This commentary is by Paul Dame, chair of the Vermont GOP.

This week a majority of Progressive Democrats will ignore their constituents in order to override the reasonable and considerate veto of the most popular governor in the country so that they can pass the most unpopular piece of legislation in Vermont in nearly 20 years. The question will be whether or not an independent-minded minority will be able to stop them.

Paul Dame, chairman of the Vermont GOP

There are at least three main reasons this legislation has become so unpopular, though if you read the bill you could easily find more.  The first is that the projected costs are too high, especially for low and middle income families.  The second is that we are handing over too much power to an unelected group who is basically setting a consumption tax on us all.  And the third is that even those who desperately want to see Vermont eliminate fossil fuels recognize that using taxes or fees as punishments will only build resentment to the climate goals.

The Legislature passed this bill without a fiscal note, meaning they did they did not do a proper estimate of what the system would cost Vermonters.  Both Governor Scott’s administration and the Ethan Allen Institute have at least made an attempt to count the cost, and came up with an additional 75 cents to $4 per gallon.  Based on recent rates this would increase the cost of heating a home anywhere between 25% to nearly 100%.  Democrats have argued that this bill would take the volatility out of the price – but if that were true, it would accomplish this goal by making the rates so artificially high that they would never need to change.  A bipartisan group of Republicans and Democrats tried to at least put some guardrails on this, by adding an amendment that would cap the tax at just 20 cents per gallon.  But Democrats knew that their plans is likely to cost more than this, and they wanted the unelected regulators to be free from “restrictions” on how high they could raise the cost.  Key Demorats are saying that the estimated figures are “misinformation”, but they are too shy to provide accurate estimates themselves.   Add this to the fact that their votes show they are expecting it to be more than 20 cents per gallon, and it demonstrates that they know this is going to more expensive than it is popular.

The more concerning trend we see extended in this bill is the fact that once again Democrats are trying to authorize legislation that will be drafted by someone other than legislators.  This is another example of Nancy Pelosi’s “we have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it” theory of legislating which has come to characterize Democrats in the past ten years.  Vermonters are familiar with this same process after the failed experiment to create a new single payer healthcare plan.  Instead of legislators taking the time to develop the plan themselves and put the law into effect, they hide behind an unelected set of bureaucrats to create some kind of black box of legislating that will leave policy makers unaffected by the will of voters.  Democrats see this as a feature not a bug.  This practice, which seems to be expanding, is one of the greatest threats to Democracy; having unelected leaders making our laws.  Whether we call them nobles, kings, regulators or technocrats, the affect is the same – these people are making decisions that affect the lives of the people, but are not directly accountable to the will of the people.  The confusing language in this bill also seems to create a new process that might allow regulators to bypass the Governor and go into effect with only the approval of the General Assembly.  Instead of a process that is getting buy in and support from everyone, Democrats are creating a legislative process that seeks to eliminate two critical checks and balances to the legislative process: the approval of the Governor, and the accountability to voters.  Even if we believe this kind of program is the right move for Vermont, the way it is being crafted is setting a bad precedent, and Gov. Scott was right to veto it.

And finally, the entire orientation of this bill is contrary to the way that Vermont has seen success in moving our state and our people towards new forms of alternative energy.  Up to this point, Vermont has adopted a policy of creating incentives for those who transition early, but with this bill we are adopting a policy that relies more heavily on penalties and additional cost burdens.  As one fellow Republican legislator said when they voted against the same version of this bill last year “we need more carrots and less stick.” There are some Vermonters out there who have done everything right; they put solar panels on their roof, they bought a heat pump, they have weatherized their home – but they still need heating fuel to get through the cold Vermont winters.  That person will not be eligible for any of the credits offered for upgrades, because they’ve already been completed.  They will however be forced to pay a higher penalty rate on the smaller amount of fuel they use.  There are other Vermonters who are still skeptics about making a switch to new forms of heating energy.  When the legislature passes a law like this, which will punish tens of thousands of Vermonters though higher fuel rates, they are setting themselves up as adversaries – not partners.  I recently had the chance to speak to a professor who used to consider themselves a liberal, but who told me “The way Democrats are pursuing policies that hurt the poor is just gross.”

For these reasons, and many more, hundreds of voters contacted their legislators.  Then Republicans and a small group of Democrats opposed this bill and just last week the Governor vetoed it.  But all that opposition will be in vain if legislators vote to override the veto tomorrow.  It is clear that the outpouring of opposition to this bill was able to convince some of the Democrats to vote against the bill the first time.  Our best hope is for everyone reading this to contact their legislators – especially their senators – to do the same now that the Governor has made himself the scapegoat.  Democrats can get the both of both worlds, they can tell people on the left they voted for the original bill because they wanted to send a message, and they can vote to sustain the Governor’s veto because they heard from their constituents.  The question for Democrats is whether they will listen to the voices from back home – or the voices that surround them under the golden dome?