No Joke

After losing out to Republican Gov. Jim Douglas on two of their bedrock, core issues - global warming and campaign finance reform - Democratic Legislative Leaders Sen. Peter Shumlin of Putney and Gaye Symington of Jericho [at left] chose Burlington City Hall as the back-drop to announce their appointment of a "Blue-Ribbon" Commission to study - ready for this - gay marriage!

A hot burning issue in Vermont, eh?

Not making this up, folks. But jaws have dropped among other Dems and Progs when I told them.

In fact. Speaker Gaye and Sen. Shummy didn't even have the decency to let Burlington Progressive Mayor Bob Kiss - who as a legislator back in 2000 supported civil unions and gay marriage, too - know they were using his Progressive Castle as the setting for their big media event.

But they did show their bipartisan spirit by appointing the former GOP Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee that wrote the civil unions bill as the chair of their "Blue-Ribbon" Commission - Tom Little of Shelburne.

Wow!

Hot burning issue in Vermont, eh?

Or are they just trying to change the subject and appeal to their base after the embarrassing Statehouse loses to Gov. Jimmy D. - who has a 1 o'clock presser at which he should have some interesting remarks about the Democrats' focus and priorities, eh?

Comments

[Will]

Seems pretty cynical Peter. Why are you looking for a problem or controversy here? I think seven years after civil unions, with one state having gay marriage and our formerly-conservative neighbors to the east adopting civil union-like legislation without a court order, it is time that we consider doing what's right. It is absolutely the right move for the legislative leaders to research it thoroughly first. I think we should discuss the issue rather than jump to the conclusion that this must be a case of political misdirection.

[manoman]

My take is that this is not self preservation but directly aimed at Douglas. Douglas would not be office if it were not for 'stray' Democrats. Symington and Shumlin are looking for an issue that will pull Democrats away from Douglas.

[jpc]

I have changed my mind about S & S, they are doing a great job...of converting Vermont back to a republican state that is. Last summer, when the people of this state were clamoring for tax reform, education reform etc etc Shumlin decided he was going to make global warming a priority. That didn't work. Instead of trying to save some face and work on this year, he is setting gay marriage as the legislatures priority. Anybody else get the feeling that Shumlin's main goal is to pass some piece of legislation that is going to get his name on the national news. Call on your legislators to expel these two people out of our government. Unbelievable.........

[manoman]

"people of this state were clamoring for tax reform"

I think what Douglas, Shumlin, and Symington know is that there is no way to have tax reform.

I would love to see various demographics, incomes, tax scenarios, and income sensitivity programs modelled. I think the data would be enlighening and I have a feeling that Vermonters, as a whole, "don't know they have it so good".

[Julie Waters]

I guess whether or not something is politically expedient is more relevant than whether or not it's -moral-. Perhaps instead of mocking the leadership for actually being willing to acknowledge that a large segment of Vermont's population is relegated to 2nd class citizenship, it would be a good idea to own some of our own demons.

[jpc]

I don't know, I just got a letter spelling out the taxes I would pay for education if it were an income tax instead of a property tax. They would be almost 700 dollars cheaper. That would make a lot of VTer's happy. Limiting school spending, consolidating purchasing and consolidation of programs would also lower taxes. Cutting social programs would lower taxes. There is so much waste in our government it isn't funny, it is a problem in other states as well, but that is certainly not an excuse. And there are plenty of changes to the tax structure that could be made. THe problem is that it requires a little thought, which S & S don't have the capacity for.

[bigbadbrad]

This is a big, big mistake. Civil Unions is one thing, fine. 2nd class citizens, my Aunt Fannie! Just stop! Don't call it marriage. There is a large portion of Vermont's population who like to think that they are tolerant to the changes in Vermont culture over the last 25 years who will be completely put of by this incroachment on marriage. Call it what you want. Call it life-partnerarage, I don't care. Just don't start throwing grenades and entertain the idea of calling it marriage. Its not worth the firestorm.

[jpc]

Wasn't a civil union exactly the same as marriage with out the name..... S & S are going to form a committee, debate the issue half the session over whether to deem it marriage or civil union? I agree with a previous manoman, this is all about going through this simply so that Douglas will veto it and look bad right before the election cycle. This is truly politics at it's worst, blatantly wasting time and money to make a political opponent look bad.

[mtbikevt]

Out of curiosity JPC is that $700 before or after your prebate? I would have to assume if your income taxes would go down $700 you are receiving a prebate on your property taxes.

In regards to what this post is actually about, I don't know why it can't be both a political maneuver as well as good policy. Some times, not very often, the two work hand-in-hand. I happen to think this is one of those times. Marriage is for any two people that are in love! and it happens to be an issue that we all know will be difficult for Douglas to handle. Seems like a win-win from where I'm sitting. So who really cares what the motives are of the Dem leadership if it actually accomplishes something worthwhile?

Oh and JPC, just because Douglas said "affordability" 9,987 times a week it does not mean the state was clamoring for it. It's an issue many Vermonters care about without a doubt but there are many more in this state that are willing to swallow hard and accept what we have in expenses to keep what we have in lifestyle. If you don't think that the business at any cost, reduce my taxes at any cost, build houses everywhere at any cost folks aren't in the minority in Vermont you are simply not paying attention. The vast majority of Vermonters will accept a higher cost of living to maintain this incredible lifestyle. One where open land and local businesses can still succeed, where we actually have downtowns to walk and the sense of community that can't be found in many other places. When forced with a choice, lifestyle or uncontrolled growth seen in most other states, most Vermonters will choose lifestyle.

[jpc]

As far as I am concerned marriage or civil union doesn't really make a difference to me either way. Do we need a commission to study it for the next 10 months, no. Is it THE most pressing issue to the state at the current time, I sincerely doubt it. It is a politcal stunt which demeans the issue for starters and I hope Douglas signs the bill. And mtbikevt, if you don't think people in this state are fed up with the way their money is spent then please let me know what you are on. Yes I would be willing to pay more taxes for some roadwork, or bridge work , or because we need new infrastructure, but I am unwilling to pay more taxes to pay for more people to recieve handouts from the state and to pay for redundant services in the state.

"The vast majority of Vermonters will accept a higher cost of living to maintain this incredible lifestyle. One where open land and local businesses can still succeed, where we actually have downtowns to walk and the sense of community that can't be found in many other places. When forced with a choice, lifestyle or uncontrolled growth seen in most other states, most Vermonters will choose lifestyle."

mtbikevt, you make a common mistake thinking that the only way for these things to occur is to pay more. Uncontrolled growth doesn't mean you have to give up lifestyle, and open land and local business do not succeed because we pay taxes.

[bigbadbrad]

Marriage is for any two people that are in love!

No, It's not. Sorry. I don't want to sound like a reactionist, cause I'm not. This is devisive fo devisivenesses sake. It is a pointless endeavour which is just going to piss people of and envariable get nowhere.

[aal]

As one of the second-class citizens that civil unions marginalize, let me assure you this is a burning issue for me and my Vermont family. Beyond all the rights that marriage confers that civil unions don't, and there are many that don’t, only "marriage" is universally recognized and provides my children with the security and equal-family status they deserve. The idea that the Dems just cooked this up in a matter of days and lined-up a completely voluntary commission headed by a Republican leader to somehow distract this hour’s issues is both laughable and insulting. A lot of work has gone into progressing this conversation in Vermont and seeking out a diverse commission to agree to take this on in their spare time.

[vermonter]

manoman sez: this is a political maneuver to bring the Douglas Democrats back into the fold. So according to manoman, it's not S&S doing what's right, it's a tactic.

Assuming manoman is right, I think it will not work. Why would S&S think that the 11 Democrats who wouldn't go along with them on H520 will follow them down the gay marriage path?

mtbikevt sez, "The vast majority of Vermonters will accept a higher cost of living to maintain this incredible lifestyle. One where open land and local businesses can still succeed, where we actually have downtowns to walk and the sense of community that can't be found in many other places. When forced with a choice, lifestyle or uncontrolled growth seen in most other states, most Vermonters will choose lifestyle."

This rhetoric comes up over and over again and I believe it is a false dichotomy. Absolutely false. Not wanting to put up billboards, and not wanting to get rid of Act 250, doesn't mean we have to have the hostile business climate that we do.

[partypooper]

Well, this it for me. After the last legislative session and now this ridiculous political stunt, I am no longer just a "stray democrat". I am officially NOT one anymore. Just like the neocons have destroyed the repugs, the "neoprogs" have foolishly forgotten their base. Idiots.

[sandy ward]

Good for the gays! But, pretty sure it will bring the 'right' people to the polls, thou...going to have to counteract that tactic.

[bigbadbrad]

AAL, I'm sorry you feel marginalized. As a single person, I feel that way every time I get my pay stub or my property tax bill. I'd like equal status with families. Why should I be expected to carry an dully high share of the revenue burden? Got any Ideas on relief for me? Life isn't always fair. I got that one in first grade. That Said,You're propably twice to parent of alot of hetros. Congrats. Gays aren't going to ruin marriage. Hetreos are doing a fine job of it as it is.
"lot of work has gone into progressing this conversation in Vermont." That's part of the problem. Its all been about progressing a specific, focused platform. This has been the unspoken mission creep from the start. Can't we just empart all these wanted rights and responsibilities and call it some thing that everyone can live with?

[manoman]

"They would be almost 700 dollars cheaper. That would make a lot of VTer's happy. "

That's exactly the point. It IS making alot of Vermonters happy. The thing is they don't make the connection between the rebate/prebate check and their tax bill. I think this is what was behind the legislature changing the way the payout is make. My opinion is that this was a good move.

25% of all state education money is handed right back to those who qualify. The thing is with median houshold income at about $45k and with the cutoff at $86k, a huge percentage of locals qualify. I think there are probably some special cases too since Vermont income is based upon Federal income. Those who qualify might also include the so-called trust funders, the retirees, and also possibly those who only have dividend income.

Interestingly, if you are a farmer or somebody with more than 25 acres, you possibly could have a land use valuation tax reduction and a prebate reduction at the same time. Actually if you are Farmer, who got out of farming, you would also qualify. I haven't yet witnessed enforcement of the definition of farming/farmer.

There are alot of different scenarios, so thats why I would find it interesting to see what a model tells us. I'd like to know just who is paying what and not just a few case studies put together in a newspaper column.

I should also add that I was thinking beyond just property tax in my original post. There are many income sensitive programs (weatherization, free heating oil, etc, etc) and all of them should be included in any sort of model.

$45k seems like a magical number and one has got to wonder if you are actually better off making $45k rather than $50k.

Anyway, you can be sure that until Douglas, Symington, and Shumlin stop playing cut-throat, there will be no tax legislation other than really really minor changes. I also think that there is more to the whole property tax story and I think the numbers won't provide a reason for a tax change.

[aal]

Bigbadbrad, I do sympathize that single people are often dumped upon to compensate for families that often take more. Like you said, it’s not fair, not that we shouldn’t work to correct what isn’t fair where we can. I’m not sure there has been any mission creep in regards to marriage equality. The conversation started with a recognized need for equal marriage rights, and will continue until there are equal marriage choices for all Vermonters. The scope of the mission has never changed and has a very definite and final goal. History has taught us time and time again that separate is never equal. Too bad everyone can’t accept and be happy for equality.

[manoman]

"Why would S&S think that the 11 Democrats who wouldn't go along with them on H520 will follow them down the gay marriage path?'

Maybe because the Marriage bill would not have a VY tax?

That was a bit sarcastic. But doesn't this push Jimbo into the Bush corner. And perhaps its not about passing a bill, but rather a strategy to reduce his relection chances.

Of course, its possible that Douglas could just sign the bill.

...desperate times call for desperate measures..

[bigbadbrad]

Granted, I think your equal. I celibrate folks who foster I loving environment in which to raise children (or not as is their right. It is vital to a healthy society. I guess civil unions a re a pale substitute that the enterencehed camps on both sides are not happy with. It is my opinion, with respect, that this is a pandora's box that willnot produce the result you are hoping for if attacheddto the term "marriage". Its a snipe hunt. A complete and utter folly.