2017-2018 | Vermont YOUR LEGISLATORS’ VOTING RECORD ON VOTING RECORD SMALL BUSINESS ISSUES 2018 EDITION Roll call votes by your state representatives on key small business issues are listed here. Although this Voting Record does not reflect all elements considered by a lawmaker when voting, nor does it represent a complete profile of a legislator, it can be a guide in evaluating your legislators’ attitudes toward small business. Please thank those legislators who supported small business. Note this voting record is for the House only; the Senate is not tabulated due to lack of roll call votes. 1. S.260, LAKE CHAMPLAIN CLEAN-UP, $6.4 MILLION health insurance as a mechanism for lower insur- TAX PACKAGE ance premiums. Representatives voting “no” NFIB: NO supported the NFIB position and challenged PASSED 92–48 the assertion that forcing Vermonters to purchase S.260 is legislation to fund Lake Champlain clean- health insurance will lower premiums. They believe up and other water-quality improvements. It raises this law is a governmental overreach in requiring $6.4 million in new revenue, primarily from a $4.55 businesses to purchase a product/service and does million increase in the state rooms and meals tax not help make Vermont more affordable. This leg- to 9.25 percent (up from 9 percent). The rest, $1.94 islation passed both the House and the Senate and million, comes via the confiscation of revenue from was signed into law by Gov. Phil Scott. unclaimed bottle/can deposits, which is currently the property of the beverage distributors and used 3. H.196, MANDATED PAID LEAVE to defray the costs of managing recycling programs. NFIB: NO Representatives voting “no” supported NFIB’s PASSED 90–53 position that water quality improvements should H.196 imposes a 0.136 percent ($16.3 million) be funded with existing resources and not funded payroll tax on employees to pay for a state-man- with mechanisms that discourage business owners dated, government-run family leave insurance from owning and operating their businesses. Rep- program. It allows an employee to leave his/her resentatives voting “yes” support increased taxes job and collect 70 percent of wages, or “an amount to fund water quality improvements. Although the equal to a 40-hour work week paid at a rate double House of Representatives passed this legislation, that of the livable wage…whichever is less,” for up the law was not enacted. Legislation to deal with to 12 weeks/year of parental leave to care for a water quality funding is likely to be reintroduced newborn, or six weeks of family leave to care for a next session. sick parent or sibling (as an example). Legislators voting “yes” supported the legislation. Legislators 2. H.696, MANDATED HEALTHCARE voting “no” did so because they saw the law as a NFIB: NO burdensome mandate on small business. NFIB did PASSED 118–16 not support this legislation for two reasons: H.696 is legislation that requires individual Vermont- the burdensome nature of the law interfering with ers to purchase and maintain “minimum essential the employer/employee relationship, and actuarily coverage” for themselves and any dependent or pay the proposed tax rate had been set artificially low a penalty to the state beginning in the 2020 plan and would not be enough if demand for benefits year. This legislation is a reaction by some legislators exceeded the amount raised at the rate of 0.136 to the federal government eliminating the penalty percent. Mandated leave legislation passed both the for not carrying insurance as previously required House and the Senate but was vetoed by Gov. Phil under Obamacare. The newly created “Individual Scott. Mandate Working Group” will make recommenda- tions by November 2018 to the legislature for how this mandate will be imposed. Representatives voting “yes” support forcing Vermonters to purchase NFIB | SHAWN SHOULDICE, VT STATE DIRECTOR | 802-498-0059 | NFIB.COM/VT | @NFIB 4. S.40, MIN. WAGE INCREASE TO $15/HOUR charge. NFIB believed the education-funding issues NFIB: NO and dealing with the implications of the federal tax PASSED 77–69 changes should have been dealt with separately. S.40 is legislation that raises the minimum wage from $10.50 to $15 per hour by the year 2024 (at 6. H.911, PROPERTY TAX INCREASE OF $34 MILLION a rate of 75¢ per hour each year). The Vermont (AND ALLOCATION OF OTHER TAX REVENUES TO Joint Fiscal Office estimated that roughly 2,500 EDUCATION FUND) jobs would be lost because of the enactment of NFIB: NO a $15 minimum wage in Vermont. Other studies PASSED 89–43 showed higher levels of job loss. Legislators voting H.911 has both good and bad provisions. Towns “yes” argue that these wage increases will put more approved $1.647 billion worth of K-12 spending for money in the pockets of low-income earners, boost- FY19, which represents a 1.8 percent increase in ing economic activity. Legislators voting “no” spending over FY18. This version of H.911 increases understood that the mandated wage increases property taxes on residential property by 2.6 cents would cause small business owners to eliminate and 5 cents on commercial property (to a rate jobs, cut back hours or benefits (or both), and may of $1.606 per $100) for a total $33.4 million in even result in the closure of some businesses, increased property taxes. Although the bill elimi- causing harm to the state economy. The legislation nates the General Fund transfer to the Education passed both the House and the Senate but was Fund, it allocates all lottery revenues, 25 percent vetoed by Gov. Phil Scott. of the room and meals tax, and a portion of the sales tax to the Education Fund. It decreases the 5. H.911, $59 MILLION INCOME TAX INCREASE number of income tax brackets from five to four NFIB: NO (the top two brackets are merged into one) and PASSED 85–54 lowered the rates to 3.35 percent, 6.60 percent, H.911 is a two-part bill that ties two unrelated issues 7.60 percent, and 8.75 percent. It implements a together. Part one shifts some responsibility for state standard deduction that mirrors the one funding Vermont’s pre-K-12 education system from adopted by the federal tax code for 2017 and caps the property tax to the income tax by increasing the charitable contributions at a 5 percent deduction income tax by $59 million, eliminates the transfer or $20,000, whichever comes first. It reduces the of funds from General Fund to the Education Fund, tax on Social Security income for individuals earning and dedicates 100 percent of the sales and use under $55,000 (eliminates under $45,000) and tax to the Education Fund. This allows for a cut in married couples earning under $70,000 (eliminates homestead property tax rates of 15 cents/$100 of under $60,000). Legislators voting “yes” support assessed value. Part two is intended to negate the this tax package. Legislators voting “no” oppose unintended $30 million tax increase resulting from this tax package. NFIB opposed this version changes made by the U.S. Congress in the federal of the bill because it created even less transpar- tax code. Representatives voting “yes” favored ency around the issue of how and by how much reducing the reliance on the property tax for education is funded in Vermont. Legislation contain- funding pre-K-12 education spending and shifting ing some provisions (income tax changes, cap on that burden to the income tax, which they believe charitable gifts, and the taxation of Social Security) better reflects ability to pay.Legislators who were passed by both the House and the Senate voted “no” supported NFIB’s position to oppose and allowed to become law without Gov. Phil Scott’s this legislation because it maintained and created signature after he vetoed it twice and called the even more complexity in the current education- legislature back into Special Session. funding system (CLA, per pupil spending, income sensitivity, etc.) by adding the new income tax sur- NFIB | SHAWN SHOULDICE, VT STATE DIRECTOR | 802-498-0059 | NFIB.COM/VT | @NFIB VOTING KEY Y = Voted Yes * = Did not vote N = Voted No N/A = Not enough votes to score (5 required) % = Percentage of votes aligned to NFIB position HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES VOTING RECORD ISSUE NUMBER 1 2 3 4 5 6 % NFIB POSITION N N N N N N 100% DISTRICT PARTY LEGISLATOR Windsor-Orange-1 Republican Representative David Ainsworth N Y N N * N 80% Washington-6 Democrat Representative Janet Ancel Y Y Y Y Y Y 0% Chittenden-8-3 Republican Representative Robert Bancroft Y Y N N N N 67% Windsor-1 Democrat Representative John L. Bartholomew Y * Y Y Y * N/A Addison-4 Republican Representative Fred Baser Y Y Y N N N 50% Orleans-1 Republican Representative Lynn Batchelor N N N N N N 100% Caledonia-3 Republican Representative Scott Beck N Y N N Y Y 50% Windsor-1 Democrat Representative Paul Belaski Y Y Y Y Y Y 0% Franklin-5 Republican Representative Steve Beyor Y N N N Y Y 50% Chittenden-6-7 Democrat Representative Clement Bissonnette Y Y Y Y Y Y 0% Windsor-3-1 Democrat Representative Thomas Bock Y Y Y Y Y Y 0% Bennington-1 Democrat Representative William Botzow II Y Y Y Y Y Y 0% Chittenden-9-2 Republican Representative Patrick Brennan Y Y N N N N 67% Windsor-Orange-2 Democrat Representative Timothy Briglin Y Y Y Y Y Y 0% Bennington-4 Democrat Representative Cynthia Browning N * N N Y * N/A Chittenden-5-2 Democrat Representative Jessica Brumsted Y Y Y Y Y Y 0% Windsor-4-1 Democrat Representative Susan Buckholz Y * Y Y N * N/A Rutland-2 Republican Representative Thomas Burditt N N N N N Y 83% Windham-2-2 Progressive Representative Mollie S.