LETTER: A case for a powerhouse team

July 10, 2024 | By Kane Sweeney

To the Community: 

It should be no secret that Waterbury holds an oversized power in the State House. That is thanks in part to the fact that both of our representatives in the House hold committee chair positions. Tom Stevens and Theresa Wood have both been outstanding representatives for our community — Waterbury has received state assistance, state jobs and state projects in their tenure. They have always put our district first before state and party. That is the representation we’ve come to expect and the representation we continue to elect. 

It is also no secret that Vermont is facing severe challenges to our statewide school funding system. Every single property owner is going to see a substantial increase in education taxes in the bills to come. On this topic we need to remember that we as a community voted on the proposal from the school board. We asked the state to find the money to fund our 2025 school year. Is our education funding system confusing? Absolutely. Are education costs rising faster than inflation? Absolutely. Could there be a better way to fund our education system? Absolutely. 

However, placing blame squarely on the shoulders of our dedicated and effective representatives who have otherwise near-perfect records seems a little short-sighted. As every community in Vermont is going to see a lift in their taxes because of education, it would seem as though Waterbury's oversized power in the statehouse could aid us all in its correction. 

Yet this outsized influence will be lost if either of our representatives lose their seats. With incumbency comes relationships and knowledge that are gained over time. Waterbury has wisely elected strong, experienced, committed community members who have earned leadership roles. These leaders have fought for Waterbury, and for Vermonters, on issues that are critically important – housing, human services, equity, support for state employees and teachers and students and families. They are powerful advocates for a Vermont that works for all Vermonters – and works for Waterbury. 

So you can see why the Republicans would LOVE to eliminate one of these dedicated chairs, and silence voices that are advocating for Vermonters. And what better way than to find a primary challenger who shares Republican values? If this primary came down to young Democrat versus old Democrat, I would not feel compelled to write this. However, this is not that. This year’s primary challenger is not a Democrat. Look no further than her donor list and you will find a smorgasbord of the who’s who of Vermont’s Republican elite. She’s unfamiliar with Democratic values and dismissive of leaders like Congresswoman Becca Balint. We’ve been bamboozled. 

The primary challenger seems to have drawn her talking points from the Republican playbook. Her message is familiar – that the Legislature as a whole and our legislators in particular are doing it wrong, that there are better (though undefined) ways to fund schools and housing, that regulation is bad for business, and unions are a problem – but familiar from the other side of the aisle. Fiscal responsibility plays incredibly well to a community reeling from tax hikes, yet without a solid understanding of state budgets and education spending, those buzzwords turn into simply blowing smoke. She bemoans housing development and detests regulation, except in the case of short-term rentals – she’s happy to tax and regulate those. Her platform detests outside influence while she accepts campaign donations from quite a few out-of-staters. 

Her political experience consists of a few months on the Harwood School Board where she delivered to us that very budget that increased your taxes. I met with her and I asked how she would seek to tamp down the housing crisis. She replied that the answer was not government spending but instead [more] incentives for landlords. I’m still unsure who would pay for those incentives if not the taxpayer. When asked if she supported unions, her answer was “unions have a time and a place.” Not really sure what that means either. When asked if she supported the governor, the answer was a firm “Yes.” 

Our hour-long conversation had me convinced that she was running in the wrong party primary. She’d be a powerhouse in the Vermont GOP. Well-spoken, talked in circles, compared the state government to a bank. They should be chomping at the bit to get her to run with an R next to her name. Or has the Vermont GOP wised up? It would be hard to believe, considering they recently violated their own rules to endorse Donald Trump in the general election. 

Yet, I was left feeling after our conversation like Vermont’s Republicans see something in her that would be negatively affected by a big red R next to her name on the ballot. If she’s elected, the GOP gets a weakened Democratic majority. A weapon against progress. With only one Republican running in our district, why would GOP voters feel compelled to vote in their own primary when they have a perfectly good Republican running in the Democratic one? 

If our incumbents lose to this candidate in the primary, we as Waterbury’s Democratic voters will have admitted two things. First, we take our power in the statehouse for granted, and second, we can be deceived.

Kane Sweeney 

Waterbury 

Kane Sweeney is a member of the Waterbury Select Board writing here expressing his own views. Vermont’s primary election is Aug. 13.