Republican gubernatorial candidate Brian Dubie yesterday unveiled his economic development plan, and also gave us his economic philosophy. Essentially he wants to limit the size and growth of government, and his plan is to increase opportunities in the private sector by cutting taxes and limiting the growth of government spending. Which sounds reasonable to me.
It's the presumptive Democratic nominee, Peter Shumlin, whose comments struck me as very odd. In response to the Dubie plan, Mr. Shumlin said
You can’t cut taxes at the same time you’re reducing spending,” said Shumlin.
Huh? Does Mr. Shumlin think that Mr. Dubie should have put forward a plan to cut taxes and increase spending? Or raise taxes and cut spending? I'm very puzzled by Mr. Shumlin's comment, especially given that he's been in the Vermont legislature for many years and should know something about the relationship between taxes and spending.

Mr. Shumlin cannot conceive, in any way possible, of ever letting go of the Tax Teat. To him government is one vast milking machine. Gotta have a dairy reference, it is Vermont, dontcha know.
Posted by: Lazarus Long | August 31, 2010 at 08:16 AM
Does Mr. Shumlin even listen to what he says let alone think about it before he says it?
Posted by: Allan Arbuckle | August 31, 2010 at 08:35 AM
Shumlin, like most Progs, has both feet planted firmly in the air.
Posted by: Cheshire Cat | August 31, 2010 at 10:17 AM
Dubie's response to Shumlin's comments should be along the lines of "No? Just watch me."
You *can* cut taxes. You *can* cut spending. We've had decades of increasing taxes, and decades of increasing spending. So Shumlin's arguing it can only go one way? Color me unsurprised.
Posted by: Chris Campion | August 31, 2010 at 12:45 PM
Not the first time that the supposedly Superior Communicator has gotten it, well, just plain wrong. Remember when he said that Germany gets 30% of its power from renewables, so can we? On Fox TV, right after the Yankee vote? Turns out German renewables account for low, single digits of the total portfolio. He blamed his staff. When he jumped on board the VPIRG float in the Mardi Gras parade, he once again blamed his staff. The list goes on. No wonder his fellow legislators and the statehouse lobbyists voted him as having Least Integrity (Seven Days, 2010). Basically this guy says what he wants, and if he's wrong, so what - there is always someone to blame. The buck never, ever stops with Peter. In my mind, this election is about more than jobs - it's also about character traits that will affect gubernatorial job performance. Neither candidate has said so, or will say so, but to anyone with eyes to see, it is just so obvious.
Posted by: milton newport | August 31, 2010 at 01:50 PM
Reminds me of the time Shumlin said we needed to raise the tobacco tax in Vermont (I think that was the tax in question) to "remain competitive" with New York, which had already raised their tax.
I guess that's why he's so against Yankee. Those low electric bills just aren't competitive with other states who can charge two or three times what we do.
Posted by: R Roper | August 31, 2010 at 02:02 PM
Art,
I found that statement odd as well. Surely he must have meant something else ... at least I would hope so.
Nice comment Rob Roper :-) It is all perspective!
Posted by: Mark Shepard | August 31, 2010 at 03:43 PM
The only time anything which Peter Shumlin says should surprise anyone is if it either (a) makes sense, or (b) if it's the truth. Therefore, one could expect to win the jackpot betting that there will be no surprise any time Peter opens his mouth.
Posted by: Ralph Colin | August 31, 2010 at 05:23 PM
The statement makes perfect sense, if you are a democrate. They cut spending here and create a new program with the money from the cuts so no one loses. A few new fees and all is well.
Posted by: Dennis Lukas | August 31, 2010 at 11:24 PM
Shhhhhhh! When your outspoken enemy is his own worst enemy, the best response is to remain silent until questioned.
Posted by: Bill | September 01, 2010 at 10:07 PM
I am working my way through Brian Dubie's 27 page economic development plan. He appears to address all of the issues although it doesn't go nearly far enough in the area of regulatory reform.
I also printed Art Woolf's 2004 paper delivered at the Atlantic Institute For Market Studies entitled: "Economic Development In Vermont: Making Lemons Out Of Lemonade". Good overview to understand VT's predicament, much of it self-inflicted.
Posted by: greenmtnpunter | September 04, 2010 at 08:56 AM