(Host) Commentator Allen Gilbert thinks that special deals for two large Vermont businesses are a worrisome shift in how the state determines public policy.
(Gilbert) It’s a sad day when dollars determine public policy. Contributions used as bait for special treatment is the height of cynicism. It begs the question for whom government exists. It’s the style of politics we’ve come to associate with Washington — not Montpelier.
But the Douglas administration took steps earlier this month that suggest that this sort of deal-making has arrived in Vermont.
Until two weeks ago, the administration had been standing on the sidelines over whether to back a power upgrade at Vermont Yankee. The upgrade is a controversial issue. The plant is now owned by an out-of-state company, with no ties to Vermont. The reactor is, by nuclear standards, an antique. The new owner, Entergy, wants to soup up the reactor so it can produce more power. That will produce more profits for Entergy. But will the upgrade be good for Vermont? Should Vermonters agree to take the increased risk of accidents and shutdowns? What about the extra radioactive waste that will be produced?
These are complex questions with implications that — at least, in the case of the extra waste — stretch not just into the decades, but into the centuries.
The Department of Public Service is charged with representing us, Vermont consumers, in hearings that will examine these questions.
But then, two weeks ago, the Douglas administration decided that the upgrade will be good for Vermont. Why? Because Entergy agreed, among other things, to “contribute” $8 million to help clean up Missisquoi Bay in the northern reaches of Lake Champlain. The department, whose commissioner is appointed by the governor, will now argue that the Entergy upgrade is a good deal for Vermonters — despite the risks.
The Entergy deal didn’t come in a vacuum. Earlier it was revealed that the Douglas administration is pushing a multi-million-dollar break for IBM on its electric bill. The break would come at the expense of homeowners and other ratepayers. IBM would pay less. Homeowners, renters, and other businesses would pay more.
In both cases, the voices of average Vermonters were not heard. In fact, the avenue by which the public is supposed to be heard — the Public Service Department — will now be used to advocate for private business interests. The Legislature has been ignored in the process, too.
“This will be good for all Vermonters,” the governor said in justifying each decision. And it’s laudable to clean up Missisquoi Bay. But it’s a somewhat strange claim to make when Vermonters have been shut out of discussions that will determine if indeed they — and not just Entergy and IBM — will benefit.
The timing may have been a coincidence, but earlier this fall a business group released a report stating that Vermont is hostile to business. It would be unfortunate if discussion generated by this report deflects close scrutiny of the Douglas administration’s new approach to public policy-making.
This is Allen Gilbert.
(Host) Allen Gilbert of Worcester is a writer and parent who is active in education issues.