H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education financing.

Question:	Rep. Freed amendment (school choice)
Result:	Yes	51
	No	88
	Absent	10
	House Journal	1/29/98

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education financing

Question:	Rep Freed amendment (public school approval standards)
Result:	Yes	50
	No	87
	Absent	12
	House Journal	1/29/98

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education financing

Question:	Rep Freed amendment (change fair market definition & put tax on real property capital gain)
Result:	Yes	39
	No	95
	Absent	15
	House Journal	1/29/98

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education financing

Question:	Rep. Richardson & Helm amendment (give prebate as credit instead of check)
Result:	Yes	41
	No	88
	Absent	20
	House Journal	1/29/98

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education financing

Question:	Rep. Howard amendment (add prevailing wage as criteria)
Result:	Yes	69
	No	74
	Absent	6
	House Journal	1/30/98

Rep. Suchmann of Chester explained his vote as follows:

"Mr. Speaker:

I voted against this amendment because it was not studied by the Appropriations committee and we had little, if any, objective evidence upon which to base a reasonable decision."

Rep. Young of Orwell explained his vote as follows:

"Mr. Speaker:

I voted no - we should be carefully selecting the right tools for the toolbox of economic development, not grabbing for a sledgehammer."

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education financing

Question:	Rep. Freed amendment (remove education tax from hydro electric moratorium)
Result:	Yes	49
	No	89
	Absent	11
	House Journal	1/30/98

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education financing

Question:	Rep Richardson Amendment (strike Sec. 78, hydro electric moratorium)
Result:	Yes	51
	No	87
	Absent	11
	House Journal	1/30/98

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education financing

Question:	Rep. Knox amendment (repeal school standards)
Result:	Yes	45
	No	85
	Absent	19
	House Journal	1/30/98

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education financing

Question:	Rep. Knox amendment (change state board of education duties)
Result:	Yes	7
	No	113
	Absent	29
	House Journal	1/30/98

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education financing

Question:	Rep. Corren et al amendment (strike economic advancement incentives)
Result:	Yes	54
	No	68
	Absent	27
	House Journal	1/30/98

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education funding.

Question:	Rep Cillo's motion to suspend rules to take up for immediate consideration
Result:	Yes	75	(3/4 vote of 97 needed)
	No	54
	Absent	20
	House Journal	2/27/98

Rep. Bouricius of Burlington explained his vote as follows:

"Mr. Speaker:

The reason we even need a technical corrections bill for Act 60 is because the Conference report on H. 527 (Act 60) last year was rushed through in exactly the same manner as is now proposed for H. 577. I don't want to come back next year to debate a technical corrections bill for a poorly drafted H. 577 report."

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education funding.

Question:	Rep Cillo's motion to suspend rules to take up for immediate consideration
Result:	Yes	74	(3/4 vote of 97 needed)
	No	55
	Absent	20
	House Journal	2/27/98

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education funding.

Question:	Rep Brook's motion to suspend rules to take up for immediate consideration
Result:	Yes	66	(3/4 vote of 88 needed)
	No	51
	Absent	32
	House Journal	2/27/98

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education funding.

Question:	Rep Brook's motion to suspend rules to take up for immediate consideration
Result:	Yes	66	(3/4 vote of 87 needed)
	No	50
	Absent	33
	House Journal	2/27/98

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education funding.

Question:	Rep. Dwyer's motion to recess for 60 minutes
Result:	Yes	41
	No	86
	Absent	22
	House Journal	3/2/98

Rep. Brunelle of Winooski explained his vote as follows:"Mr. Speaker:

I believe the mean spirits are alive and well."

Rep. Hudson of Lyndon explained his vote as follows:

"Mr. Speaker:

For the first time in my twenty-six years I explain my vote this way. I mistakenly guessed wrong on the time of debate. Now the time has come for me to eat, as a long-time diabetic. It is one and one-half hours beyond a lunch break. I have no choice, eat or drop. I choose to eat."

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education financing.

Question:	Shall the House sustain the ruling of the Speaker
Result:	Yes	103
	No	7
	Absent	39
	House Journal	3/2/98

H.577

An act relating to education, taxation and education financing.

Question:	Shall the report of the Committee of Conference be adopted
Result:	Yes	73
	No	47
	Absent	29
	House Journal	3/2/98

Explanation of votes

Rep. Bouricius of Burlington explained his vote as follows:

"Mr. Speaker:

I voted in favor of Act 60 and support those portions of H. 577 that make technical corrections to Act 60 to allow its smooth implementation. This Conference report, however, goes far beyond technical corrections. It includes a variety of corporate welfare provisions and, most disturbing, a commitment to school choice. I believe this provision marks the beginning of the destruction of our public education system and is far more significant than the bill to which it is attached. Our public education system is the backbone of any hope for a true democracy. I shall mourn this House's action today."

Rep. Corren of Burlington explained his vote as follows:

"Mr. Speaker:

It disturbs me to the upmost, that in the attempt to rush through an important bill by an artificial deadline, it has been burdened by even more critical issues upon which this House has taken no testimony, received no favorable action by a committee and has conducted inadequate deliberation.

The sleight-of-hand that brings Vermont school choice by telling supports one thing and opponents another, is indicative of the quality of the contents and procedure regarding this legislation. This is equally true of the discredited elements for so-called economic development. In the short-term, this situation is yet superseded by our utter disregard for the Rules of this House and the sudden and premature cessation of debate.

In the long term, our actions today will have the most profound impact, long after Act 60, which I support despite its serious limitations and technical corrections to it, are forgotten.

Rep. Livingston of Manchester explained her vote as follows:

"Mr. Speaker:

H. 577 offers several concessions that help soften the blow to my taxpayers - and for that we are grateful.

Manchester residents do not resent extending a helping hand to other school districts, but feel the tax structure employed by Act 60 is basically unfair.

The most laudable goals do not necessarily translate into good legislation."

Rep. Mazur of South Burlington explained his vote as follows:

"Mr. Speaker:

Unsound taxes, unsound economics, unsound equity sharing, unsound economic development policy and unsound belief that spending buys education quality - all make Act 60 and its technical amendments a black hole."

Rep. Perry of Richford explained his vote as follows:

"Mr. Speaker:

I support the Conference committee's report on H. 577 because it retains or improves on most of the House-passed provisions. These are necessary and important to timely and effective implementation of Act 60. However, the school choice provisions are a notable exception. The findings are vague and have not been substantiated in this Chamber. I believe the as-scheduled commitment to be premature and potentially counter-productive to achieving equal education opportunity in Vermont. I trust that this problem will be addressed and corrected in the next General Assembly."

Rep. Poirier of Barre City explained his vote as follows:

"Mr. Speaker:

Our local schools are the center of the community, and I voted yes despite the fact that I agree with the school choice remarks of Rep. Bouricius. I hope to be a member in the future when this provision of the Conference report will be repealed."

Rep. Young of Orwell explained his vote as follows:

"Mr. Speaker:

I voted no - Mr. Speaker, I was concerned that I might be unable to vote no on the record of history. It is important to me that the people of Vermont realize that I knew Act 60 and H. 577 were too complicated, too expensive, too invasive of local control and just won't do much to improve this states educational quality."

Rep. Zuckerman of Burlington explained his vote as follows:

"Mr. Speaker:

Our education system is a central point to our communities. We could have made a loud resounding statement to support our communities by rejecting this report and pushing the conferees to produce a clean technical corrections bill, without school choice. I believe we would have been able to do that without the self-made deadline of Town Meeting Day, and I would have supported that bill as I did act 60. But, for school choice, I voted no."