In the face of an impending pay-wall I clicked on the last of my twenty free articles in the New York Times to read
Vermont Exercising Option to Balance the Budget
It is hardly more than a quick peak at what is familiar to Vermonters
Technically, Vermont could play fast and loose in this season of fevered budget-chopping: it happens to be the only state with no budget-balancing requirement.
But Vermont, it turns out, is a fiscal goody two-shoes.
A fiscal goody two shoes (fewgadsake ‘take two Norman Rockwells out of petty cash for that reporter’ But can’t the New York Times do better than that if they want people to pay?) However it all burnishes Shumlin’s maple syrup versus vinegar credentials established at his testimony to the Congressional Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The Times references the Public Assets Institute support for a Snelling style solution of temporarily raising income and sales taxes and notes the 50 wealthy Vermonter’s begging to pay higher taxes. Quoting Progressive State Rep.Paul Poirier (where was Anthony Pollina ?).
“In the last three years, our little state of Vermont has cut over $300 million in direct services to people,” Mr. Poirier said. “Why not ask people who have done well during this recession to step up and pay a little more?”
I don’t agree with it but it’s understandable that the last thing in the world Peter Shumlin wants in the current political environment is to go into his reelection having raised taxes. He is smart and can turn on a dime when the need arises but right now, no way will he hand the Republicans and issue to bang him over head with. Got to admit to liking Shumlin and being very pleased he’s governor, but it rankles and he may just as well run his fingernails over a chalk board as say stuff like this
“But we’re already asking a lot of our wealthy residents.”Former Vermont governor Jim Douglas coughed up this stuff everyday for eight years, too bad we are still hearing it from a Democrat.
No comments:
Post a Comment