Legislative Report 3/28/2013 - Taxation Angst

This week and the next the House will be sending three big bills over to the Senate: the transportation bill, the tax bill, and the budget bill. Each of these bills touches on fundamental fiscal responsibilities that we in the legislature take very seriously.

You elected me to be your voice in the legislature, reflecting your concerns about the economy, our infrastructure, our education system, the environment, and how we support our own citizens by ensuring that our fiscal plan reflects your values. You want us to spend wisely and keep in mind that your budget is being stressed as well. By the end of this session we will pass a balanced budget that meets the financial obligations of state government in a fiscally responsible way.

Concerns about tax increases have been at the top of the list of emails and phone calls I’ve received in the past week.  At the statehouse we all share your concern about tax increases.  We have all been looking at cutting spending where appropriate within the areas of our committees' jurisdiction, as well as looking for efficiencies in state programs to avoid tax increases.  Misleading TV ads about "$70 million tax increases by Democrats" as well as misleading claims by special interests serve only to distort the reality we have to work with.  An example is the claim that fuel oil taxes were going to increase by 12 cents per gallon.  The reality is that a nominal 1/2% increase on the wholesale price (less than 2 cents/gallon) was ever considered, and that was dropped because of competing budgetary concerns.  If it had been adopted, it would have meant an increase of $15 to $20 to a household's heating bill for the entire heating season.  This would have helped more homes to get weatherization services to reduce the amount of heating fuel needed.  However, we on the Natural Resources and Energy Committee elected to depend only on current funding sources which will get us through the next heating season.  This means that we'll have to come back to this issue again next year since one of those funding sources resulting from the CVPS-GMP merger will eventually disappear.

This past week the House passed a Transportation Bill that restructures how gasoline taxes are assessed.  The bill is $4 million less than what was requested by the Agency of Transportation and $800,000 less than last year's budget.  The restructuring of the gas tax was essential because of the huge decrease in gas tax revenues leading to underfunding of needed road and bridge repair work and other transportation services.  About 39 million fewer gallons of gas were purchased in Vermont in 2012 compared to 2005 because of more efficient vehicles and fewer miles being driven.  While this is good for the environment, it does not produce the revenues needed to maintain our aging roads and bridges essential to keeping drivers safe.  This year’s Transportation bill has split the taxation of gasoline between a cents-per-gallon basis and a percentage of the price per gallon (minus state and federal per gallon taxes).   This will lead to a 6.9 cent increase in 2014, rising to 7.7 cents in 2015, and 8.8 cents in 2016 at current prices.  (In comparison, New Hampshire just voted to increase their gasoline tax by 12 cents/gallon.) It is also worth noting that 1/3 of our gas tax revenues are collected from out of state drivers.

A common criticism is that the Transportation Fund is being raided for other purposes.  While this may have been true in the past, it is no longer so.  Other than transportation infrastructure expenses, the only other programs receiving Transportation Fund money are a small percentage for Fish and Wildlife-related transportation expenses and $25 million for DUI enforcement by State Police.

I appreciate your concern about rising taxes and will seek to critically balance the needs of Vermont taxpayers with the needs to keep Vermont healthy, strong and everything that makes Vermont a great place to live and work.

You can reach me by phone (425-3960) or by email (myantachka.dfa@gmail.com).

The Word in the House 3/21/2013 - Crossing Over

Last week marked “crossover” at the Statehouse.  Any bill, in order to stand a chance of becoming law this year, had to be voted out of its committee of jurisdiction last Friday.  This was true whether the bill originated in the House or the Senate. Those bills will now come to the floor of their respective body for a vote where they will have to pass before being sent to the other body. 

The Transportation Bill, which I wrote about last month will be voted on this week.  Several amendments are expected to be offered from the floor, but I expect that it will pass with a tripartisan majority.  Here are some other bills of general interest that we will be voting on. (Passed 3/21/13)

Health Care: A technical corrections health care bill, H. 107, makes a number of changes to Vermont law to bring Vermont's health insurance statutes in line with the requirements of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).  It also clarifies a 2009 law that requires insurance companies to cover the cost of mammograms and colonoscopies without an additional copay.  Some people have been charged for certain procedures associated with their mammogram or colonoscopy that could be considered a violation of the intent of the 2009 law.  This bill explicitly affirms that all parts of the screening need to be covered without additional copay.
The House also passed H.315 that requires companies headquartered out of state to provide to their Vermont employees with same sex married or civil union partners the same benefits provided to employees married to opposite sex partners.  Some businesses were not doing so because it wasn’t required by law and it wasn’t their policy.  They made it known that they would not challenge this legislation if it passed. 
Opiate Addiction and Methamphetamine Abuse: Vermont has some serious problems with issues related to drug addiction and abuse. The Human Services Committee combined elements of H.331, H.212, and H.65 in a single bill, H.522, relating to “Strengthening Vermont’s Response to Opioid Addiction and Methamphetamine Abuse.” It includes work done by the General, Housing and Military Affairs Committee and the Judiciary Committee.
In order to further attempts to prevent abuse of prescription drugs, one part makes changes in how the Vermont Prescription Monitoring System (VPMS) is to be used. It would allow the Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner of Health to provide a report of data in the VPMS to the Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner of Public Safety, but only when it is necessary to avert a serious and imminent threat to a person or the public. Any request from Public Safety for data must document a bona fide specific investigation and specify the name of the person being investigated. The decision by the Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner of Health to provide that report can be made only after consulting with at least one of the patient’s health care providers.
Another part of the bill requires that any health care provider who prescribes and any dispenser who dispenses a Schedule II, III, or IV controlled substance must register to use the VPMS. A health care provider will be required to check the VPMS at least the first time the provider prescribes one of those controlled substances to a patient and annually thereafter so the provider will know if any other providers are also prescribing the same or similar medications.
In order to improve access to treatment and recovery for Vermonters with drug addictions, the bill asks the Department of Health, in collaboration with several relevant organizations, to develop evidence-based guidelines and training for hospitals regarding screening for addiction, performing addiction interventions and making referrals to treatment and recovery services. It also includes a statewide pilot project seeking to prevent deaths from opioid overdoses by using a counteracting drug such as Narcan.
Another section relates to the use of an electronic registry system to record the sales of products such as Sudafed and others with similar ingredients that are used to make methamphetamines. This is to prevent individuals from purchasing those products in quantities that would indicate the products would likely be used to make meth rather than for legitimate health purposes. Passage of this bill will provide help for Vermonters with drug addictions as well as attacking other aspects of the drug problems in Vermont.
This bill also contained the provisions regarding precious metal dealers that require licensing and accurate record keeping in order to deter the exchange of stolen articles for cash. (Passed 3/21/13)
I have heard from many of you on a variety of topics and continue to welcome your input. You can email me at myantachka.dfa@gmail.com or call me at 425-3960.

Legislative Report 3/14/2013 - Doyle Poll Results

One of the highlights of Town Meeting across Vermont is the opportunity Vermonters have of registering their opinions on a variety of issues in the Doyle Poll.  This survey has been conducted for many decades by Senator Bill Doyle, and this year 139 Charlotters filled out the survey, 55 more than last year.  Here for your consideration is a tally of the responses.

 
Q#
 
Question
 
Yes
 
No
Not Sure
 
%Yes
 
%No
%Not Sure
1
Should Vermont continue efforts to close Vermont Yankee?
80
45
14
58%
32%
10%
2
Should drivers be prohibited from using cell phones while driving?
92
31
16
66%
22%
12%
3
Should Vermont decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana?
92
39
8
66%
28%
6%
4
Should a 3 year moratorium be placed on development of ridgeline wind?
35
91
13
25%
66%
9%
5
Do you believe VT’s bottle deposit law should be expanded to include all bottled beverages?
111
19
9
80%
14%
6%
6
Should the gas tax be increased to pay for roads and bridges?
57
73
9
41%
53%
6%
7
Should sugar sweetened beverages be taxed?
75
56
8
54%
40%
6%
8
Should we reduce the VT prison population via alternatives for nonviolent offenders?
100
15
24
72%
11%
17%
9
Do you believe that locally grown food is an important part of Vermont’s economic future?
124
7
8
89%
5%
6%
10
Should Vermont trained law enforcement personnel be permitted to use Tasers?
71
37
31
51%
27%
22%
11
Do you believe growing hemp would be an asset to Vermont’s economy?
69
33
37
50%
24%
26%
12
Are statewide cell service and broadband important to the future of Vermont’s economy?
127
4
8
91%
3%
6%
13
Should natural gas be an important part of Vermont’s economy?
63
36
40
45%
26%
29%
14
Do you think Governor  Peter Shumlin is doing a good job?
67
41
31
48%
30%
22%

Most of the questions differed from last year’s poll, but questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 14 were similar if not the same.  Charlotters continue to strongly support efforts to close Vermont Yankee, prohibit use of cell phones while driving, expand the bottle deposit law, and decriminalize small amounts of marijuana.  Many commented that hands-free cell phone use should be allowed, however.  A large majority does not want a moratorium on ridgeline wind development. Governor Shumlin, while receiving a good report card from a plurality of respondents, dropped below 50% in the survey. 

Respondents were split on two questions relating to taxation.  While most disapproved of raising taxes on gasoline, most did approve of taxing sugar sweetened beverages.  Gasoline tax revenues have fallen in recent years because of a reduction in driving and an increase in the efficiency of vehicles on the road, and the state risks losing federal highway dollars if state revenues can’t be restored.  Sugar sweetened beverages are considered to be major contributors to obesity, diabetes and other health problems, and the tax has been proposed to discourage consumers from buying them.  I’m grateful to everyone who took the time to fill out the poll this year. 

You can contact me by phone at 425-3960 or email me at myantachka.dfa@gmail.com.