Stop-Us-Before-We-Win-Again (II) 
By Martin Harris

The major premise of my argument in these columns is that several recent legislative actions were carefully designed so that part of the public will be satisfied by apparent effort while the other, more important bloc of voters is pleased by a deliberate avoidance of actual results. For example, if you think of it as a step forward, then a step back, you’ll see that the recent school-tax two-step – a pretense at addressing costs, followed by –guess what—nothing actually accomplished-- is a prime illustration. Some observers ascribe such sequence-of-events to legislative ineptitude, but I would respectfully disagree. My minor (supporting) premise is that "nothing in politics happens by accident", a quote which originated with 4-term President and ultimate politician Franklin Roosevelt. The nothing-by-accident observation gives credence to the observation that such effective choreographing of legislative "action" requires more skill (and intelligence) than average, not less. On some level of competence-recognition, you have to admire the political skills of successive Legislatures which have propelled an entire State from somewhere near, or even below, average in terms of government employment and spending back in the ‘60’s to the very top in national rankings of the States today, and have done so without ever triggering any serious political resistance or backlash.

One example of that skill has shown up in year-after-year well-beyond-inflation school spending increases, which are defended by Golden Dome folk even while they posture as greatly concerned over an "affordability crisis." An even better example is unfolding even now, as Vermont Yankee’s nuclear operating license clock ticks down toward renewal (or not) in 2012. Already, the shut-it-down street theatre has started, with various anti-nuclear groups (all with enormous depth of nuclear-engineering expertise, of course) demanding a cold shut-down by 2012 if not before. Most recently, one of those groups (Rutland) imported from Japan an anti-nuclear expert/Buddhist nun, a direct descendant of the folks who brought "Pearl Harbor" into the national vocabulary (don’t test your recent high school grad on this aspect of American history) to beat her drums against nuclear power in the US, although it’s apparently OK in her view for Japan to use it, as The Land of the Rising Sun has been doing (now with re-processed plutonium, no less) since 1966.

If you follow what appears to be State-wide public opinion as reflected by Letters to the Editor, street demonstrations, rallies and meetings, you might logically conclude that, if put to a vote, the future of Vermont Yankee would be sealed tomorrow, with an immediate shut-down. Probably so. And, of course, the Golden Dome folk are well-attuned to public opinion, so that, if polled, I’d guess that they too would glibly express a majority shut-it-down opinion, for public consumption. But, I’d also guess, they’re smart enough to prevent such a shut-down from happening. After all, the legislative body which gets to decide on VY’s future, presumably after receiving a recommendation from the Public Service Department, is composed almost entirely of folks whose intelligence level would be (with only a couple of exceptions) positioned very definitely on the right-hand side of Charles Murray’s famous intelligence-measurement bell curve, who fully understand the economic impact of choosing to do without a third or so of the electricity Vermont uses, and likewise fully understand the improbability of replacing the lost power with towers on ridges, which even now they’re figuring on taxing into nonprofitability for environmental reasons. At the very least, they can readily comprehend what such a shut-down would do to tax revenues, and for that reason alone would choose to extend the license, even while explaining to the shut-it-down folks why they really didn’t want to do so, had no choice, were pressured by some really bad people, and so on.

A further prediction: even though the major national environmental groups are now crawfishing away from their former hostility to nuclear power (in the 10 April edition of The Wall Street Journal, Environmental Defense Fund attorney James Marston says "we’re willing to take another look at it.") Vermont legislators aren’t and won’t. Don’t look for the once-planned Shoreham plant to be resurrected any time soon; therefore, look for Vermont’s power costs to remain among the nation’s highest and for non-residential development to falter and most probably shrink as a result. Which, of course, is the underlying goal, to be quietly applauded and not decried, although, of course, never admitted.

Martin Harris is a former Director of Citizens for Property Rights