Editor’s note: Inside the Golden Bubble is an occasional political column about the Vermont Legislature.
Legislative sessions are shaped by elections. Who makes it in and who doesn’t is an expression of a party’s power.
A year ago, the Democrats were riding high with a supermajority of seats and a governor who held sway in the Statehouse. But Nov. 4 changed all that. Democratic Gov. Peter Shumlin’s close shave with defeat and the loss of seats in the Statehouse have created an apprehension among Democrats who are less confident about what direction to take in light of voter dissatisfaction.
While the Democrats only gave up a small number of seats to Republicans, Progressives and independents, those losses are enough to begin to shift the tenor of the discussion in the Statehouse this year. In the 2015-2016 biennium, the caucus will have to figure out how to function with a smaller power base, especially when contentious debates on fiscal issues lead to alliances between blue dog Democrats and Republicans.
The biggest change though is Shumlin’s potential lame duck status in the Statehouse, thanks to his razor-thin victory on Nov. 4, and his decision last month to abandon his signature single payer health care initiative.
Shumlin won by 2,400 votes, but he didn’t receive more than 50 percent of the ballots cast, as required by the state constitution. Scott Milne, his Republican opponent, did not concede the race, and the governor is now in the uncomfortable position of relying on lawmakers to vote him into office this Thursday. Because Democrats hold the majority in the Senate and House, it would be very surprising if Shumlin didn’t win, but even if he is victorious, his political strength will be significantly weakened.
Sources say the governor’s diminished power creates a vacuum. And politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum. Over the course of the biennium, it’s likely that potential rivals will fill the void with pre-2016 electoral posturing.
The Vermont Progressives have already said they will run a candidate in the gubernatorial election; the Vermont GOP has been galvanized by Milne’s near victory; and there could be a Democratic primary. Progressives like former gubernatorial candidate Sen. Anthony Pollina will likely stake their political futures on health care reform.
Lt. Gov. Phil Scott, a popular Republican who presides over the Senate, stands to gain politically from Shumlin’s downfall. While Scott passed up an opportunity to run against Shumlin in the last election and has said he isn’t interested in becoming governor, he is stealing the limelight on the first day of the session. Scott wants lawmakers to put the state’s economy front and center, and he is holding a “pitch session” on Jan. 7 for improving the state’s business climate.
House Speaker Shap Smith, a Democrat, is another pol who will likely take advantage of the shifting landscape to burnish his reputation as a contender for statewide office. Smith has distanced himself from the governor’s health care initiative and instead has made it known for months that property tax and education spending reforms will take center stage in the House. Voter dissatisfaction with recent property tax rate hikes could spur proposals for reform forward.
While Smith rules the 150-member House like a general, he has little control over the 30 wily players in the Senate who tend to dismiss the efforts of their colleagues in the people’s chamber. The school district consolidation bill the speaker drove forward last year, for example, stalled in the Senate.
John Campbell, the Senate President Pro Tem, has not taken a firm stand on health care or education. Campbell, who effectively shares power with longtime senators Jane Kitchel, Dick Sears and Dick Mazza, prefers to cite a laundry list of initiatives, starting with Lake Champlain cleanup and reform of the state’s child abuse prevention program.
Vermont’s economic future, meanwhile, is at a crossroads. Tax receipts have not kept pace with state spending and the gap between revenues and expenditures has ballooned to $100 million. While a state deficit is nothing new — state officials have closed gaps of $30 million to $70 million in eight prior years — the Shumlin administration and legislative leaders are concerned about the size of the hole this time, a shortage of reserve funds and projections that state tax receipts will continue to increase by 3 percent a year at the same time state spending is set to grow at 5 percent a year for the foreseeable future.
There is consensus among state officials that Vermont has a structural budget gap that must be resolved. There is no consensus yet on how to solve the problem. For one thing, the governor, whoever he is, will need to present a budget on Jan. 15. After that, the appropriations committees in the House and Senate will hear in-depth department proposals. Coming to consensus will take time, public hearings and a lot of handwringing. Lawmakers have suggested eliminating whole programs, cutting contractual pay increases for state workers and reducing Medicaid expenditures. The idea of raising taxes is unpalatable to most pols in view of the Nov. 4 election, which was widely viewed as a referendum on the need for tax relief.
Typically, the biennium begins with a clear direction driven by the governor or powerful leaders in the Senate or House. This time, it’s hard to tell how the personalities, policy agendas and power shifts will play out and who will dominate the arena.
What is certain is that, regardless of the short-term political outcomes, the actual policy decisions lawmakers make in the 2015-2016 biennium will have repercussions for years to come.
