This commentary is by state Rep. Kate Donnally, D-Hyde Park, who also represents Belvidere, Johnson and Wolcott.
In my work as a social worker, I have been trained to make the distinction between “process” and “content.” Content is what we do. It can be the words that we speak, the actions that we take, the concrete goals that we manifest.
If content is what we do, process is the method we use to do it. My process might be impacted by the history, emotions, motivations and values that I carry with me. To put it simply: Content is what I do, process is how I do it.
Convincing people of the importance of content is easy. We live in a society that prioritizes content above process. We understandably value getting a job done, but often undervalue the methods that are used to get results. We elevate the product above the process.
I have spent my professional life studying the importance and impact of process. I can say with certainty that process matters. It is often the single greatest indicator of whether a person will achieve their goals or not. I’m inclined to say process is everything.
We underestimate the importance of process to our detriment. Nowhere has this been on greater display than the recent legislative handling of state pension reform.
Several months ago, driven by genuine shock and fear at the state of Vermont’s employee pension system, House Speaker Jill Krowinski declared pension reform a central legislative priority. With the Vermont pension plans fighting for their financial and ideological lives, the speaker stated, “My goal all along has been to save this pension system. To make sure that our state employees and our teachers can retire with peace of mind.”
Despite the best intentions, the pension rescue process that unfolded did not achieve the goal of providing vested parties with “peace of mind.” Instead, it left many reeling. Democratic leadership found itself at odds with community members and legislators within their own party. Teachers and state employees took to the streets.
How does a well-intentioned effort to save the benefits for some of our most essential and valued workers lead to an abrupt and contentious end? A failure of process.
State pension reform is a vastly complex issue that impacts the fate of employees, their families, and the state economy as a whole. The stakes are high, wide-reaching and personal. An issue of this complexity needs to be honored with a thorough, transparent, inclusive, open, values-based reform process. One that balances the needs of all Vermonters with those of our state employees.
Unfortunately, this is not the process that unfolded. The process was experienced by many as rushed, closed and narrow. While there is near universal agreement that the pension system in Vermont is in urgent need of reform, the process did not allow for coalition building around the best possible policy solutions to this issue. This led to fracturing and mistrust.
Ultimately, the process mirrored the state of pensions themselves: one of crisis. In crisis, we fight or we flee. In the case of pension reform efforts, we did both: First we fought, then we fled the proposed plan.
Some may view Jill Krowinki’s decision to alter and slow the pension process as weakness — as caving to pressure. Some will reasonably argue that slowing down will simply exacerbate the problem. But such arguments underestimate the essential importance of process. It takes wise leadership to recognize that how we do this work is equally as important as what we do.
Process doesn’t free us from discomfort. There is no process that will make this work easy, simple, or free of pain and difficulty. Good process gives us the tools to have resilience in the face of difficulty. It is my hope that change in process will allow us to be resilient in the face of change and build the necessary coalitions to produce a result that will benefit all Vermonters in the end.
