Living and Working in Burlington Vermont

As everyone involved with this Chamber knows, and is probably tired of hearing, we neither endorse candidates nor political parties. We are passionately non-partisan but equally passionate in support of the issues we endorse. Throughout recent history, Chamber leadership has taken great pride in pointing out that, at one time or another; we have managed to get cross-ways with the all of Vermont’s political parties. We must be doing something right! That said, we are students of government and students of what the public wants in its political leaders. One thing stands clear. Throughout our state’s and country’s history, we have lionized political figures that were not afraid to tackle tough issues, to take unpopular positions that were in the public’s interest and to use the bully pulpit to rally both the support and collective conscience of our citizens. Whether we agreed with their politics or policies, the best elements of the American spirit came to be embodied in the strength of leaders like Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, and Reagan. Vermont’s political history is likewise populated with governors who did not shrink from leadership, and chose to worry instead about the next election cycle

So, I have been struck by the discordant noise that is surrounding the recent efforts of President Obama. When he took office, our country faced a war without end in Iraq, a war in Afghanistan eerily reminiscent of the forgotten war in Korea, a US economy on the brink of meltdown with the world economy tethered to it, favorability ratings for politicians at historic lows, and a nation where the chasm between the “have’s” and “have not’s” was still illuminated by the catastrophe known as Katrina. Agree with his particular strategies or not, why is it that we seem to want this President to go slow? Pundits say that he is trying to do too much too soon; that he should have a more singular focus; that the issues are too complex to be dealt with in multiples. I don’t know if I agree. There is a lot that concerns me too. For example, I think it was really nice to use my tax dollars to buy my neighbor a car because their old minivan (that ran really well and had no rust) was a “clunker”. However, at the end of the proverbial day, I would much rather see my leader actually lead than whine about how tough things are. I would rather see my leader try some novel approaches than sit back and wait for things to get better. I would rather see my leader have the guts try and fail than to sit timidly on the sideline taking public opinion polls.

What do you think?

Sometimes we are our harshest critics. Despite the fact, to quote from President Obama, that we get all “wee wee’d up” talking about our tax rates, our permitting rules, the battles between developers and “greenies” and the stew pot of other issues, each and every one of us still chooses to live here. It is as if we know we have it so good that we have to find something to complain about. Let’s face it: living in Vermont, and in the Lake Champlain region in particular, has much to recommend.

We can live and work within walking distance or a short commute. Alternatively, not more than a half hour’s drive gets us to dirt road country peace and quiet. Try that in any other metropolitan area. We can travel anywhere from an airport that doesn’t require a GPS to find your gate. Runners, bikers and walkers can all use the most heavily trafficked downtown streets with little fear of either being mowed down or needing to grab for the inhaler. The lake, clear and blue, stretches through four counties with much of its shore line accessible to the public. Our restaurants, music, art and theatre are all of national and even international quality. They can be found in downtown, in our villages, and in many valleys and along back roads. Our education system, from kindergarten through college, is widely recognized for its focus on individual needs while maintaining world-class standards. A Vermonter’s access to health care is the envy of other states.

While it is true that we could do more to encourage economic growth, our unemployment rates remain below the national average. We are seeing the emergence of market segments in the technological and intellectual property arenas that build off the strengths brought to us through the UVM, its College of Medicine, the Albany College of Pharmacy, Champlain and St. Michael’s Colleges, and Fletcher Allen Health Care. And, while our energy future is the fodder for much discussion, we still have the lowest electric rates in New England and a nearly carbon-free portfolio. The latter is not likely to change.

Living in Vermont: it is still a great idea, a great deal and the basis for a great future.

Over the past few weeks, Vermonters and all of America have been treated to the coarse reality show soap opera called ‘legislative district visits’. One cannot turn on a television or radio without hearing adults shouting down one another in piques of rage. Real or theatrical, it doesn’t matter. Whether it is done from the ‘left’ or from the ‘right’ matters not. What we should all be concerned about is the hijacking of democracy that occurs when civility is discourse is jettisoned in favor of the boorish behaviors more appropriate to the Simpson’s or Roseanne television shows than public policy debates.

For a long time Vermont remained somewhat immune from this nonsense and citizens and elected officials debated contentious issues on local, statewide and national topics. Our very Vermont essence is embodied in our March Town Meetings where a lack of civility or neighborliness was the exception rather than the rule. More recently, Vermont is experiencing an erosion of that culture and we seem to have begun our slide towards the political screeching that characterizes many cable news shows. Last year, the Chamber hosted a forum in South Burlington that explored the blood sport that state politics had become. Many in the audience lamented the change and spoke eloquently about the hard fought policy issues of the past that retained a touch of class. It really is not too late to reverse the trend.

How can we do it? Here are some pretty basic ideas. Political party leaders need to make it clear to their most ardent supporters that obstreperous behavior is unacceptable and will be denounced. Second, all parties must agree that advertising that impugns the reputation of a candidate or that drags a family member into the fray is unacceptable. Select Boards would be well advised to adhere to Robert’s Rules of Order in the execution of town business. Our legislative and executive leaders would be likewise advised to counsel their members to stick with principle and not to stick it to the opponent. Let’s reconstruct the wall that existed between the reporting of factual news and the opinion crammed blogs written by reporters that make some wonder if the news is news or more opinion. Finally, it really can begin with the average citizen. Let’s be mindful of our tone and choice of hot button words. Let’s stay away from alluding to what a person’s motive might be absent anything other than pure speculation. Let’s call our representative on the carpet when they spout off like street corner bullies. Let’s remember what our moms all taught us: “if you can’t say something nice about somebody, don’t say it at all.”

I am reminded of the old saying that “fools rush in where others fear to tread” as I begin this piece. Health care reform has risen to the ranks of religion and politics as a subject that is better left unspoken in polite company. However, it is also a topic that a Chamber of Commerce will be expected to weigh in on at some point. A couple of years ago one of the predominant themes coming from our Member Survey was that, but for the escalating cost of health care, business owners would offer a host of other benefits to their employees. Clearly the cost of health care is an issue that we cannot duck.

There are a few fundamental, and somewhat paradoxical, dilemmas that many who engage in this debate need to come to grips with. It seems that we want what we want when we want it and we don’t want it to cost much. We rail against the idea of rationing at the personal level but proclaim its benefit for others; we argue that we want newer and better drugs on the market but demonize the industry that invests in research and development; upon entering the hospital, we demand every conceivable test but publicly argue that doctors order too many unwarranted tests; we want the best, brightest and well trained to provide our care and then we complain that costs of medical education keep driving costs up. Add to it the view that our ‘social contract” demands that every person living in our country is entitled to health care to some degree and the concept of controlled costs and inexpensive health care goes out the window.

Is there an answer? Frankly I know that I’m not smart enough to figure it out but these are some hard decisions that we will have to confront. Here are some ideas to spark a lively debate:

• Everyone is required to “purchase” an insurance plan: it matters not if it is private, public, or a hybrid; if you are over 22 and able-bodied, a portion of your income flow should go to health care. This assumes that there is an entry or basic plan that is readily available.
• Everyone pays something when they show up for care: If you have skin in the game, you’ll think about the choices that you make.
• If you are over ___ (insert an age) years old: no joint replacements.
• If you smoke or engage in other significant negative lifestyle choices: the price that you are required to pay for health insurance is significantly higher than those who lead a healthier lifestyle. Also, you may be denied certain types of treatment.
• If you are over _____ (insert an age): no organ transplants.
• If your liver is shot due to certain lifestyle choices: no liver transplants.

I’m not saying that I am fond of any of these choices. In truth, some would have had an effect on members of my own extended family. However, absent a change in our thinking about what Frank Sinatra called the “autumn of my years” (where about 80% of the costs are incurred) we are not going to be able to significantly affect the rate of cost escalation.