Will the New Year Bring Change? 
By Pete Behr

When this commentary reaches you, the Vermont Legislature will have begun its 2007 session. Partly due to Republican failure to exercise fiscal restraint in Washington, the Democrats have taken over both houses of Congress, and strengthened their majority position in our State Legislature.

Now, will Vermont Democrats exercise the fiscal restraint they rightly accused the Republicans of abandoning? If so, we will see property tax reform, abandonment of the universal pre-kindergarten idea and no tinkering with the Catamount health plan. Such a refreshing scenario would astonish a lot of people, including your writer.

There are already signs that the Democrat leadership will not address the issues they promised to face during their campaigns. Peter Shumlin, the well worn but newly elected leader of the Senate, is back in office, having served four years of penitence for failing in his effort to seek a higher position. The word is that he has eschewed the issues important to the electorate, and is now making global warming his main focus. Apparently taking a page from Al Gore’s book, he is returning to the scene as an environmental messiah. Give me a break! We Vermonters could all live in igloos and survive the winter on root vegetables, but our contribution to the diminution of global warming would be inconsequential. (Don’t get me wrong, global warming is real, but it is a national and world problem, and Shumlin is only trying to divert attention away from Vermont issues he doesn’t want to face.) Stick to the subject, Pierre.

Will Vermont Go High Tech?

The Vermont Legislature is back in session, but the main agenda items have not fully emerged. One idea which seems to have bipartisan endorsement is that Vermont should become an eco-technology center. Senator Peter Shumlin, president pro-tem of the senate, uses Silicon Valley in California as an example. Governor Douglas is on the bandwagon, too, proposing new technical schools to develop the talent needed for this new thrust, and an Environmental Engineering Advisory Council to help woo companies to Vermont.

I wonder what the time frame is for such development. Silicon Valley, which is located south of San Francisco, was spawned by engineers and scientists from Stanford, like David Packard and William Hewlett, who famously started Hewlett-Packard in their garage. They were joined by scores of other companies over the past five decades or so, with companies like Yahoo and Google being recent arrivals, also with Stanford roots. A similar phenomenon occurred in suburban Boston, with M. I. T. being the technology incubator. Across the Connecticut River, we have a mini-Silicon Valley along Etna Road and other locations, with thriving companies established through Dartmouth connections.

In all these cases, and in many other technology centers, particularly in the West, entrepreneurs were backed by venture capitalists who saw the promise of start-up business plans. Does Vermont have the attraction to accomplish such a revolution?

Who is rich? 

I watched a program on CNBC which focused on the Democrats’ vow to stop the tax breaks for the rich. The problem was to define the rich. One person said $70,000 per year income was rich, which means that the Act 60/68 definition of needy is wrong, since Vermont property owners with incomes up to $106,000 get some property tax relief. Does that make sense?

David Brooks, in the New York Times on January 4 wished that rich Republicans would make peace with equally rich Democrats, using George Bush and Nancy Pelosi as examples. He compared hedge fund managers (apparently Republican) with "helipad environmentalists" (apparently Democrat). He says Pelosi is a creature of the modern fund raising system, saying she has achieved her leadership role because she is a master of the thousand-dollar-a-plate fund raising circuit, which says a lot about U. S. politics.

Many of our leading politicians, from both parties, come from wealthy families, like the Roosevelts, Kennedys and Bushes. But one can get rich in a hurry, as Bill Clinton has proven since he left office. Campaigning in Hollywood gave him a taste for the good things in life, and now he and Hillary have a private jet at Westchester airport. Only in America!

Then we have the corporate barons, whose yearly pay often equals far more than average, well educated, hardworking citizens can earn in a lifetime. And when they fail to perform, they walk away with a multi-million dollar settlement package. Charlie Munger, vice-chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, who receives $100,000/year in salary (but who is a billionaire investor), believes compensation consultants are partly responsible for runaway CEO salaries saying "I have always said that prostitution would be a step up for these people." (This is from an interview published in the January 7 Valley News.) There is more, but I don’t have the space. I’ll save it for later.

-- Pete Behr writes a regular column for the Vermont Standard