Editor’s note: This commentary is by Don Keelan, a certified public accountant and resident of Arlington. This piece first appeared in the Bennington Banner.
[O]n Nov. 4, the voters of Manchester, Arlington, Sunderland and Sandgate will have a rare and valuable opportunity. They can send two eminently qualified individuals to the Vermont Statehouse.
Cynthia Browning of Arlington and Judy Livingston of Manchester, bring a wealth of experience to the position of state representative. What is even more interesting is the fact that Browning, a Democrat and Livingston, a longtime Republican know and have respect for one another.
Notwithstanding their political persuasions both candidates have several things in common — the welfare of the towns they represent and the direction that state government is heading — these are bedrock positions a state representative must bring to Montpelier.
To put this another way, Browning and Livingston are two independent persons and are not beholden to anyone but their constituents. Cynthia Browning made this quite clear at the last legislative session — she sued the governor (a member of her own party) in Vermont state court to have him reveal to the voters the cost of his universal health insurance plan.
Judy Livingston is returning to politics after a six-year hiatus. She had served her Manchester district as its representative for 14 years. During her tenure she also did what was best for her district, which was not always in keeping with what the leadership of the House and the administration had in mind.
Livingston, while in Montpelier, served six years on the House Judiciary Committee and several years on the ways and means, education, appropriations and commerce committees — at times as vice chair. When she goes back to Montpelier, in January, she will land on her feet — the learning curve will be non-existent.
Unique qualities that both candidates possess: they are bright, articulate and can understand the complexities of the issues that come before the Legislature. Browning holds a Ph.D. in economics and has been a professor at several leading liberal arts colleges. Meanwhile, Livingston’s academic credentials are also noteworthy — UConn, Corcoran Art School (Washington, D.C.) and the Harvard Graduate School of Design.
Livingston and Browning march to their own drumbeat — and their drums were given to them by their district voters — not by Montpelier.
If this election was being held 50 or 100 years ago we may not be interested as to whether a candidate had post-graduate school credentials or even if they ever attended college.
However, times have changed and so has the nuances of the bills that come before the Legislature. Does anyone doubt the complexities of the Affordable Care Act, school district consolidations, reform of the state employee pension system, reform of the state’s income and school tax systems (Acts 60/68), economic recovery and opiate addiction?
We elect our legislators to go to Montpelier in early January and come home by late April. During the four months, at least a thousand proposed bills come across their desks. Some are a few pages while others are scores of pages. They all have to be read, digested/understood/rejected /or considered. If we are, by way of our vote, sending a representative into this fray, then they better be prepared. Browning and Livingston have that preparedness.
However, the most important character traits one must look for in voting for their representative are integrity and courage — to do the right thing for her/his district and for the state at-large.
Browning paid dearly for these character traits at the last legislative session (I wrote about her courage in April 2014). Likewise, when the revolutionary school funding legislation was being debated (the basis for Act 60, in 1997), Livingston, recognizing the negative impact it was to have on her constituents, held her ground against tremendous odds.
To hold true to one’s principles is not necessarily what the leadership of the Statehouse or administrative expects of one serving in the Legislature — especially if it runs counter to their own objectives. Livingston and Browning march to their own drumbeat — and their drums were given to them by their district voters — not by Montpelier.
I almost wished that Browning and Livingston would not be candidates but instead stay home. They have done so much for Arlington and Manchester.
Browning continues to serve as a member of the Arlington selectboard and as executive director of the Battenkill Watershed Alliance. Today, thousands of annual visitors enjoy the splendor of Hildene and of the Reilly Rink at Hunter Park. They need to be ever grateful to Judy for having been one of the initial board members of each organization.
Let us return these two dedicated and experienced people to Montpelier — to do the work of their district and that of the state.
