On March 30, 2018

Legislative report: Who can be against lower taxes?

Jim Harrison
Jim Harrison

By Rep. Jim Harrison, R-Bridgewater, Chittenden, Killington & Mendon

This past week, the Vermont House voted on a proposal to lower residential property taxes for education. Who could be against that? After careful consideration, I voted against H.911 when it came up for preliminary approval.

The legislation does lower the residential property tax rate on average, about 15 cents. It also raises about $60 million with a new income tax surcharge that will now be paid by virtually all Vermonters. To me, it is just a rearranging of deck chairs, without addressing issues related to cost containment. It creates an illusion that we have done something on the property tax front, yet come next January we will all see a new line on the Vermont income tax form for the new income tax surcharge (most will see a rate of 0.5 percent).

It is my understanding Governor Scott opposes the legislation for similar reasons, so unless the Legislature is willing to have a dialog on how to tackle the costs of education and put the brakes on tax increases, H.911 as passed by the House, has little chance of becoming law. I am hopeful we can begin those cost reduction conversations in the balance of the session and end up with a product that gets us on a more sustainable path.

I am pleased to see that the House Education Committee will be looking at various items, like how to best negotiate health care benefits, beginning this week. This was an issue I raised for discussion in the form of an amendment to H.911, but did not offer, following an agreement with the House Education Chair to discuss the issue in committee. It is my hope that we will be able to put politics aside and find that elusive solution that benefits all involved, from our volunteer school boards, to valued employees, teachers and taxpayers.

The House Education Committee also deserves credit for bringing forward a proposal to change the way we fund and deliver special education services in the future. It passed the House unanimously, as most believe there is potential to improve on the results while also doing it more cost effectively.

Gun safety
While legislation concerning firearms won’t be completed for another week or two, one of the more controversial measures, S.55, received preliminary approval last Friday, March 23. As I told some of my legislative colleagues last week, I will probably manage to disappoint all of my district constituents with one vote or another through the course of debate on various components of the bill. As I mentioned at our town meetings, I will support measures that I believe will help reduce gun violence and improve school safety, but I am less likely to favor those measures that are designed, in my view, to score political points without addressing the core issues and infringe on constitutional rights of law-abiding Vermonters.

The 10-hour debate and review of S.55 on Friday saw a number of roll call votes on each major section of the bill. I supported a ban on bump stocks, which is also being proposed by the Justice Department, and increasing the age to 21 for rifles with an exemption for those with hunter safety training, military personnel and law enforcement. I opposed other measures of the bill including background checks for private sales (we already have universal background checks for commercial purchases).

While I am supportive of more background checks, I don’t believe the way S.55 was drafted will work. For example, under S.55, it is perfectly legal to avoid Vermont’s requirement when selling a rifle to a friend, by crossing the river and doing it in a New Hampshire parking lot.

Additionally, an amendment to allow individuals to obtain the necessary background checks at a law enforcement office for a modest $10 was rejected by the committee. Under S.55, a private sale buyer has to find a gun retailer to do the background check for them. Does anyone really think that retailers, like Walmart or Dick’s, will be doing background checks for private sales? Probably not, so the easiest way to sell that rifle to your friend legally, is to visit a N.H. parking lot.

Do you want to submit feedback to the editor?

Send Us An Email!

Related Posts

BlueCross BlueShield of Vt seeks to raise insurance rates further

July 24, 2024
If accepted, the new request would increase premiums for individual health plans by 21% and small group plans by 24% in 2025 By Peter D'Auria/VTDigger BlueCross BlueShield of Vermont is seeking to raise health insurance premiums by an additional 4.3% next year, further increasing a request for already near-record-high rate hikes.  The proposed increase would increase premiums for individual…

Gravel rides tell Vermont’s story top to bottom on VTXL cycling route

July 24, 2024
By Charlotte Oliver/Community News Service Editor’s note: The Community News Service is a program in which University of Vermont students work with professional editors to provide content for local news outlets at no cost. From the top of the Northeast Kingdom down toward the Berkshires, the VTXL carves a path the length of Vermont. The biking route takes…

Living with wildlife: Bats in your house?

July 24, 2024
Bats are everywhere! It may feel that way to some of Vermont’s human residents. Summer is when some species of bats gather in colonies to raise their young in human-made structures such as houses, barns, office buildings, and bat houses, but fall is the safe time to get them out. “Summer is the time of…

Annual count shows rise in homelessness

July 24, 2024
The 2024 census recorded 3,458 people homeless in Vermont, a nearly 5% increase over the number tallied in January 2023 By Carly Berlin Editor’s note: This story, by Report for America corps member Carly Berlin, was produced through a partnership between VTDigger and Vermont Public. The number of unhoused Vermonters living without shelter jumped last year,…