Questions remain for legislators

Dear Editor,

Prior to Gov. Phil Scott vetoing the bill concerning legislative salary increases and related matters (S.39: An act relating to compensation and benefits for members of the Vermont General Assembly); and, with the Legislature not having overridden the governor’s veto, is a bill that is more than likely to be revisited, yet again, during the 2024 legislative session.

Certain questions arose within my mind about these and related matters, including about what the actual motivations as well as reasons could be behind why someone runs as a candidate in Vermont for either the House of Representatives or the Senate in the first place.

The underlying assumption behind this particular question is that it seems to be more than likely people do not necessarily put themselves forward as a candidate for the state Legislature because of the allure of the salary and, instead, probably do so for myriad other reasons. 

These other reasons could include because they currently are or previously were highly passionate about public service and also about one or more matters (issues) important to them as well as members of the community they have sought to represent and serve.

To my way of thinking as well as by way of observation, rather than the issue of sufficient enough legislative salary being an impediment from either continuing to run for reelection or otherwise seeking election, what might possibly be among the reasons for not running could be complete disillusionment with politics as well as the political process, including at the local and state level, not merely at the federal level.

It could be that, once in office or otherwise having come to the realization regarding how political sausage is actually produced and what goes into it prior to considering running as a candidate, the hopes, idealism as well as vision that initially led them to consider running in the first place ends up being dashed and deep dismay as well as utter frustration with the reality of politics within the state house and at the administrative level sets in, which eventually causes some to give up and bow out.

There are many, including state legislators as well as other political observers, who suggest that politics beneath the Golden Dome in Montpelier is not anything like it is in Washington, DC. However, while true, that is only by a matter of degree, as well as the level of gamesmanship and resulting nastiness at play. 

Having witnessed the political process play out underneath the Golden Dome firsthand over the years, I can easily attest that, oftentimes, political-sausage making is still an ugly and somewhat nasty process at both the legislative and administrative level here in little old Vermont as well.

By the way, in terms of shortening the legislative session as some have proposed (versus raising legislative salaries), I have observed over the years about how the Legislature can get its work accomplished in rather quick order when it chooses to do so. Furthermore, and there can be no disputing the fact on this particular count, the recent veto session held this month (June 20), with its relatively heavy workload, is a prime example of that.

Morgan W. Brown,

Montpelier