Henry Raymond
Fairfax News => Political Issues/Comments => Topic started by: Carolyn Branagan on February 20, 2012, 04:55:22 AM
-
During the legislative session many groups visit the statehouse to see government in action. During this past week, several groups came to visit including ambulance owners/drivers and high school students from Future Business Leaders of America. On Friday legislators were honored with a visit of more than 50 new Eagle Scouts from the Vermont chapter of Boy Scouts of America.
Meanwhile legislative Committees continue work. Crossover is now just a few weeks away. Here are the weekly reports:
Rep. Vicki Strong from Albany reports the Judiciary Committee continues to work on H. 751, which if passed, will help determine which court in which 16-17 year olds will be prosecuted. Presently, if youth in this age group are prosecuted as adults they are much less likely to receive services necessary for rehabilitation and are much more likely to reoffend. The bill will allow some minors to go through the family division, still allowing the discretion of the state's attorneys to charge other minors as adults in the criminal division depending on facts. On Friday the committee finished discussion and then voted H. 419, an act relating to the dissolution of civil unions. This bill will be on the House floor this week for debate and a vote. The bill provides an expedited process for dissolving the civil union of a couple upon their marriage to one another and to provide access to a divorce or a dissolution to nonresident couples who established a marriage or civil union in Vermont but live outside of the state. Rep. Strong voted against the bill because of her lack of belief in gay marriage and also belief that divorce should not be made easier. These are her personal convictions and she voted accordingly in the committee. Other topics in discussion in Judiciary are: remedies for people who fail to pay a fine given in their municipality, ignition interlock devices for people with DUI's, and situations involving power of attorney.
Commerce and Economic Development Committee voted out H.512, the Bishca Housekeeping Bill, and H. 565, the bill regulating Licensed Lenders and Mortgage Loan Originators, on Tuesday this week, writes Rep. Lynn Dickinson from St. Albans Town. Both bills received the full support of the Committee. The two bills passed both later in the week on the Floor of the House. The Committee heard from an attorney from London on H.533, the act relating to insurance business transfers. Jon Yorke came to discuss how this process works in the UK and Europe and was very informative. Rep. Dickinson hopes for a presentation on this bill at a caucus since it is a potentially significant bill that should be well understood. The Committee continues with more Risk Management from Irene, although there doesn’t seem to be any bill or issue that Commerce can address with this rehashing of the effects of Irene. Also discussion of H.718 continues, a bill dealing with the department of public service and the Public Service Board. This bill deals with Commercial Building Energy Standards, Electronic Filing for the Public Service Board applications and a study for the Universal Service Fund for telecom. More than one and a half hours was spent discussing the electronic filing section, data security and other obscure details of electronic applications vs. paper documentation. There was a question from a committee member of how this bill affects “commerce” for businesses in the state and when the committee will examine the real impact on “commerce” from other energy bills being discussed in the Natural Resources Committee. It was also mentioned that the Health Care bill in the Health Committee has an impact on “commerce” as well. The Committee does not want jurisdiction on these bills, but would like to see them and hear some testimony on this aspect. Testimony on H. 730 occurred dealing with Consumer Protection issues. The week ended with testimony on the VEGI Report, ACCD, Tom Salmon, Doug Hoffer, Paul Cillo and Frank Cioffi. The VEGI statutes provide an incentive rebate to businesses that help the state retain or recruit companies. Paul Cillo and Doug Hoffer are against renewing this tool.
Rep. Jim Eckhardt of Chittenden reports the Health Care Committee continued to close sections of the Big Health Care Bill for the year H-559. Decisions made this week will allow employers with 50 or under to be included in the exchange. Not yet decided is whether or not the ever popular Bronze plan will be included. Also not decided is whether or not to allow plans outside of the exchange. Otherwise, over thirty of the more than 40 sections of the bill have been closed. Most of these sections had agreement. Rep. Eckhardt voted for the under 50 employees to be in the exchange and both he and Rep. Patti Komline are in favor of everyone being in not just those that work for employers with under 50 employees. The majority of the committee currently feels that there should be no plans outside the exchange. The Federal Affordable Care Act was looking to set up a robust insurance market inside and outside of the exchange. By having markets inside and outside the exchange, competitiveness would be fostered and plans inside the exchange could be kept in check. Plans would be more attractive and reasonably priced. It would appear that the committee wants to funnel everyone (93,000) lives into the exchange and have no markets outside. How do we make certain that plans inside the exchange are the best deal?
All association plans will go away. Vermonters who currently buy insurance through the Vermont Chamber or any other association it will no longer be able. What this will mean to those associations is uncertain but they will no longer sell insurance. There is still no word on what the plans will look like or how much this will cost the taxpayer. Unfortunately the committee chair wants to get this bill out of committee before those questions are answered. That is unacceptable to Rep. Eckhardt. They want the bill voted out by next Wed. or Thursday so much more will follow in the next week report.
In the Government Operations Committee Rep. Mark Higley from North Troy reports this week more testimony was taken from the OPR (Office of Professional Regulation) bill. In addition testimony was taken on the following: Land Surveying, Psychology, Clinical Social Workers, Optometry, Nursing and Mixed Martial Arts. There were also two meetings of the Senate Reapportionment committee that some members of the House Gov. Ops. Committee sat in on. Members of the House Reapportionment process reported the need to move the House bill H.629 fast because the Boards of Civil Authority in towns that have 2 seats or more have until March 15th to get back to the Legislature with any splits creating single member districts that have been worked out. While there has always been talk of the Senate not amending the House bill and vice versa, it appears some Senators have no such agreement and are ready to present their amendments on the floor of the Senate. The areas of Shaftsbury and Arlington in the south and Eden in the north are being considered. The House committee expressed concerns that in trying to solve one problem another is created and the vote was decisive with 138 in favor and only 4 opposed. Rep. Higley encourages voters to speak to their Senators and ask that H. 629 be approved, as is, soon!
Last week the Institutions and Corrections Committee continued work on Capital Budget Adjustment issues wrote Rep. Linda Myers from Essex. The committee discussed the over $2 million in reallocations from previous capital bills that are slated as part of Governor Shumlin’s $18 million plan for funding for the Waterbury Complex and the Vermont State Hospital. In addition, the committee heard testimony concerning a possible five-year plan for the capital budget and had a lengthy discussion of state building space needs and received a post-Irene update in regards to where state workers were before Irene and where they are now. On the corrections front, mental health needs of the corrections population were discussed as well as the issues dealing with public inebriates. There was a joint meeting with the House Education Committee to hear a request for a change in the board of the Community High School of Vermont, which provides high school education for correctional facility inmates. Other discussions occurred on progress on H. 24, an act relating to the maintenance and conveyance of Maidstone Lake Road, and the testimony from the sponsors of H. 607, which deals with out-of-state placement of those in corrections, and H. 701, which deals with invasive and non-native plants on state building property.
Rep. Anne Donahue reports that the House Human Services Committee worked this past week primarily in two areas of policy and took input on committee bills. The policy issues were regarding the various Agency of Human Services budget cuts, and a section of the Health Care bill that addresses a project to coordinate care for elders and those with disabilities who are eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid. Next week, the committee hopes to address permitting 16-year-olds to donate blood, as most other states do. The committee is beginning to tackle an incomplete part of work that has been ongoing for several years: protecting decision-making rights of individuals for end-of-life care. Vermont has had no law on who can make decisions on what a patient who is no longer competent would have wanted, when there is no advance directive or guardian. The Department of Health has drafted regulations based on instruction in last year’s bill. The committee will address what aspects should be directly in statute.
The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee had a busy week reports Rep. Mike Hebert from Vernon. The committee considered several bill redrafts. No bills moved along, and this may not be such a bad thing. H.468 the RPS bill is being completely rewritten and a new draft is expected on Tuesday. Chair Klein informed the committee Friday that he decided the bill was too "complex and hard to understand" and could not easily be explained. He “leaked” this information earlier in the week but did not tell the committee until Friday. This news explained why Rep. Hebert received a huge number of calls and email about the bill and had no idea what people were talking about. The “rewrite” (new draft) will include the following items:
• The definition of new renewable will be generation coming on line after 2013;
• by 2025 all utilities will be required to have 30% of their power purchased from “new generation”. This may seem like a modest goal, but when you add in the 50% they will be purchasing from existing generation that makes the total of required renewable energy to be 80%;
• There will be a new more aggressive standard offer (fee & tariff) program, 25Mw/yr x 10 yrs. with a reserved technology component.
• Hydro Quebec will have a “tight collar” (cap) which will not allow it to be used to meet the entire 30% requirement.
There will be a caucus report on H.468 Tuesday night, after the new draft has been reviewed.
H.485 continues to be redrafted on almost a daily basis. As testimony continues more items are dropped from the bill. However an interesting point come up in testimony, the question was of enforcement was raised as the person could not find it in the bill. Michael O’Grady said it was in the bill but that it was hidden in the language which referred to VSA 10 sec. 102 which gives ANR the enforcement a penalty power. Makes one wonder what else may be hidden in the bill? 'Oops! I guess I just can’t contain my skepticism', writes Rep. Hebert. Also Leg. Council gave a briefing on the Central Vermont Public Service and Green Mountain Power merger. The briefing was at a 30,000 foot view, but one thing that was very clear is that this is an extremely complex issue with a multitude of proposals. One of which made the headlines: Vt. purchasing controlling interest in VELCO. Leadership needs to assign a sub committee to keep an eye on this. Maybe a lawyer in the caucus? Or two? If Vermont can’t trust a company from out of state to delivery energy how can Vermont trust a company from another sovereign nation to deliver?
-
" If Vermont can’t trust a company from out of state to delivery energy how can Vermont trust a company from another sovereign nation to deliver?" because we are haveing people from the UK come here and are telling us how to run government programs
-
Carolyn, Thank you as always for the updates! I truly appreciate them.
I am so frustrated about the AG continuing the pursuit of VY/Entergy. It is a complete waste of our tax dollars and I am sure we have many places for it to go here in VT especially after Hurricane Irene. I would so prefer the milions they are going to spend were worth spending.
I know I am not alone in my frustration and tired of hearing how Vermonters all want it closed.
Thanks for listening!