By Rob Roper
Despite the outpouring of public opposition to S.5, the Clean Heat Standard bill, the Vermont House of Representatives passed it on April 20 by a vote of 98-46. But the final vote to pass the bill wasn’t the only vote of interest. There were a couple of very interesting amendments.
For several months now, supporters of the Clean Heat Standard have been accusing opponents of this “Rube Goldberg” carbon tax on home heating fuels of exaggerating what it will do to the price of heating oil, propane, natural gas, and kerosene. The Secretary of Natural Resources, Julie Moore, estimated that number to be $0.70 per gallon. The pro-Clean Heat Standard folks say, no way! It will only be a few cents at most. You’re just scaring people.
Rob Roper
Well, Rep. Jim Harrison (R-Chittenden) called their bluff, proposing an amendment to the Clean Heat Standard that would have capped any impact the program had on the price of heating fuels to $0.20 per gallon. “We offer this amendment in the spirit of assuring our constituents that their worst fears won’t be realized,” said Harrison. He concluded by throwing down this gauntlett, “If you are comfortable that the price impact will be minimal, then this amendment should be easy to support. If you believe it will be more and want the bill to pass and allow it to go higher [than $0.20 per gallon], then you will want to reject this amendment.”
101 of his colleagues rejected the amendment. It failed 43-101. So, I guess we have our answer to that!
Every Republican supported Harrison’s amendment.
Ninety-three Democrats, all five Progressives, and two out of three Independents are just fine with forcing their constituents paying somewhere upwards of $0.20 per gallon to heat their homes in winter. When Rep. Laura Sibilia (I-Dover) spoke in opposition to Harrison’s amendment, she admitted with a shrug of her shoulders that, yeah, the impact of the program could be higher than $0.20.
In presenting his amendment, Harrison noted that, “It is interesting to me how past proposals to increase the tax on heating fuels have been controversial. This legislature debated a $0.02 increase in the fuel tax two years ago and ultimately decided against it.
“The then and current fuel tax rate is $0.02 per gallon on the sale of fuel oil, kerosene, propane, and other dyed diesel fuel, and raises $4 to $4.5 million per year… The Act 62 report recommended expanding that tax on fuel oil, kerosene, etc. from the current two cents to four cents in 2021 and to six cents in 2023 with the revenue used to expand more weatherization. I believe these recommendations were ignored not only because they are tough votes to take, but they also raise costs to our constituents. Yet today, we have a bill before us that is likely to raise the cost of heating fuels by many multiples of two to four cents.”
Of course, this is exactly the point of S.5 – to pass a massive tax on home heating fuels in such a devious and confusing manner, camouflaged by a cloud of misinformation and outright lies, that its supporters hope no one notices what they’ve done.
You can find the official roll call vote for the Harrison Amendment HERE. If you click on the name of a Representative the link will take you to their legislative home page with all their contact information, if you feel like sending any of them a message.
The next steps for S.5 are first a reconciliation of the House version of the bill with the version the senate passed. Then final approval of the compromise version by both chambers before a trip to the governor’s desk where all indications are we can expect a veto. To sustain that veto, five more Democrats at least will have to flip their votes, buck party leadership, and listen to the voices of their constituents and vote no.
Rep. Wayne Laroche (R-Franklin) summed up the situation perfectly, “There’s an agreement that Vermont is too small to impact global climate. So, we’re not going to have a benefit. But we’re going to spend money — forcing people to do things they may or may not want to do. [The Clean Heat Standard is] doing something to Vermonters, not for Vermonters.”
Rob Roper is a freelance writer who has been involved with Vermont politics and policy for over 20 years. This article reprinted with permission from Behind the Lines: Rob Roper on Vermont Politics, robertroper.substack.com
What Jim1 said above…. there is No Crisis, CO2 is a trailing indicator of Earth’s natural warming, 98% of any “warming” effect from CO2 and/or methane has already been in place since CO2 was at levels of 100 ppm.
biden did add lots of Methane with his,”act of war”, blowing up the NordStream pipeline….
Guess I’ll be going into the firewood sales business. A lot of folks will be forced to burn dirty firewood for heat now. These liberals never think about the unintended consequences of the garbage that they shove down their throat’s. People will find a way around paying more for heat.
Yup Bob, like the stupid law they made to make it illegal to have open containers of Alcohol has contributed to the roadside full of bottles/cans thrown out the windows of cars… stupid laws have consequences. People will continue to have a beer on the ride home, that’s just how it is.
So we have 101, all D’s and P’s, who don’t give one crap about the average Vter.
They don’t give a crap what it cost us and they don’t give a crap that it will accomplish one iota of carbon reduction. IT”S THE AGENDA STUPID is their motto. Their newest lie talking point is that it will save you money from bidens war on oil… WHAT A CROCK OF BULL. How does having to buy heat pumps at enormous cost SAVE you money? How does paying more for oil save you money. These idiots think we’re all as stupid as D,P voters…
The entire climate change agenda is part of a movement to introduce a global police state based on climate “necessities.”
It’s dismaying that many of our lawmakers seem not to realize how the power of the state can become arbitrary and capricious and can disregard reality for the dream of even more power to tell other people how they should live.
As stated in this commentary, Vermont has no impact on climate change. Nothing. At best, it might serve as an example of state control for the greater good of stopping climate change, but beneath this apparent virtue-signalling good is the egregious error of believing that there is even such a thing as CO2 catastrophe.
The powers-that-be in Vermont don’t seem to realize that the reason so many believe in the pseudoscience of CO2 catastrophe is that alternative scientific views have been, and are being, censored, in a stupid and un-scientific “there’s no debate” stance. There’s plenty of debate.
Censorship is the beginning of totalitarianism. A free society does not censor alternative scientific or political opinions.
We need open, public debates on CO2 so that people can come to understand the truth: there is no CO2 catastrophe. The powers-that-be don’t want this; they wish us to remain in ignorance, with them in control.
Jim1
Representative Laroche sums up a Constitutional conundrum. He is very correct, and 98 representatives in the Vermont House got it wrong.
Vermont Constitution Chapter II, Article 16
You do solemnly swear (or affirm) that as a member of this Assembly, you will not propose, or assent to, any bill, vote or resolution, which shall appear to you injurious to the people, nor do nor consent to any act or thing whatever, that shall have a tendency to lessen or abridge their rights and privileges, as declared by the Constitution of this State; but will, in all things, conduct yourself as a faithful, honest Representative and guardian of the people, according to the best of your judgment and ability. (In case of an oath) So help you God. (Or in case of an affirmation) Under the pains and penalties of perjury.
I’d say, S.5 is an act or thing that injures, lessens and abridges…
The conundrum is this:
Chapter I Article 18:
That frequent recurrence to fundamental principles, and a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, industry, and frugality, are absolutely necessary to preserve the blessings of liberty, and keep government free; the people ought, therefore to pay particular attention to these points, in the choice of officers and representatives, and have a right, in a legal way, to exact a due and constant regard to them, from their legislators and magistrates, in making and executing such laws as are necessary for the good government of the State.
We as Voters and Citizens have failed. We have not fulfilled our obligations as required. I’d suspect that a very large majority of Citizens and Voters have never read the Vermont Constitution and certainly are ignorant of Article 18.
We get the government we deserve, it seems.
Next year, the transportation energy sector will be in legislative cross-hairs. It will not be pleasant.
You have made a very accurate analysis of how the communist idiots don’t have any concerns and they just keep coming up with different ways to tax us to death. They just keep coming up with different ways to suck us dry. If they don’t come up with better ways to lower our taxes, I will have to move to a state that looks out for their constituents…