(Host) The Vermont House has rejected a plan to cut legislative pay by 5%. The vote was part of the House’s review of the 2009 Budget Adjustment bill.
The debate lasted over 2 hours and revealed some strong policy differences between the Democrats and the Republicans – differences that are likely to re-emerge when next year’s budget comes up for consideration in several weeks.
VPRs Bob Kinzel reports:
(Kinzel) A day after Governor Jim Douglas chastised lawmakers for not making larger cuts in this year’s budget, House Republicans tried to make some small reductions.
Most of the debate involved a GOP plan to cut legislative pay by 5%. It’s estimated that this reduction would save about 35 thousand dollars this year. Barre Town Rep. Tom Koch said it was an important step for lawmakers to take:
(Koch) "The symbolism however is important I believe it’s a principle of leadership that you don’t ask somebody else to do something that you’re not willing to do."
But House Appropriations chairwoman Martha Heath argued that a better way to save money would be to trim two weeks off of this year’s session:
(Heath)"For every week that this body adjourns earlier than 18 weeks we can save about $240 thousand dollars I think that’s a better way to reduce our compensation and to save Vermonters money."
The House rejected the pay cut amendment by a vote of 88 to 50 – most Democrats voted against the cut while most Republicans voted for it.
At the end of roll call votes, individual members have an opportunity to explain their votes:
(Smith) "For purposes of explanation member from Glover."
This explanation is then printed up as part of the official Journal of the House. Democratic leader Floyd Nease used this procedure to suggest that some Republicans were being hypocritical on the pay cut issue:
(Nease) "I hope that Vermonters will take notice and check to make sure that all of those who voted yes here today have already placed their names on a list of people who voluntarily took a cut in pay."
That caused Newport Republican Duncan Kilmartin to formally request that Nease’s remarks be stricken from the record. It was a request that was denied by House Speaker Shap Smith:
(Kilmartin) Mr. Speaker…the point of order is that the rules forbid personal remarks in the impugntation of motivation which I believe just occurred."
(Smith) Member from Newport City in response to your point of inquiry, members have the constitutional right to explain their vote and therefore a motion to strike is not in order."
The bill now goes to the Senate for its consideration.
For VPR News I’m Bob Kinzel in Montpelier.