The Vermont Report 10/21/05

FreedomFest a Success

FreedomFest 2005 was an energy filled event attended by 150 center right activists. Gov. Douglas, Lt Gov Dubie, US Senate candidates Rich Tarrant and Sen. Mark Shepard all made appearances. The day’s keynote speaker, Steven Moore of the Wall Street Journal editorial page, was outstanding. He has since written two articles about his experiences in Vermont, including an interview with Governor Douglas and “Ice Cream Hangover,” a hysterical and insightful account of his tour of the Ben & Jerry’s factory in Waterbury.

For Steve Moore’s impressions of Vermont, please visit:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/cc/?id=110007428

For Burlington paper Seven Days take on FreedomFest, please visit:
http://www.sevendaysvt.com/features/2005/minority_report/
You can respond to: letters@sevendaysvt.com

FreedomFest was a solid jumping off point for FreedomWorks to begin organizing in earnest for the 2006 Legislative session. Excited by the prospect of having a meaningful impact on the next legislative session, several attendees expressed interest in starting local chapters in their home towns. It only takes a handful of individuals committed to making a difference. If you were unable to attend FreedomFest, but would like to start a FreedomWorks chapter in your home town, please contact State Director, Rob Roper, for more information. 802-999-8145, rroper@freedomworks.org.

The Governor’s Heath Care Summit.

FreedomWorks had the privilege of being invited to the Governor’s Health Care Summit in Killington on October 17th. State Director, Rob Roper, and Advisory Council Chairman, Frank Mazur, were able to attend and advocate for market-based solutions. The many members of FreedomWorks-Vermont who have been active on this issue — speaking up, writing, calling and taking part in the debate — earned this opportunity for our organization. Thank you.

The event itself was educational and worthwhile as a truly diverse group of people had a chance to air a wide spectrum of ideas. On the positive side, no one got killed and there was general agreement that health care is good and people should have access to it. But behind the veil of politeness, it is clear that the warm and fuzzies we all experienced in Killington will fade when the time for talking ends and the time for actually doing something – and paying for everything – begins. On that note, a couple points of general agreement were worrisome….

Don’t smoke that, drink that, or eat that!

One idea for paying for Health Care that didn’t get roundly shouted down was increasing taxes on cigarettes to $2/pack and adding new taxes on beer and candy. Back in the spring, Sen. Susan Bartlett (D-Lamoille) declared a desire to tax everything with some kind of sugar listed in the first four ingredients. The cigarette tax just won’t work. It might cause some people to quit smoking, which, for the individual, may be a very good thing. However, for a state that needs more revenue to pay for health care, quitters represent a significant revenue loss. (Not that we shouldn’t be encouraging people to quit smoking, just be aware that it comes at a financial price for the state that will have to be compensated for.) Others will opt to go across state lines to buy their cigarettes, which would mean even more lost revenue for Vermont, and the incentives to do so would increase exponentially if you want tax-free New Hampshire beer to go with your smokes. Add to the out-of-state shopping list all those sugar laden groceries (ever read the label on a kid’s cereal box or a jug of juice) it won’t just be hard drinkin’, hard smokin’ troublemakers crossing the border looking for a bargain, it will be everyone running a household on a budget. Caledonia County already loses roughly $36 million a year alone in retail sales to New Hampshire. As the Governor has pointed out, we have a crisis in affordability — this tax scheme will cause Vermont to lose money, making an already bad situation dramatically worse.

Don’t drive that, watch that, or do that!

Another bad idea that garnered too much head nodding was mandating – by law — the purchase of health insurance. Although this no doubt scratches an emotional “get-them-freeloaders!” itch, consider what mandates really mean. Many of the people who currently aren’t buying health insurance can’t afford it. Mandating that they do won’t make any difference whatsoever. Of those who the state has determined could afford health insurance* but choose not to buy it, the biggest culprits are healthy, 18 to 28-year-old men. Keep in mind that the single most significant long term problem Vermont is facing is that an increasing percentage of our population is over 65 and non-working. This phenomenon is fueled in great part by the fact that our young people are leaving Vermont in record numbers…

Here’s the scenario if this mandate becomes a reality: You’re young, footloose and fancy free, in an entry level job, trying to find your way in the world, and you “choose” not to spend $4200 (the cheapest plan available in VT) of your annual salary on health insurance. So, without “Proof of Health Insurance,” Vermont will not issue you a driver’s license. You’re angry. Then you learn that the tax refund you were counting on, and quite frankly earned… well, Vermont will be keeping that. You’re livid. But wait! Blue Cross of Vermont has come up with a special discount plan that only costs at $150 a month, $1800 a year! All you have to do to qualify for the low cost plan is give up tobacco (Okay.), alcohol (Huh?), eating out at restaurants (What!) and your cable TV (#@%*>!!!)…. This is not a joke.

Question for you, young, healthy, twenty-something, with no roots and a world of options at your feet: Will you (and your life-long earning potential) be staying in the lovely Green Mountain State to help fund our tax base? Or not?

Vermont has become a “Lifestyle Destination” economy. That is, people choose to make certain sacrifices to live her in exchange for a HIGHER quality of life. However, being at the mercy of a state government empowered to micro manage your ability to drive, eat out, have a beer with friends, and watch TV is not represent a choice, and it does not allow for a higher quality of life AT ALL. If we tax and regulate all the joy out of living here, no one will.

*Note: The government deciding what a middle-class individual or family can afford is rather arrogant in and of itself – particularly when it means cutting at least $4200 out of a person’s household budget. For simplicity’s sake, let’s call that a 10% cut in groceries, vacation funds, piano lessons, etc. Just for fun, ask your representatives and senators to make a similar 10% cut in all non-healthcare related government spending to pay for healthcare reform! Then sit back and see just how easy and affordable they think that is.

Please Contact: Your Legislators at www.leg.state.vt.us

Take this job and shove it.

One area that proved to be a fairly common point of agreement was surprising (at least to me), and that was the idea of decoupling insurance from employment. What’s more surprising is there was no mention of agreement on this somewhat revolutionary idea in the press or in the Governor’s press release summary of the event.

Employer based insurance, people on both sides repeatedly pointed out, was an accident of history, makes no logical sense, and would never be part of any health care system designed today. Decoupling insurance from employment would free businesses to concentrate on what they do, which would almost certainly be good for the economy. It could allow employees to carry insurance from job to job, or even through a period of unemployment, which would be an improvement. This could create opportunities for insurance companies and their customers to build long term relationships, which would be of benefit to both parties, particularly as we switch from an acute care system to a chronic care system — as all agreed we need to do. And, decoupling insurance from employment could be sensible starting point to “level the playing field,” another much agreed upon concept. As it is, large companies, small businesses, and individuals, don’t have the same options and don’t pay the same rates under the current system.

This could be a significant piece of common ground from which to build real reform. I confess, I haven’t thought about this long enough to have an opinion if this is a practical idea or not. But I do think it is interesting that even where there was a good deal of agreement on a way to change the status quo, the idea didn’t leave the room.

Winning the First Battle in Early Ed Debate!

According to Vermonters for Better Education’s latest newsletter (www.schoolreport.com), the State Board of Education is now discussing some small but significant changes in the rules submitted by the Vermont Department of Education governing early ed spending. Writes VBE, “For example, they now state that school districts “SHALL” (emphasis added) collaborate with existing providers before establishing new programs,” as opposed to “MAY.”

FreedomWorks members should take this as an encouraging sign that our hard work speaking out on this issue is beginning to resonate, and drive policy in the right direction.

However, this is just a small first step! This change represents no protection for the 90% of private providers who will never be considered for collaboration with school districts in the first place, and represents no protection at all for Vermont’s already overburdened property taxpayers. We are winning. Let’s keep on winning!

Chemotherapy for All!

The forces promoting universal public preschool have no intentions of giving up or letting up. And, they are poised to stoop to a highly misleading scare campaign to get what they want.

Vermonters are about to hear a lot about the “benefits” of universal preschool – both for children and for taxpayers. “Investing” in universal preschool, taxpayers will hear, can save up to $7 in the long run for each $1 we spend today. How? Parents of young children will hear that children who attend early education programs are less likely to become addicted to drugs, go to prison, or go on welfare. Yikes! Sign my kid up now!

However, none of this is remotely true. The studies upon which proponents of early ed are basing these conclusions tested only severely at risk, learning disabled children. One oft cited study is the Perry Preschool project, in which all of the participants were of low socioeconomic status and had IQs ranging from 70 – 86. The kids also received a lot more than just a few hours of early education. They received intensive education, regular home visits, and their parents were given classes in better parenting.

Though the Perry Preschool project did produce dramatic and positive results, it has nothing to do with what is being proposed here in Vermont! Not in terms of what the program is, and not in terms of whom the program serves. What the early ed proponents are doing is akin to taking a study involving cancer victims that demonstrated chemotherapy extended life expectancy, and coming up with a policy that recommends ALL people, regardless of their health, take regular chemo treatments, too! This is not only misleading, it is dangerous.

Pay No Attention to That Reality Behind the Curtain

Proponents of early ed are busy citing hypothetical outcomes based on unrelated research. The latest comes from Wisconsin:

“A recently released statewide study for Wisconsin measuring the economic impact to Wisconsin’s K-12 system IF [my emphasis] the state expanded Four-Year-Old Kindergarten (4K) to more children has been issued. The report emphasizes “a clear economic motive” for expansion of the 4K program to a significantly larger number of children in the state. The proposed program would generate strong fiscal benefits for the state, such as reduction in crime and reliance on welfare…”

One wonders if early-educrats in Wisconsin are gleefully citing similar studies out of Vermont to push for their plans.

What they don’t cite is any information from places where universal preschool already exists, like Georgia. Since 1993, Georgia has funded a no-fee pre-kindergarten program for 4 year olds. An assessment of this real life program with a decade-long track record (not some half-baked hypothetical projection) concluded, “After ten years, the Georgia preschool program has served over 300,000 children at a cost of $1.5 billion and children’s test scores are unchanged.”

Notes & Events

The Legislature’s Health Care Forums. For event specific information: Glenn McRae, The Snelling Center, 859-3090 or Jill Krowinski, Assistant to the Speaker, 828-2245

Event Dates:

Tues. Oct. 25, 2005, 6:30 to 9:00 pm, Bennington Fire Department, 130
River Road, Bennington

Tues. Nov. 1, 2005, 6:30 to 9:00 pm, Barre Technical Ctr. & Spaulding
High School Campus, 155 Ayers St., Barre

The next meeting of the Republican Assembly of Vermont will take place on Wednesday, October 26th at 7:15 p.m. at the United Methodist Church in Rutland.

Please Contact:
Your likeminded friends and neighbors. Forward them this edition of the Vermont Report, and encourage them to join FredomWorks’ growing email list by signing up at www.freedomworks.org/processor/signup.php or by contacting State Director, Rob Roper directly at rroper@freedomworks.org or 802-999-8145. Feedback welcome!

Related Content