The Vermont House failed to override Gov. Phil Scott’s latest budget veto Tuesday afternoon in a vote that broke almost entirely along partisan lines. A two-thirds majority was needed to override; the final tally was 90 yes, 51 no.
Every Republican present voted to sustain their governor’s veto, including those who had previously voted “yes” on the budget bill. Only three Republicans were absent.
There was no debate before the roll call. It appeared that all sides knew how the vote would turn out and saw no reason to delay the inevitable.
Legislative leaders crafted the budget bill, H.13, to include the vast majority of a new spending plan while setting aside the few areas of disagreement with Scott. It would have lifted the pressure of a pending government shutdown, which would happen on July 1 in the absence of a budget. But the governor vetoed the bill because, he argued, it would have done nothing to prevent a statutory increase in nonresidential property taxes. (Democratic leaders have said they would have addressed the automatic increase in separate legislation.)
Quite a few members took the floor afterward to explain their votes, and the arguments broke down along predictable lines. One view was shared by all: A crisis and potential shutdown could have been avoided — as long as the other side had been willing to surrender.
“The budget passed with tripartisan support and only 14 no votes,” said Rep. George Till (D-Jericho), referring to an initial House vote in May. He said that holding property tax rates level, as Scott is determined to do, would be “terrible and foolish fiscal policy” that would result in “higher taxes next year.”
“The legislature has had chances to advance a real compromise,” countered Rep. Kurt Wright (R-Burlington). “The legislature has wasted monumental amounts of time on a budget they knew would be vetoed.”
State Senate committees plan to start work Wednesday morning on yet another budget plan. But the divide remains, between a governor hellbent on keeping property tax rates level and a legislature dead set against using available revenue to achieve that. At this point, the middle ground looks more like No Man’s Land.
Correction, June 19, 2018: An earlier version of this story misstated when the Senate was to start work on a new budget plan.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Why isn’t anyone asking the Democrats why they insist on making Vermont an expensive state to live in., why they insist on changing Vermont into the state they left and why Vermonters have to pay for the legislator’s pet projects??? Most of all why must the taxpayers of Vermont have to keep paying for the overinflated reimbursement claims??? Vermonters need to do what NH does with their legislators.. pay them $200. for a 2 yr term !!!! Vermont use to be a great state to live in. People made a decent living. We had GE, IBM, some factories, Democrats don’t want business in Vermont… It’s something when you have a legislation that won’t even listen to Vermonters. They feel it”s their way or the highway. in other words, screw the taxpayers. Just pay what we tell you to pay so we can spend spend spend and raise the taxes every yr..Another thing paying out of staters $10,000 to move here is the stupidest thing there ever was. What democrats thought up this idea? Will they pay $10,000 for Vermonters not to leave the state???
Mr Hoffer, I respectfully disagree with you. Kansas went to far with their trickle down approach, it was destined to fail. Affordability is a real issue in VT and taxes, of all types, are a significant piece of that. I dont need peer reviewed literature to tell me otherwise. I am a non Chittenton County Vermonter and know far to many friends and neighbors that are adversely impacted by their taxes. Phil Scott gets it!
Has even one Republican managed to explain why the budget was perfectly acceptable to him or her a few weeks ago and is now anathema? I want to hear from each and every one of them about their hypocrisy, and why the very same budget had their full support then, and not now. We’ll wait.
Mr. Frazier – With respect, it’s a little late for Trickle Down. The facts are in; it doesn’t work. The peer-reviewed literature is clear on this: state taxes are a tiny cost for most businesses. For the most recent example of a failed ideologically-driven failure, see Kansas.
Mr Hoffer, if you lower the cost of taxes and continue to encourage economic growth as the Governor is doing, there will be natural growth in our general fund revenues to cover the additional cost as Vt becomes a more attractive place to do business.
Mr. Freitag said “All that is needed is to move all the legislative mandated costs in the Ed Fund back to the General Fund where they belong.”
Sounds reasonable, but it is not quite as simple as you would have us believe. Even if some of the estimated surplus was used to cover such expenses in year one, how do you suggest the legislature pay for them next year and the year after that? Your focus on the savings to the property tax ignores the need for additional General Fund revenue going forward. Please tell us how you propose to raise the necessary funds or what services you would cut.
With record surplus revenue it is hard to justify the need to raise property taxes. School boards have done their part in keeping their budgets under inflation. All that is needed is to move all the legislative mandated costs in the Ed Fund back to the General Fund where they belong. Use the surplus to balance the budget without the need to raise property taxes and let the legislature set the priorities for the remaining 20 to 30 million in excess revenue.
It appears that Democrats are willing to shut government down and risk the financial integrity of the state all in order to deny Governor Scott from keeping his core pledge on which he was elected of not raising taxes or fees. Not a fine moment for a party which has in the past done a great deal of good.
“no wonder so many people are moving out of the state!”
according to IRS data, the percentage of older and younger citizens moving out of Vermont is virtually identical to New Hampshire
Vermont doesn’t need anymore taxes put on them! We’re one of the highest taxed places in the country, no wonder so many people are moving out of the state!
Why isn’t anyone asking each and every Republican who is voting for these budgets but then voting to sustain the veto why their voting record is not inconsistent?