Phil Scott’s vetoes mean we all lose

Phil Scott has vetoed nearly 70 bills in his decade as Governor, more bills than all other Vermont governors combined. So often, Scott has chosen to use his veto pen rather than negotiating skills when faced with policy disagreements. Three of Scott’s vetoes this session are especially concerning because the bills would have lowered health care costs, protected our water and electric grid, and saved Vermonters money.

1)  This week Scott vetoed S.190, a bill that would have reduced health care costs and property taxes for people across Vermont. The bill focused on reducing the cost of health insurance plans for public school employees, as well as individuals and businesses who buy health insurance plans through Vermont Health Connect. High health care costs are a major cost driver for school budgets, so reducing the cost of teacher health plans means reining in school budgets and property taxes for everyone. Reducing health care costs for VT Health Connect plans means helping Vermonters who lost their federal health insurance subsidies, thanks to Trump, and saw the steepest increases in health insurance premiums this year. These individuals and small businesses absolutely need a break.

Democrats in the Legislature passed S.190 to save you money (most Republicans voted against the bill). S.190 would target first-steps in the Green Mountain Care Board reference-based pricing program on these health plans so that we could reduce school budgets and property taxes, and so teachers, individuals, and small businesses could also reduce the amount they spend on health insurance. Implementing reference-based pricing is a big job, so it just makes sense to start with what’s most urgent. Phil Scott and Republicans apparently didn’t think this was fair, so they decided to help nobody.

2)  Phil Scott vetoed H.727, a bill that would have set strict requirements for large data centers that wanted to set up shop in Vermont. I worked on this bipartisan bill in the Senate Natural Resources Committee. It would have prevented a data center from raising our electric rates, contaminating Vermont waters, increasing greenhouse gas emissions, and bullying small towns. In fact, it would have required large data centers to make annual payments to local communities to help improve renewable energy options. Read this excellent op-ed by Rep. Kathleen James, who chairs the House Energy Committee where the bill started.

Scott vetoed the bill saying it would send the wrong message to companies, and even House Republicans who originally voted for the bill would not vote to override the veto. Democrats wanted to protect Vermonters and our communities, but Phil Scott and the Republicans chose to protect large corporations and data centers that have been taking advantage of communities, raising electric rates, and harming the environment around the country. In fact, last week it was reported that Phil Scott has been in discussions with a company that might want to bring a data center to Vermont, so it is clear where his priorities lie. 

3)  Scott also vetoed S.218, a bill that would have helped snow plow drivers use less salt and protect our water from chloride contamination. The bill would have set up a voluntary training program for snow plow drivers, set standards for salt use, and provided drivers with incentives & protections to use less salt. Based on a successful program in New Hampshire and using many best practices already followed by VTrans snow plow drivers, the program would have helped prevent much more expensive fixes later as our rivers, lakes, and drinking water see increasing levels of salt contamination. Road salt is expensive and increasingly difficult to get, so incentives & protections for using less would have saved towns and businesses money.

I work every day to try to find solutions for my constituents, to save you money, reduce your cost of living, protect our communities and the resources we need. When Phil Scott vetoes bills that focus on common sense solutions to real problems facing Vermont, siding with huge corporations over everyday people, it means all Vermonters lose. We need leaders who won’t simply refuse good ideas, prioritize corporate interests, or walk away from solving a difficult problem.

Thank you for your support.