vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

Political notes from Free Press staff writers Terri Hallenbeck, Sam Hemingway and Nancy Remsen

6.15.2007

July it is

House Speaker Gaye Symington has decided to leave the veto session on the July 11 date, she announced this morning. It seems Minority Leader Steve Adams' opposition to changing the date pulled some weight.

I'm sure you've read about how she considered delaying the veto session two months to Sept. 11. If not, click HERE or go out and plunk 50 cents down at your favorite little store and settle with the print edition.

Five Democrats can't make it July 11, Symington says. That's four more than weren't there for the last veto override vote - on the budget adjustment bill in April. She said she wanted to make sure as many people as possible could be there.

She will take heat for even considering the move. An override on the energy bill would be tough to pull off no matter when the session is held. The campaign finance bill, though, might be a different story. Can the Democrats pull that one off.

- Terri Hallenbeck

posted by vt.Buzz | 9:40 AM |

Comments:

The legislative session isn't 24x7, or even 8x5...why can't the legislators make it for when it convenes?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:56 AM, June 15, 2007

So the million dollar question - how many house member votes does the Speaker need to override a veto? This appears to be a trickier question than it seems.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:04 AM, June 15, 2007

This doesn't get any more transparent. Symington counted the vote, discovered that there were no new arms to twist, and realized that a veto override is an impossibility.

So what does Bill Lofy have Madame Speaker do? Put the word out that a number of Democratic Reps (poor dears) can't make July 11th and suggest a much later date. All the while, knowing that she has no intention of pushing the date back. No - its those damn obstinate Republicans who aren't willing to go with a new date.

So - the veto override fails, and its not Symington's fault. Blame the Republicans. Clever tactic, but woefully obvious. Good try Bill – but you need to do a little better next time.

Notice that several Repubicans are interupting their vacations (one of whom is making a special trip back) just to be there on July 11th. But five Democrats can't be bothered to interupt their vacation? Pathetic.

You get the Government you deserve.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:41 PM, June 15, 2007

How come no one talks about the "lock-step" walk of the GOP - here or in Wash DC.

Republicans will vote for a bill - however, when the bill is vetoed they lock in on a no-vote -- to protect teh Governor and their party!

Talk about flip flop and lack of leadership or vision!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:47 PM, June 15, 2007

follow Governor Veto.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:51 PM, June 15, 2007

How can 5 Democrats not make the veto session? Don't they understand that this is the most important piece of legislation facing our state this year? Don't they realize that there is virtually no chance of overriding the veto if they don't make it?

Who are these 5 Democrats and how can we contact them?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:08 PM, June 15, 2007

Good question about whether the D's can pull off overriding the veto of the campaign finance bill.

That one will come up first in the Senate on July 11. With the D's holding a 23-7 majority in the Senate, they could lose 3 votes and still have the 20 votes needed to override. Plus a Republican or two (Diane Snelling?) might vote in favor of overriding.

If the Senate does override the campaign finance veto and that bill then goes over to the House, the House would probably vote on campaign finance after the vote on energy. Some of the D's who will vote to sustain the Gov's veto on energy might vote to override on campaign finance. Also, all of the Progs should vote yes on overriding the campaign finance veto. If there are no defections among Dems and Progs, there just might be enough votes in the House to override on campaign finance.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:20 PM, June 15, 2007

Outrageous - the Republicans are stealing away from their vacations to make the special session and FIVE - count them - FIVE Democrats can't be bothered.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:28 PM, June 15, 2007

If Warren Kitzmiller doesn't make it back from his Montana vacation to vote on July 11, the Democratic voters of Montpelier should toss him out in the September 08 primary along with Jon Anderson.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:15 PM, June 15, 2007

Bring back Ralph Wright! Bring back Obie!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:18 PM, June 15, 2007

OK - so who the hell are these other 4 Democrats? Where are they?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:13 PM, June 15, 2007

Obie was a lump.

Kitzmiller pulling a Susan Bartlett? Not good ... thought that he was more reliable than that.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:15 PM, June 15, 2007

Where are the other 4 Democrats???!!!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:50 PM, June 15, 2007

The question is why Madame Speaker pushed the override vote all the way back to July 11 in the first place. An override session is traditionally held right after the session is over. She was trying to game the system in the first place by pushing it all the way out to July 11, to make sure her frolicking Democrats could all be there, and to buy time to twist arms. Then that date didn't look good, so she tried to re-game it by shooting for September. Then she takes immediate heat for that ploy so she goes back to July 11. A decisive leader. Message to Symington: no matter how many schemes you try, you don't have the votes for an override. Find another way to fund this bill and you'll get what you want. Then next year, if you still think VY is underpaying in property taxes, you can deal with that issue straight on and legitimately. For now, whether VY is underpaying or not, you miscalculated and you'll never get past the stench connected with the confiscatory funding scheme on this bill.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:00 PM, June 15, 2007

That stench eminating from Mr. Peter "Slimeball" Shumlin.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:02 PM, June 15, 2007

Name calling? Wow. Very grown up.

Thanks for your insight.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:27 PM, June 15, 2007

To the person who said that this is "the most important piece of legislation facing our state this year." Consider this tragic irony: the blii would probably already be law if it weren't for Pete Shumlin. He doomed it from the start by insisting that it be funded by a new tax on Vt. Yankee. Guess what? There were several other possible funding sources, but Shumlin wouldn't consider any alternatives. Iv'e talked to a couple of the Democrats who voted against it and who won't change their minds on an override. They said that they voted against it only because of the slam against VY, and that there were funding alternatives. So we have the stubborn author of the bill, Shumlin, to thank for the fact that it won't pass. Everyone who thinks that this is important legislation should be angyr ay Shumlin, and not anybody else.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:50 PM, June 15, 2007

Forget namecalling - how do we impeach Shumlin?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:33 PM, June 15, 2007

The most important piece of legislation never made it out of the legislature this year - property tax reform!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:37 PM, June 15, 2007

In today's Free Press Symington is quoted as saying she'll drive all the way down to New Jersey if she has to, to pick up Democrat Alice Miller, for the override vote on July 11. Considering that Symington knows that the override vote will fail, burning all that gas to drive all the way to New Jersey and back would be a sin against global warming wouldn't it? Another irony in the Dems failed leadership on this bill.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:14 AM, June 16, 2007

It's basic math. She's willing to burn 30 gallons of gas in order to save hundreds of thousands ... it's a net savings.

Duh.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:34 AM, June 16, 2007

There is no way the veto can be over-ridden - even with all the D's there - too many of them will be voting to sustain - it is futile and the reps with other plans know it.

Not only would they be wasting gas to get back to Vermont but they'd be wasting their time.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:00 AM, June 16, 2007

Impeach the 5 Democrats who can't make it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:26 PM, June 16, 2007

Impeach Symington and Shumlin.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:57 PM, June 16, 2007

Can't we get some new leadership? I am not a Republican and never will be but I can't see anything worth voting for in this Democratic leadership. It is a group completely lacking in any real passionate leadership.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:57 PM, June 16, 2007

We need a tax on legilative stupidity. If there was only a way of measuring that...

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:14 AM, June 17, 2007

I'm a Democrat and I agree there's a lack of leadership in the Senate. Shummy is smart but self-centered. Ask yourselves what the other option was, though? John Campbell? Susan Bartlett? Who are we kidding -- Shummy is the best of the worst.

As for Symington, you people have got to lay off. She has been a punching bag because Welch was running for Congress and couldn't tackle the big issues, and now that Shummy is so obviously running for Governor he is throwing her under the bus the same way. She is a strong leader with a Democratic caucus that is unruly and a Senate leader that behaves like a spoiled teenager (he does whatever he wants whenever he wants, no matter how it affects others). Give her some credit for keeping her head above water with the group of misfits she's been handed.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:17 PM, June 17, 2007

John Campbell is a good guy who commands the respect of Democrats and Republicans alike. He is smart, respected, and above all - honest. I would agree that Shumlin is smart, and I think most people would share the same opinion on his other attributes.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:06 PM, June 17, 2007

Bill Lofy for Speaker! Oh, wait - he already is.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:38 AM, June 18, 2007

At least if Shumlin runs for governor in 08, there will be a new pro tem in 09-10.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:33 PM, June 18, 2007

If only our media inc. the reporters from the Freeps would cover information correctly.

On this issue of moving the date from July to Sept, the media knew and ignored by focusing on the '5 Dems who will be away' that the real reason was that the Speaker and Pro Tem were considering having the appropriate committees meet over the summer to see if any compromise with the Governor was possible.

It took 5 months to debate, write and pass H.520 - and the Governor wants the legislature to pass his energy proposal in one day! Without debate! Without details!

In fact, go ask the Governor right now for a copy of the legislation - you won't get one because it is not written.

One of the questions which the media has not asked -- when was the last time the Governor or his staff contacted the Speaker or Pro Tem since the end of the session?

Answer: Not once - why? Because the Governor wants this as a "political issue" going into next campaign season!!!

Yes, it is true, the Governor and his political hacks (read Jason Gibbs and Neale Lunderville) are the most political people in the statehouse.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:12 PM, June 18, 2007

Bill Lofy - go back to whatever state you came from.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:44 PM, June 18, 2007

Shumlin should run for Governor and
Matt Dunne should run for Lt. Governor again. They could win this time.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:09 PM, June 18, 2007

"In fact, go ask the Governor right now for a copy of the legislation - you won't get one because it is not written."

Nor will it ever be written, smart guy, because the Gov. is talking about implementing his proposal by Executive Order.

As for an earlier posting, if the Senate hadn't been so cowed by "charisma," they would and should have elected Campbell as Pro Tem last fall in the first place, not Shumlin. Shumlin waltzes back into the senate in Jan. 2007 after a 4 year absence and pushes Campbell aside in his egotistical desire to be Pro Tem -- and the majority of the Senate goes along with it! Why? Well, obviously not because they love and respect Shumlin (who could?), but because they felt that Shumlin would stand up to the Gov. and give the Senate more "standing" than Campbell would. Shame on them for throwing the guy who deserved the post under the bus. Imagine the Shumlin-shenanigans that would have been avoided this session had someone else been Pro Tem.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:31 PM, June 18, 2007

Wow, there is a fatal flaw in your argument. Yes, Shumlin is a bad Senate President because he does what's politically expedient and not what's best for the state, but to argue that John Campbell is the right guy for the job is just wrong. He's a great guy with a good work ethic who couldn't lead his way out of a cardboard box -- not to mention the fact that he's essentially a republican. The Senators had a choice between dishonest yet tactful liberal or loyal yet weak conservative. Those are terrible odds.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:10 PM, June 18, 2007

First, I don't think it is correct to label Campbell a "conservative." More conservative than you, maybe. But not a conservative.

Second, the Senators had a choice between following age-old tradition, which dicated electing the leader who was in the Senate when they took a big majority. That was Campbell. Or, throwing tradition aside and electing a pro tem who hadn't been in the Senate for 4 years. They should have stuck with tradition and elected Campbell. That's proven to be more true now that the session is over and we see just how rotten Shumlin has behaved.

Third, you say Shumlin is "dishonest but tactful." I respectfully disagree. Dishoest is true, but tactful certainly isn't. I'd say dishonest and tactless. That's not a winning combination. His decision to seek the pro tem position by pushing aside Campbell? Not tactful. His attitude toward the Governor? Not tactful. His flip-flopping on impeachment and his throwing of Symington under the bus on that issue? Not tactful. His shrill attacks on the Governor on the Yankee-tax issue? Not tactful.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:06 PM, June 18, 2007

Shumlin is the same creature he has always been - assuming he was the "new" Shumlin was the senates mistake.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:43 AM, June 19, 2007

Campbell a conservative?

What planet have you people been on. Lets not forget - Campbell introduced legislation to provide same-sex mariage. Shumlin squashed it like a bug.

So who's the conservative?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:02 PM, June 19, 2007

If Gaye Symington was such a "strong leader" she would not let anyone throw her under the bus.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:24 PM, June 20, 2007

I heard that!!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:29 PM, June 20, 2007

. . . shouted Symmington, from under the bus.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:10 PM, June 21, 2007

Did I hear right? Is Matt Dunne running for Governor in '08?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:22 PM, June 21, 2007

Why not? He's been planning it for about 10 years now, hasn't he?

I'd love to see Dunne and Shumlin kill each other. If Shumlin lost the primary, he'd be so pissed I doubt he'd wholeheartedly support Dunne. He'd go back to Brattleboro and sulk.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:55 PM, June 21, 2007

Dunne could beat Shumlin

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:59 AM, June 22, 2007

Oh, yeah!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:37 PM, June 22, 2007

Dunne is overtly ambitious and that's unattractive. But I'd love to see him beat Shumlin in a primary. Maybe then Putney Pete, who at that point would be a two-time statewide race loser, will then call it quits and stop tormenting Vermonters with his childish, self-centered, and erratic behavior.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:54 AM, June 23, 2007