gun control or pot legalization discussed. A marshmallow debate.
Scott’s position on wind and solar seems to make sense, and appears to me more in tune with Vermonters actual desires. The Doyle Poll last march showed that 90% of those who responded wanted more local control of siting projects.
Wind and solar are vastly different in regards to environmental impacts and how/when they produce power. As two weeks ago showed, on the hottest days of the year when we needed power the most, wind production was negligible. While the hot, sunny day made for optimal solar generation.
It is a wise stance to separate out wind and solar and not lump them together. Wind can hardly be considered “green” when it requires roads on our ridges, environmental degradation, wildlife deaths, habitat change, and noise to those who live nearby. Solar on the other hand has essentially none of these, and can also be built on our rooftops and parking lots.
Vermonters care about about their ridges, and it is part of their identity. I’m not sure why the Democrats don’t get this.
Wanna know why Minter wants to rape the Ridges ? Pull up her campaign contribution list and print it if you have enough paper. Now look at the percentage of out of state money she’s pocketing and how Blittersdorf , friends , family and maybe even their dogs and cats are all ready to go on 500′ wind fans on all the ridges.
When asked about getting and keeping millennials here, she referred to the “Urbanization” of Vermont because that’s what millenials like. I guess you could call the “New Vista” project proposed for 20,000 people near Tunbridge “Urbanization” by her definition. Her Campaign slogan should be “Make Vermont Massachusetts again” Big Money,,,, Big Plans,,,, Big Problems !
I agree with Phil that the debates should be broadcast to a statewide audience on the networks. With all the ad income they received during the primaries they can afford to use some for public service. We also saw Sue pander to the teachers union who sponsored this debate. So future debate should not be sponsored by special interest groups.
We saw the free spending Sue Minter seeming to continue the spending spree of the Shumlin administration and democratic legeslature, while Phil Scott reiterated his commitment to rein in spending.
This debate was advertised to happen Tuesday Aug 23. I wonder what happened. I missed it.