Vermonters for Economic Health

I want to applaud Jim Eckhardt (and other business people) for having the courage and taking the time away from business to run for a position in the legislature.

Having people like Jim, who know what it takes to run a successful business and provide JOBS to people WITHOUT using taxpayers funds to make the payroll, in the legislature will make a real difference and bring fiscal sanity back to our policy making.

The current makeup of our state legislature is completely out of balance and their policy making is driving business investment, growth of good jobs, and entrepreneurs from our state. All of this is undermining our tax base. And our demographics are getting worse by the year. And I mean worse in terms of not having the job and population growth to support the unfunded liabilities of the future.

I have read how certain legislators do not like the budget that Governor Douglas put forth for the coming state fiscal year. Apparently they don't like the reductions in social service spending, among other things. And as we now know, many are also picking apart the Challenge for Change initiative and the $38 million in spending reductions that was supposed to deliver - almost half of which was from the Social Service delivery system.

None of us like cuts that hurt people, but when you don't have enough tax revenue to pay the bills you have to cut something. And when the majority of your spending is in social services and education, something in those spending line items is going to have to give.

My thought of the day is about how many legislators, particularly those in the Chittenden County area whose voices I hear most often due to the local press, are frequently complaining about the lack of affordable housing in the area.

That is ironic since they are the ones at the controls of housing prices.

If you want affordable housing you have to relieve the cost pressure on construction via permit reform and you have to reduce property taxes and other mandated costs of owning and operating housing units.

I happen to own a four unit apartment building (1 bedroom in each unit) on a public street adjacent to the UVM campus. I lived in one of the units from 1997 to 2003 when I finally decided I needed more than 500 square feet of living space and would benefit from having a garage at my then 35 years of age.

Based on various sources of input I am starting to get quite concerned about the momentum building to establish an employer funded single payer health care system in Vermont.

Many of the people behind this movement are either being intellectually dishonest or have no idea how an true healthy economy functions as some of them are actually claiming that this will help our employers and our economy. In my opinion, based on my 19 plus years in the business world helping companies survive financially, nothing could be further from the truth.

My opinion is that an employer (or high income earner) funded single payer system will only further reduce our dwindling tax base by driving more employers entirely or incrementally out of Vermont. And with them will also go a material portion of the individual income tax revenues as well.

Featured image: 

An editorial written by Tom Licata:

“Governor Dean, you want a more robust Public Option?”
“I think the bill still has some fairly significant flaws but you know we can work with this. This is what Mitt Romney did essentially in Massachusetts, but it’s going to take a long time but it’s going to lead to reforms ultimately. I wouldn’t call this bill reform but I do think it can lead to reform…it’s going to take a lot more work”

“Governor Dean, Philosophically… do you think your party knows…we’ve chosen a different type of society, more akin to Europe?”
“…when it gets [social inequality] out of whack…you need to do some redistribution. This is a form of redistribution.”

This CNBC Squawk Box interview occurred on March 25th; two days after President Obama signed into law the most significant major legislation since Medicare, in 1965.