A Victory For The Vision

by Geoffrey Norman

To nobody's surprise, the Vermont Senate voted yesterday to close the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant.  The vote was not close.  Not even close to close. 

The final number was 26-4.  So the Senate is clearly ahead of the public which, according to a recent poll, is slightly over 50% in favor of shutting down Yankee.  This is a first and comes, of course, at a time when all the news about Yankee is bad.  Tritium leaks.  Misleading testimony. Rising rates.

The Senate vote is, then, a better reflection of the political Zeitgeist in Vermont than of the voters' feelings.  Vermont's political culture is strongly influenced by the Progressive sensibility and its inclination is, on almost every issue, to make life in Vermont more expensive without necessarily improving it. 

On education, the political class remains committed to a system under which declining enrollments lead to higher spending.  Under this regime, in towns that have reduced their school budgets, citizens find their taxes rising.  The schools are not getting any better.  Merely more expensive.

In Burlington, the jeweled city of the Progressive vision, the public telecom operation cannot compete.  Burlington Telecom's infrastructure is, according to the experts, "state of the art."  But 1/3 of the money spent to make it so came in the form of a secret "taking" from taxpayers.  Without the $17 million loan, Burlington Telecom would have gone broke months ago.  It was necessary to "borrow" the money not to make internet service better in the city but to keep the vision alive.  Every Burlington taxpayer was secretly assessed to further this cause.

Health care providers do not receive full payment when they treat Vermonters whose medical expenses are covered by the state.  The cost is shifted to those who carry private insurance.  For the survival of the system.

Green energy producers are allowed to charge prices that are several multiples above market rates for electricity.  Some kilowatts are more equal than others.

As is some property.  If it is in "current use" or owned by someone whose income is a mere 50% above the median, then that land is taxed at preferred rates.  Still, the top legislators in Montpelier have made it plain that "income sensitivity" is not to be tampered with.   Some landowners will subsidize others.  It's the Vermont way.

Recently, a spokesman for a wind power developer said, straight out, that the project for which he was an advocate could never compete on price with Yankee.  To which, the Vermont political class would no doubt respond ... "So what."

The objection to Yankee has never been, fundamentally, about safety.  If the plant were unsafe, it should be shut down immediately.  And would be.  The plant is having problems which the (new) managers are attempting to fix under the eye of federal regulators.  But this is not good enough.  By the standards of the Progressive vision, nothing would be.  Yankee's kilowatts are unacceptable at any price or even if they were free. 

Expensive electricity, like expensive education, is preferred for its own sake.

And the wherewithal to support this vision?  Who knows?  Certainly not from a robust, growing, thriving private sector economy.  That is antithetical to the vision

Eventually, the legislators in Montpelier will emerge with a plan to keep Vermont marching down this road ... and, by the way, have we mentioned what lousy shape the roads are in?  This, of course, because money from the transportation fund is needed to support other elements of the big vision.

The plan will, no doubt, include tax increases.  Designer kilowatts and gold plated school systems and state of the art non-profit telecom operations don't come cheap, but they are essential if we are to achieve paradise in the Green Mountains. 

Comments

[Tom]

"Health care providers do not receive full payment when they treat Vermonters whose medical expenses are covered by the state. The cost is shifted to those who carry private insurance. For the survival of the system."

As opposed to when they treat Vermonters whose medical expenses are covered by nobody?

Or are you advocating denial of medical treatment?

[GreggB]

Full speed ahead.

[Dennis Lukas]

Does any one know what impact this will have on IBM?

[DJB]

Geoff:love your piece and your educational pieces eg. Kemper, are incredibly informative. BUT nothing will happen until: we get rid of income sensitivity, and find a way to reach and educate 200,000+ voters. Nothing gets ones attention faster than something that affects their pocketbook. We also might check the constitutionality of temporary students voting in Vermont elections. This is plain idiocy. As a Russian friend of mine recently commented, "It's like home to visit you !"

[Ralph Colin]

Geoff,

Unfortunately those in the majority party "working" three days a week, but politicking full time under the Golden Dome don't really give a damn about the rest of us. They won't bother reading your sensible commentary because their arrogance informs them that they don't need to.

Perhaps we'll all be surprised in early November, those of us who do read and care, those on whose shoulders the majority politicians foist the burden for paying the political bills with which they stick us, will up and topple their unsustainable follies. Then, if we are smart, we'll get the hell out of town and let them figure out how to pick up the pieces of the mess their irresponsibility has created.

One can try only for so long to bring some sense to the series of legislative disasters they have perpetrated. After a while the ache from banging one's head against the concrete wall becomes too strong and as they have intended, the will to oppose begins to wane. But before it does, let's kick the bastards out.

[Mark Shepard]

One down and one to go ...

Pollina says he won't make a decision [about entering the Democrat Primary for governor] until after this Legislative session to see if candidates deliver on Progressive priorities like universal health care and closing the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant. If there is action he may support a Democratic candidate, if not-- it makes it more likely he'll run.

Full story: http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=11446250

[Bob McCafferty]

Geoff, I have been told the vote on Vermont Yankee was worded in such a way that the yes vote does not kill it off. I for one would appreciate your further research on this.

[ayne rand]

Read Atlas Shrugged, it will look very familiar.

[Vermonter for Liberty]

Reminds me more of We the Living:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_the_Living

[Daniel Foty]

Some wag once described war as "A series of disasters culminating in victory."

Given this latest installment of hubris-as-"victory," it appears that the local version is a series victories culminating in disaster....

[Cheshire Cat]

It's amazing how Vermont races into the 17th century with these newfangled alternative energy ideas.

Wind power, that reliable method of sailing from one place to another in a zig-zag line IF the wind blows. Seems the naval types were more than happy to rid themselves of that method ASAP.
Shumlin wants to step into the modern age with THAT? The Bedouin are technologically farther along.

Solar in Vermont, give me a break. With an average of 60 clear days a year, you're not going to generate enough juice to blow the leaves off the panels.

The "Save the Lampreys" crowd certainly will join hands with the CLF to prevent any serious hydroelectric production instate. As cool as overshot waterwheels look, nobody is going out in January with an axe to free them of ice.

That leaves the Luddites at the mercies of Quebec and the coal burning plants in the mid-west.

Don't you love it when a Progressive plan comes together!