
It’s been a tough legislative session for Vermont progressives, big ‘P’ and small.
Many of them would prefer to shift a greater portion of the tax burden to the wealthy while sparing budget cuts to state programs. They’d also like to see more focus on climate change.
But with federal budget cuts looming, they’ve been swallowing hard and going along with a more conservative approach to state spending.
On Monday, four Vermont House members made polite, tentative steps toward maybe eventually advancing progressive policies that would tackle both taxation and climate change. Perhaps next year — or just sometime.
“What they have in common is they are all things to start a conversation,” said Rep. Sarah Copeland Hanzas (D-Bradford), who proposed phasing out the state sales tax in favor of a carbon pollution tax. “It’s how can we change our tax structure to achieve more of what we want.”
The four lawmakers chose to go about announcing their ideas in an unusual — arguably awkward — way. They held four separate press conferences at four different locations around the state and invited certain media members to each without telling any of them about the other events.
The end result for any dutiful Vermont consumer of news will likely be confusion. One TV station will be talking about a carbon tax while the next will be airing footage on a sales tax proposal.
All these ideas, which backers concede are nowhere near ready for passage this year, will be competing with each other. They represent four different ways of shifting existing taxes toward a tax on fossil fuel usage.
Copeland Hanzas proposed reducing the state’s 6 percent sales tax by 1 percent each year while phasing in an equivalent tax on home heating oil, propane and gasoline. Such a move would help downtown Vermont businesses compete with sales tax-less stores in New Hampshire and online, she said, while giving Vermonters incentive to reduce their use of fossil fuels.
Reps. Martin LaLonde (D-South Burlington) and Johannah Donovan (D-Burlington) each issued different proposals focused on shifting property or income taxes.
Rep. Diana Gonzalez (P/D-Winooski), in her home district and flanked by organizers with the environmental group 350.org, touted a different approach to taxing fossil fuels.
She would have Vermonters pay a tax on fuels, with the state collecting the money and returning it in the form of quarterly dividends based on one’s income. Low-income Vermonters would get a higher return than wealthy residents. The exact details, she said, would be worked out through debate.
The idea, Gonzalez said, is based on “The Conservative Case for Carbon Dividends” proposal released earlier this year by former aides to Republican presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George Bush.
Gonzalez said she wants to have a productive debate on the issue after a disastrous attempt in 2015. Back then, legislators pulled a carbon tax proposal almost as soon as it was launched after outcry that it would raise the cost of a gallon of gas. Long after the idea had been dropped, Republicans continued to use it as campaign fodder.
So far, the conversation doesn’t seem to have shifted much. Vermont Republican Party executive director Jeff Bartley blasted the idea of charging Vermonters more for fuel, particularly hitting Gonzalez’s plan.
“Vermonters will not support any proposal for an economically disastrous new carbon tax,” Bartley said Monday. “Especially a proposal like this that tries to hide a wolf in sheep’s clothing by pretending to take money from one of your pockets and put it into another.”


There is not climate warming and no disasterous effect from CO2. We are entering a grand solar minimum and about to see dramatic and famine producing cooler weather. See YouTube Channel, Adampt2030 and watch some of his videos and others which he links to. The entire global warming has been a hoax.
David Z,
In this age of texts, online comments, etc where you cannot pick up on the normal nuances that would communicate you are having fun or joking around etc, are not present and end up being misconstrued.
Even innocuous emails should be read before hitting the send to see if they might be misinterpreted. It is one of the big losses of our connected times
knowyourassumptions. Actually, I got home and read the article (as I assume you did. I see you read it within 25 minutes of its being posted, I was a whole hour later!!!), and was interested to read what people thought in response to the proposals (I actually read comments to see what people think and check back to see if they are dis-proportionally liked or not), and thought I would have a little fun. I am saddened that in the world of internet comments, people can not appreciate a little fun (at both myself as well as you for often zinging me). I never google my name, I don’t have time to, but I do read information (articles, and reports etc. etc.) and I try to have a little fun once in a while. I thought I was making a little fun at both of us. Ahh well, now I know how well people can sense (or not) a little humor.
TAX TAX TAXES,, Vermont is becoming the highest taxed state in the nation..
@knowyourassumption. to add to your list..
8. A fart tax.. everyone will be taxed for passing gas, hell let’s tax the animals too.
9. A stupid tax..the legislators will be taxed every time they come up with a stupid idea or say something stupid
(that will bring in A LOT of MONEY)
10 A lie tax..this for every lie that the 2 Senators, Congressman, governor and Lt governor and the legislators tell..
( another good source of income for VT)
If you believe any government will carbon tax and then lower other taxes or “give back” the money then I have a bridge to sell you. It’s in Brooklyn, NY………………..
Hannah, do you really think they will reduce the sales tax and return money to low income people? You obviously have not watched how the Dem controlled legislature has behaved over the past 20 or so years. Do you have any idea how this will negatively affect the rural areas of Vermont where there are no local stores, no local doctors, no local jobs? Where you have to drive 12-25 miles or more to buy food, or see a doctor. These are the areas where there are more elderly, more low income people than in Chittenden County.
Perhaps it is time to stop finding ways to take money and find ways to save money