В Вермонте начинается борьба за ответственность за экономический кризис: кто виноват в росте цен?

by Chris Graff Vermonters seem pretty certain about one thing this election year: They’re not happy with the way things are going. They seem considerably less certain about whose fault it is. Is it Republican Phil Scott, who has been governor for nearly 10 years? Or is it the Democrats, who have controlled the Legislature and, until recently had enough votes to override him? The polling is pretty clear: In 2021, nearly half of Vermonters thought the state was headed in the right direction. Today, only a third do, while nearly half say Vermont is on the wrong track, according to polling by the University of New Hampshire. Most say Vermont is too expensive. Roughly four in 10 said they would like to leave the state. They worry about property taxes, housing, health care and the cost of just about everything else. Those are terrible numbers for the party in power. The problem, however, is figuring out which party is in power. Scott has occupied the governor’s office since 2017. Democrats, meanwhile, have controlled the Legislature, sometimes by margins large enough to override Scott’s veto. Scott has been remarkably successful at being both governor and opposition leader. He runs state government, signs the budget, and appoints the people who run the state agencies. But when things go wrong he can point across the lawn at the State House and say, in effect: I tried to stop them. And sometimes he did. He has vetoed Democratic legislation, objected to spending increases and warned repeatedly about taxes and affordability. Democrats have responded that governing requires more than saying no and that many of Vermont’s biggest problems – housing, health care, education and demographics – cannot be solved simply by cutting spending. That leaves Amanda Janoo, the Democratic gubernatorial nominee, with both an opportunity and a problem. Her opportunity is obvious. She can ask voters a simple question: If Vermont is headed in the wrong direction, how does a governor who has been in office for a decade escape responsibility. At some point, incumbency has to mean ownership. But her problem is equally obvious. Scott can ask voters to look at who has actually been passing the laws and spending the money. His argument essentially is that Vermont needs fewer Democrats in the Legislature, not a different governor. And that argument has worked before. That’s how Scott keeps winning re-election by larger and larger margins. While Democrats argue he has blocked their attempts to solve problems Scott responds Democrats created the problems by taxing and spending too much. There is another complication for Janoo. She isn’t running against an unpopular governor. By some measures Scott remains one of the most popular governors in the country. That means simply telling voters that Vermont has become unaffordable probably isn’t enough. Scott agrees with them. Janoo has to connect the condition of the state directly to Scott’s record. She needs to turn his longevity from an asset into a liability. At what point does, “I tried to stop them” stop being enough? Which is why this election may turn less on whether voters are satisfied than on whom they blame for this dissatisfaction. Janoo doesn’t have to convince Vermonters that Vermont has problems and Scott doesn’t have to convince them everything is fine. The argument between now and November is about responsibility. After a decade of divided government, voters know they are unhappy. Now they just have to decide who did it. Chris Graff is the former Vermont AP bureau chief; former contributing editor to Vermont Business; author of Dateline Vermont; former host of Vermont This Week. He has covered Vermont politics for more than 50 years.