I continue to advocate for a Senate redistricting plan which results in every Senate district containing 2 or 3 members, as opposed to the current range of 1-6. Generally speaking, with some tweaking of towns along the margins, it would work as follows: Bennington (2), Windham (2), Rutland (3), Windsor (3), Washington (3), Caledonia/Orange/Essex (3), Orleans/Lamoille (2), Franklin/Grand Isle (3), Chittenden North (3), Burlington (2), Chittenden South (2), Addison (2). This means Senators would represent equivalent groups of voters, voters would have much more equivalent access to Senators, and the cost of seeking a Senate seat would be more comparable. Multi-seat at-large legislative districts were a favorite tactic of Southern whites to minimize minority representation. The tactic still works, just a different minority group being the target.
affect, not effect
Sen. Peg Flory will be sorely missed. The State House was a better place with her in it, and our General Assembly will find it difficult to replace her insightful observations, quick wit, practicality, and firm logic. Best wishes and hope you have lots of fun with your family in your well-earned retirement, Peg!
I seem to recall a certain Martha Rainville had a legitimate shot at being elected to Congress. Against one of the men in the above photograph. You know and I know that those bemoaning Vermont's last place distinction in the article didn't vote for her. So, they aren't genuinely concerned about Vermont not electing a female representative to Congress. Instead, they want one having the preferred political leanings, and will vote for a male in a heartbeat if the female candidate doesn't pass their political litmus test.
In Vermont, proposing lots of new, expensive proposals is neither bold nor courageous. Presenting a budget that reins in growth and avoids new taxes and fees is, in and of itself, both bold and courageous.
Why is every loss in a representative democracy explained with reference to corruption, idiocy, dishonesty, etc.? Sometimes, on a matter of important public policy, people disagree as to the best choice, you don't have the votes, and you ... lose. It comes with the territory in a functioning democracy.
Re: “Walters: Scott, Legislature Still Talking Past Each Other”
I hope that the newfound interest in not "spending" one-time funds to keep tax rates level will be applied with equal vigor in the future to not spending one-time funds to fund program operations which become part of the budget baseline.