Energy bill would hurt Vermont’s economic environment  
By Rob Roper

If anything is raising the temperature in Vermont these days, it’s the increasingly heated rhetoric over H.520 and the impending veto session that will decide its fate. It’s ironic that such an excess of political energy is being spent so inefficiently on a bill whose goal is supposed to be energy efficiency and conservation. Maybe it’s time for everyone to take a deep breath of clean Vermont air. Just don’t exhale too much carbon dioxide!

The question Vermonters should ask is why — after Democrat leaders Peter Shumlin and Gaye Symington made global warming their premier issue for the legislative session, spent the whole legislative session coming up with this bill, and after all the media coverage surrounding it — does H.520 not have enough legislative or popular support to become the law of the land (and air and water)?

When you come down to it, H.520 is not a particularly interesting idea, it has never been a particularly good piece of legislation, and, even as mundane as it is, we still can’t afford to pay for it.

This bill has been hyped as the biggest, boldest, coolest (pun intended) piece of climate change legislation ever. In reality, all H.520 really does is raise more taxes, hire a bunch of bureaucrats to tell people how to better insulate their homes or businesses, and subsidize a handful of pet projects. Are some aspects of the bill worthwhile? Sure. But bold and visionary? Do Vermonters really buy the notion that without H.520, "our children and grandchildren’s future will be unspeakably horrid," as Peter Shumlin claims? Al Gore’s phoned-in endorsement notwithstanding, come on!

Vermont is already a leader in the world of environmental stewardship. We don’t need H.520 to claim that title. But H.520 could bring with it the unintended consequence of helping us lose that title. Here’s how:

The real problems facing Vermont today are not our sterling environmental policies. The real problems that we must deal with now are a 0.6 percent job growth rate in our state. Our property tax system is spiraling out of control. Two-thirds of all Vermont households now can’t afford to buy a median-priced home in the state (let alone retro-fit one, subsidy or not). We have the fastest-growing incarceration rate in the country. We are among the highest-taxed people in the country. And the high costs and lack of opportunities in Vermont are driving away our businesses, our young people and our young families. This is not just our future tax base walking away, it’s our whole future.

While Vermonters will continue to do an exemplary job of maintaining our natural environment, this Legislature has severely neglected our economic environment. It’s time to re-establish a sensible economic/environmental balance, because if we don’t fix the former, we will not be able to afford the latter. The debate over H.520 should make this reality crystal clear. A big reason why H.520 is so bland is because we don’t have — and can’t responsibly raise — the money to do anything else! As Peter Shumlin stated correctly early this year, Vermonters are tapped out, and there is no more taxing capacity left in our state.

How did we get into this mess? State economist Jeff Carr recently outlined the crisis: The risks specifically facing Vermont’s economy are the perception of Vermont as a "high-tax state with an inadequate workforce, a relatively high price of electricity compared to the U.S. as a whole, and a perception that a high cost of living in Vermont could deter entrepreneurs from investing in and growing a business in the state."

For whatever good intentions come with H.520, the results of this bill would make every one of the problems Carr cites worse. It relies on higher taxes and aims to punish a successful business and employer that happens to supply one-third of our electricity cheaply, which will raise our electric bills, inflating the cost of living, which, in turn, will continue to drive out our young workforce.

Gov. Douglas was right to veto H.520, and a bipartisan coalition of legislators will be right to sustain that veto on July 11. H.520 does not reflect the priorities or realities in Vermont today.

Hopefully, Peter Shumlin and Gaye Symington will take this lesson to heart and refocus their energy – efficiently – on building a strong, sustainable and affordable economic environment to match and support our natural one.

Rob Roper is chairman of the Vermont Republican State Committee