Vermont lawmakers are discussing how to bring increased accountability and transparency to the Vermont National Guard in the wake of a six-month VTDigger investigation that revealed a toxic culture within the military organization.
The lawmakers say constituents have expressed alarm over the reports, which outlined cases of misconduct stemming from a culture of excessive drinking and sexual harassment. In the series, VTDigger describes how several Guard leaders have been punished for misconduct ranging from alcohol abuse to sexual assault. Vermont’s congressional delegation has also expressed concern.
Some Vermont lawmakers were disappointed with comments made by Republican Gov. Phil Scott, the commander in chief of the Guard, who said after publication of the seven-part series that his support of the Guard was “unwavering.” Scott blamed a “few bad apples” and declined to open an independent investigation into the organization.
“Several constituents have said to me that they don’t understand why the governor would not formally ask for an independent investigation, especially given that he’s conceded that he hadn’t heard some of the allegations until the Digger series came out,” said Sen. Becca Balint, D-Windham, the Senate majority leader.
“These are very serious allegations for any workplace, and they’re made all the more concerning by the nature of the job in the Guard. Our servicemen and women do dangerous work, and they need to know that there are safe avenues through which they can report potential violations. Lives literally depend on protocol being followed,” Balint said.
Lawmakers say they hope to bring more transparency over the Guard, as well as examine ways to curb inappropriate workplace behavior, empower Guard investigators, and protect whistleblowers. Both the Senate Government Operations Committee and the House Committee on General, Housing and Military Affairs are expected to hold hearings next session on issues related to the Guard.
Rep. Jean O’Sullivan, D-Burlington, who, in 2013 spearheaded a new mandated reporting law for sexual assault and harassment of female Guard members, has long advocated for more legislative oversight of the Guard. Last session, O’Sullivan convinced Guard leadership to include information in these annual reports on the recruitment, retention and promotion of women. The fiscal year 2018 report, scheduled to be released sometime in January, will be the first to publicly disclose this data.
After reading the VTDigger reports, O’Sullivan sent a memo to fellow Democrats outlining a plan to make the Guard’s misconduct reporting requirements more comprehensive. O’Sullivan said more fundamental reforms are needed and the Guard leadership is “in denial.”
“To sum this up, reports are not going to solve this problem,” O’Sullivan wrote. “They start the conversation and give the Legislature objective facts to work from. To say that the Guard leadership is in denial about the hostile sexualized work environment is an understatement. This isn’t ‘whack-a-mole’ with a few bad actors who are disciplined when an incident is reported. It is about a culture that accepts unprofessional behavior as a norm.”
In an interview this week, O’Sullivan said she was frustrated by Scott’s comments at the press conference, saying that neither the governor, the Legislature, nor the press have paid enough attention to the annual legislative hearings held on sexual harassment, nor to the annual reports on sexual harassment and assault within the Guard.
Rep. Tom Stevens, D-Waterbury, who is expected to become chair of the House Committee on General, Housing and Military Affairs, said the allegations will be a “priority as we start off the session.”
“The stories were eye-opening, the allegations are very serious, and we at the Statehouse need to address some of these cultural issues, fairly and with respect,” Stevens said.
Vermont lawmakers, however, are unsure how much oversight authority they have over the Guard. The organization responds to both state and federal authorities. The Vermont Legislature elects the Guard’s leader, the adjutant general, and the governor is the commander.
Federal authorities can activate the Guard as they see fit, the Department of Defense writes the rules and regulations, and a federal inspector general conducts investigations. A variety of Vermont statutes dictate the relationship between the state and the Guard, statutes lawmakers will likely dive into in the coming weeks and months.
One area where lawmakers have clear authority is over the election of an adjutant general, and they are pledging to better vet candidates for the post. In his first public comments after the series was published, Gov. Scott announced that Maj. Gen. Steven Cray, who has led the Guard since 2013, would not seek another term, a move both Scott and Cray said had long been discussed.
Lawmakers have begun meeting with two candidates vying to replace Cray: Vermont Air Guard Brig. Gen. David Baczewski and Col. Gregory Knight, deputy chief of staff and personnel for the Vermont Army National Guard, who recently became the human resources officer.
The one area where Scott has expressed interest in Guard reform is the selection process for adjutant general. Vermont is the only state that does the selection by legislative vote. Scott has advocated for making the selection process like judicial nominations, where a commission provides nominees to the governor, who then appoints a judge who must be confirmed by the Senate.
Not all lawmakers are interested in investigating the allegations against the Guard, which focused on the organization’s leadership.
“I think these incidents are behind us now, and I think they were handled well,” said Sen. Dick Mazza, a Grand Isle Democrat and close Scott ally. “There’s always some bad apples and there’s always going to be some incident, like the governor said. From my experience with the Guard, 99 percent of folks are super people, dedicated to serving the country. As long as these issues are handled properly, I have no interest in pursuing it.”
Sen. Joe Benning, a Caledonia Republican who serves as the chamber’s minority leader, called the reporting “thorough” and said it “caused me to raise an eyebrow.”
“But I have to trust that the governor has done his homework,” Benning added. “If people in my caucus are dissatisfied, I haven’t heard anything about it.”
In a recent interview, Scott said he had never discussed the contents of the reports with Cray during his tenure as governor, noting that their conversations largely focused on upcoming deployments, recruitment challenges, and the basing of the F-35.
Vermont’s three-member congressional delegation called the allegations raised “concerning” and said they required a “thorough and impartial review by the appropriate authorities.” Those authorities include the governor, Vermont Legislature, and the Department of Defense, they said.
All three declined repeated interview requests, including Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who is the co-chair of the Senate National Guard Caucus. Instead, the delegation released a joint statement and an emailed response to follow-up questions.
In the initial statement, the delegation said: “Let us be clear, sexual assault, harassment and misconduct have no place in our state, in any organization, at any time. The Vermont National Guard is no different.”
They said that men and women in the Guard needed to be able to bring forward allegations of misconduct and trust that they would be handled appropriately, regardless of the rank of those involved.
“We will continue to work hard in Washington to support policies that fortify a culture of trust and professionalism in the Guard and other institutions as well as guarantee protections for survivors and whistleblowers,” the statement said.
“This includes the delegation support for the Military Justice Improvement Act, which would bring the military justice system more in line with the justice system Americans expect, moving judgment outside of the chain of command to better ensure confidence that adjudication is impartial,” they added.
