Vermont Democratic House Campaign

From the Essex Reporter

I was hoping by now to have adjourned so I could deliver a final report of the Legislature’s bills for 2013. Due to differences, however, between the Senate, House and Governor, we don’t yet have a budget or tax bill for the year, though we are very close.

Many of you will be happy to hear we are not considering the tax increases proposed earlier this year. Revenue forecasts for April and May show the state in much better fiscal position than predicted in January. We are closing a near $10 million budget deficit by reducing discretionary spending, but details are not yet agreed upon by the Appropriations Committee members. The Ways and Means Committee members are also working on changes to the tax code. I am told they will be revenue neutral.

A controversial bill still under consideration but likely to pass this year is S.77, a bill that allows a person under very defined circumstances to request a prescription for a lethal dose of medicine at the end stage of a terminal disease. I support giving Vermonters this choice as part of end of life care. Although hospice is a wonderful choice for many people, there are circumstances where palliative care is ineffective. I understand and respect concerns about this bill, but we have been very careful to scrutinize 15 years of data from Oregon and almost five years from Washington in order to build safeguards into the statute. Health care professionals are not required to participate if they so choose. Many people will find this statute on the wrong side of their religious convictions, but I know it is a bill that many Vermonters want.

[...]

Week 17 (5/6-5/10)

 Well, we didn’t quite make it to the finish line by the end of Week 17, but we got pretty close. The game-plan, as I write this on May 11^th, is to finish-up on Tuesday, May 14^th  -- so when Journal readers peruse this column, the session should be wrapped-up. As always, when the Legislature starts winding down, the drama, suspense and the sheer flurry of activity in the State House markedly ramps-up. Everything ranging from GMO labeling requirements, to “death with dignity”, to campaign finance reform, were subjects for extensive debate on the House and/or Senate floors. But it will be the meat and potato money issues of the budget and taxes that will dictate when and how the final curtain will come down.

[...]

Things happen very quickly this time of year in the Legislature. We are in the home stretch, so to speak. Bills that have made it from one chamber to the other are being heard, voted out of that particular committee and passed by the second chamber. If both chambers pass identical versions of the bill, it goes to the governor for his signature. If the two chambers pass different versions of a bill, three representatives and three senators are assigned to a conference committee, which is what is presently happening.

This is the first year of a biennium. Even though a bill may have gone nowhere this year, it can be taken up next session by the committee.

H.510, the Transportation Bill, passed all final stages and was signed into law by the governor.

The following is a timetable of the funding work: On May 1, A new 2  percent assessment on the price of gasoline took effect. The tax per gallon decreases by 8 cents, for a net increase of 5.9 cents per gallon at the pump. The price of diesel increases by 2 cents on July 1. Beginning July 1, 2014, the tax on diesel increases by another cent for a total increase of 3 cents. A second 2 percent assessment is added to the price of gasoline, and the tax per gallon drops 6.9 cents, for a cumulative net increase in the tax on gasoline of 6.5 cents at the pump.

The much needed increase to the Transportation Fund allows Vermont to fully access our share of federal funds in 2014. It fully supports the town highway aid programs and continues the much needed repair to our roads and bridges.

[...]

From Shelburne News

There are no issues more moving than those tied to deeply-held personal values. The debate on spending and taxes is decidedly different from debate as personal as our wishes on how our lives draw to a close. Last week, the House passed S.77, an act relating to patient choices and control at end of life. As of this writing on Monday, May 6, it is in the Senate where its future lies in the hands of one or two senators and the use of senate rules to either move it into law or stop action. My hope is that it has moved forward.

Modern medicine is good at staving off death with aggressive interventions—and not always so good at listening to the patient and knowing when to focus, instead, on improving the days that terminal patients have left. This does seem to be improving with advances in palliative and hospice care, and I was proud to vote for increasing access to these services in 2010. Without hospice and palliative care in place, any discussion on S.77 would have been premature.

I have long been a supporter of “Death with Dignity” and have listened to many people, both for and against this end of life option. Everyone knows someone who has died and most of us have stories that describe peaceful deaths as well as tortured ones—families brought together and families torn apart. While death itself is no surprise, the timing and uncertainty around it is, requiring us to make conscious our deeply held moral, cultural, and religious values. This was evident in the Vermont House of Representatives last week, as many legislators made these views explicit either through personal stories or their interpretation of law, ethics, and government’s role.

[...]

Summary of Committee work

My committee passed S.77 Patient Control at End of Life.  I supported the bill and its intent to provide patient autonomy. 

We are continuing our work on H.112 Labeling of GMO's/GE foods. I hope to vote this out of our committee in the next few days.  My committee's role is to ensure we are building a strong record demonstrating the legitimate state interest in the law, such as prevention of consumer deception, protection of public health, the environment and food safety. The Agriculture Committee established a strong record on these purposes plus others. Our legislative counsel reviewed an advisory opinion from Oregon's legislative counsel on its GE bill. The Oregon bill is similar to ours.  Oregon's counsel found that the bill is constitutional and defensible.

[... read for more]

As we inch closer to the end of the session (mid-May), most of the action in the House has migrated from committee rooms to the floor. Here’s the thumbnail round-up of Week 15:

Transportation Bill – On Wednesday (4/24), the House gave its final blessing to this year’s Transportation Bill by a vote of 107 to 33 (Wilson voting with the majority). This legislation, a compromise between the original House and Senate versions, calls for much-needed new revenue to give Vermont a fighting chance in tackling the daunting challenges associated future road and bridge maintenance. It will also ensure that the State is positioned to fully leverage $56 million Federal transportation funding. As of May 1, the gas tax will increase by 5.9 cents a gallon and the diesel tax will go up by 2 cents in July.

Education Finance – By a roll call vote of 110 to 24 (Wilson voting with the majority), the House approved a bill (H. 538) Wednesday aimed at tamping down the seemingly unsustainable trajectory of education spending. Preliminary estimates indicate that FY 15 school spending could increase by $73 million, leaving $61 million worth of red ink in the Education Fund. This, in turn, would mean that the base statewide property tax rate would have to be boosted by 6 cents (about 6% for residential property)

[...]

From the Essex Reporter

Both houses of the Vermont Legislature are working hard to get legislation finalized, and you will be reading about most of the controversial bills as we work toward an expected mid-May adjournment.  Last week, my committee, House Natural Resources and Energy, neared completion on a wind energy bill that differs from the bill passed by the Senate. Originally a three-year moratorium on commercial wind projects, the bill sent to us from the Senate contained only further study. The moratorium had been deleted after strong opposition from renewable energy advocates and others. Complicating the debate is the parallel track of the Governor’s “Siting Commission”, which is due to report at the end of April; early drafts indicate a very comprehensive review.

The House bill will direct the House and Senate Natural Resources and Energy committees to meet during the offseason to consider the Siting Commission report and propose legislation to be introduced next year. As often happens when there are strong feelings on both sides of an issue, more study is the result, and sometimes it allows for thoughtful compromise down the road. I think that will be the case with commercial wind issues. We took testimony from about 50 witnesses on this bill; it may be on the floor for debate as you read this.

Also last week, the House Ways and Means Committee (the tax committee), unveiled a fairly comprehensive bill to lower the cost of funding K-12 education. They addressed many of the thorny issues: income sensitivity caps, phasing out small school grants, reducing some subsidies, setting limits on administrator ratios to teachers, and more. It’s not a radical overhaul by any measure, but it is a serious effort to reduce costs without creating new inequities in how we pay for education. As with all education changes, it is certain to be highly controversial. Everyone wants to slow the growing annual increases in K-12, but agreeing on how to do it is very difficult.

[...]

I will review my committee work as well as some of the bills we discussed on the House floor.

House Judiciary Work:

S.1 An Act Relating to Consideration of Financial Cost of Criminal Sentencing Options-we passed this bill.

S.148 An Act Relating to Criminal Investigation Records and the Vermont Public Records Act.  We continued our work on this bill.  We heard from The Vermont Digger, League of Cities and Towns and others.

S. 47 An Act Relating to Protection Orders and Second Degree Domestic Assault-we passed this bill.

H.112 Labeling of Genetically Engineered Food. We started our testimony on this.  I hope to continue our work on the bill soon. We are focusing on the constitutional issues.

S.77 Patient Choice and Control at End of Life-we had a joint public hearing with the Human Services Committee and will be taking up the bill this week.

[...]

Week 13 (4/9 – 4/12)

It may be a little bit early to say that the end is in sight, but it is becoming clearer which legislative initiatives will make it to the Governor’s desk, and which won’t make the cut. It would be my guess that we’ll wrap-up the session by mid-May. Here are a couple of the highlights from Week 13:

Decriminalization of Marijuana – On Friday (4/12) the House gave preliminary approval to a bill that would decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana. The vote on this measure was 98 in favor, with 44 opposed (Wilson voting with the majority). This legislation would make the possession of less than an ounce of marijuana a civil offense, punishable by a maximum fine of $300.

[...]

Public Hearing on Tasers:  The House Government Operations Committee is holding a public hearing on policies regarding law enforcement use of Tasers.  The public hearing will be held on Wednesday, April 17 from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. in Room 11.

My Committee Work:  House Judiciary took testimony on the following bills:

S. 31 An Act Relating to Prohibiting a Court from a Consideration of Interests in Revocable Trust or Will When Making a Property Settlement in a Divorce.  This bill addresses a Vermont Supreme Court about future inheritance and divorce. The Court held that a family court could consider third party estate planning.  Witnesses expressed concern that this ruling presents issues of cost, privacy and evidence.  We heard testimony that this means that that third parties may have to testify about their estate plans, which are private in nature.  For example, a grandmother may be asked to testify about what she is leaving her grandchild who is a party to the divorce.  S.31 states that these interests are not allowed to be considered. 

S.47 Relief from Abuse Protective Orders. This is the Senate companion bill to one I introduced in the House on behalf of victims advocates.  This bill addresses relief from abuse protection orders and how the order is to be served.  Current practice puts an extra burden on victim.

[...]