On August 8, 2026, ICE agents rolled up in black and grey SUV’s to Mary’s home in tiny Cornwall, Vermont, got out, and, over her objection, forced their way on to her property. There they seized two people who were helping to put a new roof on Mary’s home and took them away. Throughout this confrontation, Mary repeatedly demanded that the ICE agents produce a warrant. They ignored her. They did not produce a warrant.

In coming onto Mary’s property without a warrant, the ICE agents violated both the 4th Amendment to the Constitution and a Federal law and regulation that specifically prohibits entering residential property to effect a warrantless seizure:

An immigration officer may not enter into the non-public areas of a business, a residence including the curtilage of such residence, or a farm or other outdoor agricultural operation, except as provided in section 287(a)(3) of the Act, for the purpose of questioning the occupants or employees concerning their right to be or remain in the United States unless the officer has either a warrant or the consent of the owner or other person in control of the site to be inspected. (8 CFR § 287.8(f)(1).)

“Curtilage” is an ancient legal term that means the land and outbuildings immediately surrounding a home. The exception mentioned in the quoted regulation covers arrests without a warrant of someone suspected of being in the United States illegally if the arrest is made within 25 miles of a border. Mary’s house is not within 25 miles of a border. Moreover, the exception does not include entering a residence without a warrant. See 8 U.S.C. § 1357(a)(2).

The 4th Amendment states:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

ICE violated federal statutory law and the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution.

To my knowledge, this is the first such warrantless violation by ICE in Vermont.

ICE’s Contempt for the Rule of Law

The first principle of the Rule of Law states:

No state power (i.e., force, violence, institutions, or financial resources) may be exercised without specific authorization by law. No agent of government may act outside the law. And each such official must carry out the duties prescribed by law for his or her office.1

This is the subordination principle. It says that no government official may legally use the power or authority of the government without specific legal authorization. No independent frolics. No use of government power for private purposes. No autocratic, oligarchic, kleptocratic, or kakistocratic rule. Everyone is subject to the rules, and the rules apply to everyone. No exceptions.

In a democracy, the government has a monopoly on the use of force. The only exception is self defense. Under the Rule of Law, the use of force by government agents must be specifically authorized by law. Otherwise, it is illegal.

We’ve Heard Nothing from Governor Scott

VT Digger and Channel 5 reported the arrests on Mary’s property. Senator Ruth Hardy issued a statement condemning the arrests on her website. The Addison Independent reported the story on August 13.

Yet, Governor Scott has not issued any public statement nor, so far as we know, taken any action with respect to this violation of a Vermont citizen’s rights. We’ve heard nothing from the Governor’s Office.

Governor Scott’s Silence is a Failure of Leadership

When he took office in January 2025, Governor Scott swore the following oath:

I, Phillip B. Scott, do solemnly swear that I will be true and faithful to the State of Vermont and that I will not directly or indirectly do any act or thing injurious to the Constitution or government thereof, so help me God. I, Phillip B. Scott, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, so help me God. I, Phillip B. Scott, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of Governor of the State of Vermont, and will therein do equal right and justice to all persons, to the best of my judgment and ability, according to law, so help me God.

The broad meaning of that oath requires the Governor to take all necessary action to defend the rights of Vermont residents under the US Constitution, the Vermont Constitution, and the laws of the United States and of Vermont.

At the very least, the Governor has a responsibility to denounce the flagrant violation of the Constitution and federal law committed by ICE agents at Mary’s home on August 8. He has not yet done so.

Why Should Governor Scott Denounce the Illegal Acts of ICE Agents?

Why is it important for the Governor to denounce ICE’s violation of Mary’s rights?

In an essay published on July 10, 2024, I wrote that Trump and Project 2025 are coming for you, your family and your freedoms and quoted Martin Niemoeller’s famous poem:

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me

If ICE can come onto Mary’s property and seize people without a warrant, ICE can come onto your property. ICE can come onto my property as well.

If ICE can get away with violating Mary’s rights, ICE can get away with violating your rights and my rights too.

The Governor of Vermont has a duty to protect our rights. He has the duty to protect all of us against the illegal acts by ICE or anyone else.

The least Governor Scott could do would be to denounce ICE’s actions on Mary’s property. He could let ICE and everyone else know that Vermont will not tolerate such lawless behavior.

But he hasn’t and, odds are, he won’t. Governor Scott has failed Vermont and Vermonters in his own stated goals. (See A Report Card for Governor Scott.) He is failing now to lead on denouncing and repudiating ICE’s illegal actions in Vermont.

It’s time for someone new. It’s time for Amanda Janoo.

Leave a comment

Share

In 2016, governor Scott campaigned on the promise to grow the economy, make Vermont more affordable, and protect the most vulnerable. In every state of the state and budget address, governor Scott has repeated those goals.

In this short video, I present a report card on governor Scott’s stewardship. Has he achieved those objectives? How is Vermont doing after 9 years of having Scott in charge?

Every Governor and every agency of government must have a strategic plan–a detailed statement of what it wants to achieve, the resources needed to reach those goals, and a set of intermediate projects that will get you to the ultimate objective. So, what strategic plan does Governor Scott have for growing the economy, making Vermont more affordable, and protecting the most vulnerable? This is a picture of the State of Vermont website on Governor Scott’s Vision and Strategic Priorities. Let’s click on “Current Strategic Plan” and see what it says.

Oh, no. It literally says, “Site under maintenance. Strategic plan is currently under maintenance. Thank you for your patience.”

In short, Vermont is adrift with no competent leader at the helm.

Gov. Scott is absent without leave.

So, on Strategic Planning, the Governor gets an F. He has not done the work at all. There is no plan against which we, the voters, can hold him accountable.

What about his stewardship on health care?

Here it’s a runaway train of costs and premiums increasing by double digits every year. Tens of thousands of Vermonters carry medical debt. 187,000 can’t afford to see a primary care doctor. He has no plan and has done nothing of consequence to fix the problem. Gov. Scott gets an F on health care.

Let’s turn to housing?

If anything, the housing story is worse than the health care report. 92% of Vermonters can’t afford a median-priced new home. Housing is not available. Vermont has one of the highest rates of homelessness in the nation. An honest grade must be an F here too.

What about Vermont schools?

On education, Governor Scott is addressing the school budget problem by proposing to close schools in small communities. 4th grade reading scores are declining, while states with fewer resources such as Mississippi have made measurable gains. He is ignoring health care costs, which are the main driver of school budget problems. He gets a D minus only because he has at least taken action, ill-considered though it might be.

What’s the story on the cost of living in Vermont?

Affordability is one of Governor Scott’s three recurring goals. Here too, Governor Scott has failed miserably. At least 45% of Vermont households fall short of a livable income by $10,000 to $20,000 a year. Property taxes have gone up more than 40% in 5 years.

In a February 2026 interview with the Boston Globe, Governor Scott admitted that Vermont is not more affordable than it was when he took office. People tell him they just can’t afford to live in Vermont any more.

In 2020, the General Assembly passed the Global Warming Solutions Act over Governor Scott’s veto. It would have put us on track to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to do our part in combatting the Climate Crisis. Vermont missed the 2025 emissions target because Scott and his administration have sat on their hands. It has been sued for failing to comply.

Meanwhile, 500 year floods continue to devastate Montpelier and other parts of the state.

Working families have been hit hardest by Governor Scott’s failures to do his job. He repeatedly vetoed legislative increases to the minimum wage. He vetoed paid family leave. He vetoed the child care expansion act. His response to every proposal to help working families has been a flat NO, and he has no plan of his own to help them.

On almost every subject, Governor Scott’s record earns an F. He has vetoed more than three times the number of bills as any previous governor of the state. Governor No has got to go.

On November 3, I’m voting for Amanda Janoo. How ‘bout you vote for her too?

I’m Mike Palmer. Thanks for watching.

Share

Leave a comment

Get your own copy of the Scott Report Card with this link. Pass it around.

Hey, let’s end on an upbeat note. Enjoy the great Joan Chamorro and friends at the Bar Colombia a few years ago.

Editor’s Note: Today’s essay is a guest article by Kelly Cummings of Fletcher, Vermont. It appeared originally as an op-ed piece in the St. Albans Messenger.

If you keep on doing what you've always done, you keep on getting what you've always got.

Let’s be honest, things are bad for the average, everyday, regular person. We can feel it in our gut. Gas prices, food prices, healthcare prices, housing prices and childcare prices, just to name a few, are costing us more than we can afford to pay. It’s as if the walls are closing in on us. Where’s the hope? Where’s the possibility? Where are those boots we have always been told we should pull up by their straps? Do we even matter anymore? Think about it. Do we?

In a world that is being driven by greed and power, at any cost to the average, everyday, regular person, we don’t stand a chance if we continue to accept the status quo approach. It is exactly what got us to where we are now.

Let’s Try Something Different

But are we brave enough to try something different? The greedy and powerful are betting—maybe even on Polymarket or Kalshi—that we are not. They figure we will fall in line, like we always do, because we will inevitably fall for the same old shtick. The same old scare tactics. The same old lies. The same old middle ground comfort that, for some reason, we believe will save us, help us and surely change things for the better. But it hasn’t. And it won’t, because pretend comfort doesn’t pay our bills, it doesn’t help us raise our children and it will not help us afford healthcare when we get sick.

It is time for a change. It is time, now more than ever, for us to be brave and bold and take that chance on real substantial change, no longer accepting - the “impossible to do” excuses. We know where we’re headed if we don’t. We know it’s most likely going to be bleak and hard and hopeless.

And if you haven’t figured that out by now, do a little research. Start paying attention. Be curious and ask questions. Not only have our leaders been suffering from a failure of imagination but so too have we. The time to expect and demand more from our leaders is now. We must no longer be appeased with old ideas and accepting of performative talk that is hollow and lazy.

This is important because our very lives and livelihoods may depend on it. It is now possible to imagine we may not survive the status quo much longer, the burden is already too heavy and getting heavier. But, it is also just as possible to imagine a different kind of future for ourselves and our children, if we dare. And dare we should. Dare we must. This is our chance.

Enter Amanda Janoo. Amanda is running to be the next governor of Vermont. Have you gone to her website janooforvt.com or maybe gone to one of her many events around the state? If you haven’t you should. She’s not the status quo and is not being supported by any status quo PACs like her opponent in the primary election, Aly Richards. And she’s not afraid to imagine a better future for Vermont.

Amanda is soft spoken and humble, but make no mistake about it, she is bold and brave and wants to roll up her sleeves and really get to work for us. She’s an economist, she’s smart, and I would also add a visionary. She’s ambitious, but her ambition is not for herself, it is for us.

Believe in the Possible

Imagine it, ambition for us. Ambition to improve the lives and well being of Vermonters. Wait, what? That’s backwards. Exactly, it is.

Some will tell you her ideas are not status quo enough or even pixie dust. I disagree with pixie dust because we know that any idea any of us have ever had, a desire to start a business, to get a degree, to start a family, began with our ability to first imagine it, then to believe it possible, then to really want to make it happen and then do just that.

We know that we as individuals have been able to accomplish the best things in our lives because of our own belief that they were possible. Don’t let The Established, once again, convince you otherwise. Not this time. They are going to try really hard, like they’ve always done, to convince you the status quo is the way to go. Just remember that’s what we have now and have had, for a very long time. Ask yourself, how has the status quo served you? It’s exactly what has brought us unaffordable healthcare, an unaffordable housing crisis and so many more things that keep us needing and yearning for just the basics of a life lived, for a little break - we’re tired.

It’s Time to Save Ourselves

Here’s the thing, we are going to have to save ourselves. We just are. We can start by choosing the best, out of the box and ambitious visionary leader to lead us. A leader who isn’t afraid to lead us or for that matter, to lead the legislators. A leader who sees us and will bring a determined heartfelt desire and new perspective to start solving some of our very old problems. A leader who has a plan on how to do it with Vermonter’s quality of life as her first priority.

I believe Democratic candidate Amanda Janoo is that leader and I will be casting my vote in the August 11th primary election for her. I hope you will too.

It’s time to stop doing what we’ve always done so we can stop getting what we’ve always got.

I don’t know about you, but I’ve had about enough of the status quo that never seems to really fix anything.

What happens next is up to us.

Kelly Cummings, Fletcher, Vermont

Leave a comment

Share

Scott Killed Protection from AI Data Centers

On May 26, 2026, the Vermont Senate passed H.727 by a vote of 26–3. It cleared the House almost unanimously. H.727 would have created strict rules to control the building of large Artificial Intelligence (AI) data centers. It aimed to protect local energy bills, water supplies, and the climate.1

On May 28, Governor Scott vetoed the bill, writing, “this bill creates an unacceptable precedent which will have much broader consequences for economic opportunity and long-term competitiveness in Vermont.”2 He indicated that Act 250 is sufficient to address concerns about data centers. He did not, however, say how the existing regulatory system provides the protections Vermonters want. It doesn’t.

Let’s take a look at the protections H.727 would put in place that Act 250 does not afford.

H.727 Would Have Protected Us and the Environment

H.727 introduces extensive, explicit protections for data centers that fall entirely outside the traditional jurisdiction of Act 250, focusing on grid stability, consumer protection, and strict environmental accountability.3 Financially, the legislation shields everyday consumers by requiring data centers to sign minimum 10-year utility contracts and absorb 100% of their infrastructure costs. Furthermore, it mandates real-time grid integration into utility-managed Virtual Power Plants (VPPs) for load-shifting, levies a recurring multi-million dollar energy transformation fee to fund local weatherization, and enforces continuous monitoring for EPA-detectable PFAS chemicals, known as "forever chemicals" because they don’t break down in the environment or the human body.

Procedurally, the bill establishes rigorous, data center-specific requirements that go far beyond standard Act 250 land-use reviews. Before applying for permits, facilities must conduct pre-permit site suitability analyses alongside local utilities and Efficiency Vermont. And they are required to use closed-loop cooling systems unless proven structurally infeasible. Additionally, H.727 lowers groundwater withdrawal permit thresholds and enforces mandatory biennial compliance audits to ensure ongoing adherence to grid and environmental standards. Ultimately, authority is distributed between the Public Utility Commission for grid and utility contracts and the Agency of Natural Resources for water and environmental permits, bypassing Act 250 entirely.

Governor Scott’s statement that Act 250 provides sufficient protections for Vermont’s rate payers and the environment is simply not true.

Scott Killed Help on Health Insurance Premiums

On June 16, 2026, Scott vetoed S.190, one of the healthcare-related bills the legislature passed this session. The bill would have helped lower costs for two groups paying some of the highest premiums in the state: public school employees and Vermonters buying coverage on the ACA marketplace, whose premiums have skyrocketed after Congress let the subsidies expire.

Governor Scott vetoed that bill too because it did not cover everyone.

Scott Killed Data Privacy

In June 2024, Scott vetoed the Vermont Data Privacy Act — a comprehensive bill that had passed the House 139–3 and would have given Vermonters the right to sue companies that misused their personal data, with strong protections aimed at children.4 Scott’s objection centered on that right to sue, which he warned would expose businesses to costly litigation. Well, the right to sue helps keep corporate capital from abusing its power. The Senate couldn’t muster the votes to override.5

Vermont lawmakers didn’t give up. Over the next two sessions they stripped out the provision Scott objected to and rebuilt the bill — S.71 — around Connecticut’s much weaker, industry-preferred model: consumer opt-ins, no right to sue, and lighter obligations on the companies collecting Vermonters’ data.6 On June 16, 2026, Scott signed it.

Compare what Vermonters lost. The 2024 bill would have let people sue companies that violated their privacy rights after giving those companies three months to fix the problem. The bill Scott finally signed gives Vermonters no such recourse — just the same “notice and choice” framework that privacy advocates nationally have called an illusion of protection. Big Tech companies including Google, Meta, Apple, and Amazon publicly thanked Scott’s administration for the 2024 veto. Vermont’s Attorney General said at the time that the administration had been “almost entirely absent” from the years of public process that built the stronger bill.

Scott never introduced his own privacy bill. He waited for the Legislature to write him a weaker one, and only then put his signature on something.

Why These Vetoes Matter When Assessing Governor Scott’s Stewardship

Governor Scott’s most recent vetoes brought his total to 63, over three times the number of any other governor in Vermont history. So many that insiders now call him Governor No.

As I wrote in a previous essay, Phil Scott is also the No Plan Man. Combine the lack of a strategy with the no to legislative initiatives and you have a Vermont on the road to nowhere.

Here’s why his obstructionism matters:

First, Vermont has real problems that are not being addressed because of Governor Scott’s obstruction. Highest-in-the-nation health insurance premiums (19.6% in Vermont compared with 4.2% in New Hampshire). 45% of adults earning less than a livable wage. Young people leaving the state. Population declining. Record homelessness. Second-highest median new home prices. Soaring property taxes.

Second, constant vetoes demoralize volunteer legislators. Each of our representatives and senators spends hundreds of hours crafting legislation to address and solve problems only to get stabbed in the back with Governor Scott’s veto pen. He doesn’t work with them to devise legislation he can support. He just lies in the weeds and then pounces when they do what they can. No wonder so many of our veteran legislators are retiring.

Third, vetoing legislation like the data centers bill and the healthcare premium reduction bill contributes to the continuing decline of our beautiful state. There is a compounding effect. Innovative organizations struggle to get going for lack of housing, unaffordable health care, and high property taxes. No one is managing the store. And it shows.

Governor No Has Got to Go

Governor Scott’s approval rating has dropped to 51% and his disapproval rate has risen to 43%. He’s not doing the job, and Vermonters have noticed.

Three bills. Three different issues — healthcare costs, energy costs, data privacy. Same governor, same move each time: block the Legislature’s solution, point vaguely at existing tools or a future executive action, and let the problem sit. None of these vetoes came with a competing plan. Two came with promises of “executive action” that, months later, remain unspecified. The third came with silence until someone else did the work of writing him something he’d accept.

That’s not fiscal caution. It’s not a competing vision for how to solve Vermont’s affordability crisis. It’s a governor whose only consistent program is stopping other people’s programs.

Governor No Has Got to Go.

Elect Can Do Janoo

Fortunately, this year we can replace Governor No with Amanda Janoo. Amanda has the plan, the expertise, and the experience to lead a well-being economy and fix what is broken in Vermont. Learn more at Janoo for Vermont. Get involved. Get your neighbors involved. The future of Vermont depends on it.

Previous Essays in this Series

Phil Scott: Vermont’s No Plan Man, June 7, 2026

The Plan Phil Scott Once Had, June 15, 2026

Is Governor Scott Trapped by Bad Thinking, June 29, 2026

The Myth of the Inevitable Governor, July 3, 2026

Share

Leave a comment

A new UNH poll shows Phil Scott’s approval rating has dropped dramatically.1 Until now, even long-standing Democratic operatives thought Phil Scott was untouchable. He was Vermont’s permanent fixture. You may as well save your energy, the story went, because anyone running against him would lose.

This story has kept good candidates on the sidelines for years.

All that changed dramatically on June 30 when the University of New Hampshire released its latest poll, which found that Scott’s approval rating had dropped from 64% in 2022 to 51% today.2 His disapproval rate has jumped to 43%.

And this is with very little news on the campaign and almost no advertising on Scott himself. Scott’s inaction and obstructionism in the face of unaffordable—well, everything: health care, housing, gasoline, groceries, education—are catching up with him organically.

People have noticed. They’ve noticed that Governor Scott wants to close their local schools, has done nothing to reduce the cost of housing or make more housing available, and opposes even baby steps to reduce health care premiums in Vermont—the highest in the nation. He presides over one of the highest rates of homelessness in all 50 states. He vetoed a bill that would have protected Vermont ratepayers from large-scale artificial intelligence data centers.3 And he just vetoed a bill that would have lowered insurance premiums for school employees and small businesses.4

Yes, if the election were held today, Scott might win. He is still leading Amanda Janoo, but only 42% of likely voters chose him. About a quarter of voters are undecided, which means they could be persuaded to join the 27 percent already supporting Janoo’s election and put her over the top.

I’m not saying Amanda Janoo is a cinch to win. Far from it. But it is entirely feasible for Janoo to be elected Vermont’s next governor.

The story of the invincible, inevitable governor is falling apart.

Start with his own numbers. Scott’s job approval has fallen to 51 percent — the lowest UNH has measured since it began asking the question in 2022. And here’s the part that should keep his campaign up at night: the decline isn’t coming from Democrats alone. It’s coming from Republicans too. Just 57 percent of his own party approves of him now, a substantial decline from earlier polls. This is exactly what the erosion of shallow support looks like — not just with the opposition, but with the base quietly drifting away.

Wrong Direction

The UNH poll also reports how Vermonters feel about the direction of the state. Only a third — 33 percent — think Vermont is headed the right way. Nearly half, 49 percent, say we’re on the wrong track.

That is not the mood of a state at peace with its leadership. When a governor is genuinely popular, people usually feel good about where things are going. Half of Vermont doesn’t. After a decade of affordability promised and never delivered, of housing that keeps slipping out of reach, of a school-consolidation fight that has landed hard in small towns, and of the most expensive health care in the nation, even Republicans want to change course.

Then there are the independents — the voters who decide statewide races in Vermont. With Janoo in the race, they currently split almost exactly down the middle: 29 percent for Scott, 28 percent for her. Think about that. An incumbent who has been on ballots here for more than ten years cannot pull away from a challenger most voters have never heard of. That is not the profile of deep support. That is the profile of a name people are used to, holding on by habit.

Getting to Know Amanda Janoo

Which brings me to the number I find most encouraging of all. Among Democratic Primary voters who have met Amanda Janoo — through her work, her writing, a town-hall, a conversation on a porch — favorable opinions outnumber unfavorable ones by seventeen to one. People who know Amanda like Amanda. She’s a candidate most Vermonters simply haven’t yet met.

A name everyone knows is only 15 points ahead of a name they’re just beginning to learn. The challenge is not to get voters to like Amanda Janoo. Those who meet her do—overwhelmingly. Rather, the challenge is to introduce her to everyone. And that happens not through a glitzy television ad campaign but one trusted conversation at a time.

YES WE CAN

That’s where you come in. You and thousands like you are the engine of getting Vermont on the right track. Go to Janooforvt.com and click on Get Involved to sign up for canvasing, phone banking, or a lawn sign. Click on the following picture to get a page of notes you can hand out to friends, neighbors, and everyone you meet:

Inevitability isn’t a fact. It’s a feeling — a spell a state casts on itself — and it breaks the moment enough people decide to stop believing it. The University of New Hampshire poll is the first crack in that spell. Scott is more vulnerable today than he has been in years, and the only question left is whether enough of us do the patient, person-to-person work to turn his soft, tired, borrowed support into a real choice.

We’re the ones we’ve been waiting for. Let’s introduce Vermont to its next governor—Amanda Janoo.

Leave a comment

Share

Over the past 9 years, Governor Scott has failed abysmally to achieve even the three objectives he repeatedly mentions when giving a major address or budget speech:

1. Grow the economy

2. Make Vermont more affordable

3. Protect the most vulnerable

While most Vermonters would agree that Governor Scott means well, the data show that he has not gotten the job done. His good intentions have not translated into more affordability or a better life for the most vulnerable. Working Vermonters are worse off than they were in 2017 when he took office.1

Gone Fishing

To solve a water damage problem, it’s necessary to find out how the water is getting into the house. If you just patch the damaged ceiling, the next big rain will cause the same damage again.

To solve a leadership problem, either the leader changes or you change the leader.

At the core of most leadership problems is either the failure to think or improper thinking.

With Governor Scott, it is possible that we have both. That is, he is not doing the thinking the job requires. And the mindset with which he approaches his work is fundamentally flawed.

In Vermont’s No Plan Man, I explained that Governor Scott has not put forth a strategic plan for Vermont in at least three years. That’s a failure to think.

Neither he nor his Administration has articulated a vision for Vermont with a plan for how to achieve it, including milestones and other benchmarks by which voters can hold him accountable. That’s basic nonfeasance, a fancy word for not doing the job. It’s like you hired an architect to design an office building but never saw any drawings. All you got were generalities about how nice the building would look.

The Scott Administration has no senior economic-policy strategist or growth architect at its center. It has no standing council of economic advisers and no office of strategic planning. The Administration does not produce or maintain a current statewide plan with measurable targets. There is no institutional home for the root-cause analysis that Vermont’s problems demand.

On its webpage, the Agency of Commerce and Community Development advertises a “2020 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy” (CEDS). That document is a federally-supported plan produced regionally by the Regional Development Corporations and Regional Planning Commissions. It is not a comprehensive strategy developed by the Administration.

More important, the CEDS was last updated in February 2016, that is, under the Shumlin Administration. The Scott Administration has not updated the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy in the 9 years that Governor Scott has been in office.

The federal government created the Council of Economic Advisers in 1946 on a simple premise: a modern executive cannot govern an economy without professional economic counsel positioned to advise on direction, not just to keep the books. Given Vermont’s specific problems—a shrinking working-age population, the nation's highest health-insurance premiums, a severe housing shortage, and taxes rising faster than incomes — we need a chief economist with a small analytics team, a strategic plan that sets and tracks measurable goals, and the practice of commissioning rigorous diagnoses before committing to remedies. We have none of that.

It’s almost as if Governor Scott had hung a sign on the door: “Gone Fishing.”

Is Governor Scott Mesmerized by a Magic of the Marketplace Mindset?

When a CEO fails to do the job, most boards don’t agonize over why. The just replace the CEO with someone they believe can get it done. This happens routinely in the corporate and nonprofit worlds. And CEO’s understand: Either they deliver the goods or they must leave.

But that’s short-sighted thinking. How do you know what to look for in the replacement if you don’t understand why the first person failed. You could be putting someone in the job who just repeats the same mistakes. So, let’s take a moment to examine what might have led Governor Scott to completely neglect his planning responsibilities as Governor.

Based on Governor Scott’s own speeches and pronouncements, it appears that he is trapped in a “magic of the marketplace” mindset.

In his FY2027 budget address, Governor Scott explained that every proposed initiative is run past three questions — does it grow the economy, make Vermont more affordable, protect the most vulnerable — and if it doesn't satisfy at least one of these three, it doesn't move forward. He first set these as an executive order on his opening day in 2017. The structure is the argument. Economic growth and affordability are the gatekeepers, and the safety net enters as a residual ("the most vulnerable"), not as a general purpose of government.

Governor Scott is using a market-first priority as an operating rule. It’s a belief system that was expressed most strongly by Milton Friedman and other economists at the University of Chicago.

A companion piece of this thinking is the notion that the economy will grow and everyone will be better off if we lower taxes and curtail regulation. In this view, lower taxes will lead to investment and stimulate growth.2 Free, unregulated markets—driven by self-interest and voluntary exchange—spontaneously organize the efforts of millions of people to produce goods efficiently.3

The following joke sums up the Chicago School ideology:

How many Chicago School economists does it take to change a lightbulb?

None. If the lightbulb needed changing, the market would have already done it.

A crude way of putting this is, “Let the rich get insanely rich and everyone else will be OK.” It’s the “rising-tide-lifts-all-boats” meme from the 60’s turned into government policy.4

But as the wealthy have increased their wealth in complete disregard for everyone else, the boats of the poor and middle class have not risen. They’ve been swamped.

By implementing magical market thinking in Vermont, Governor Scott has opened the door to the destruction of Vermont’s housing market by private equity firms, the explosion of health care costs, and the second-highest rate of homelessness in the nation. He has failed to implement the Global Warming Solutions Act to mitigate Climate Change. In short,

IT’S NOT WORKING.

After 9 years of Scott’s Governorship, Vermont ranks 51st in the nation—51st!—on economic momentum.5 Vermont is dead last in property tax burden. Vermont’s average wage in 2025 was $67,164, well below the U.S. average of $78,722.6 Not even Chittenden County gets up to the national average.

Governor Scott says his approach to governing is pragmatic. But it has nothing to do with the pragmatism developed by C.S. Peirce, William James, and John Dewey at Harvard and Columbia at the beginning of the 20th Century. Rather, it is the dregs of a gouge-the-poor selfishness dressed up in a supposedly respectable but defunct economic theory.7

Amanda Janoo Will Lead a Well-Being Economy

It’s time for thinking that actually works. Amanda Janoo has helped Pamona, California, Toronto, Porirua New Zealand, and Perth Scotland put well-being economies in place.8 She can do the same for Vermont.

If you want a better life in and for Vermont, sign up at Janooforvt.com to help get her elected. You can make a gift, canvas, put up a lawn sign, and do your own bit in other ways.

Editor’s Note: This is the third in a series of essays on the Governor Vermont needs to meet its current challenges. Subscribe to get every essay and leave a comment to join the conversation.

Previous Essays in this Series

Phil Scott: Vermont’s No Plan Man, June 7, 2026

The Plan Phil Scott Once Had, June 15, 2026

Share

Leave a comment

If you want to get help elect Amanda Janoo, click on the picture below, then download and print the page. Cut it into four squares and hand them out to friends and neighbors.

Subscribe now

Phil Scott once told Vermonters exactly how to judge him.

When Phil Scott ran for governor in 2016, he asked Vermonters to expect more of their state. His Comprehensive Blueprint for Economic Growth promised a Vermont that would grow more affordable each year. A young family could find a house within their budget. Health care would cost less not more. The workforce would stop shrinking. The most vulnerable would be protected. And young adults would stop leaving. He put these promises in writing and asked Vermonters to hold him to them.

Ten years later, many of those same Vermonters feel quietly let down. The most vulnerable have not been protected. Vermont has the second-highest homeless rate in the nation. And Governor Scott admits that Vermont is not more affordable today than when he became governor.

In February, Scott told the Boston Globe what he hears from the people around him. His own friends and neighbors, he said, tell him “I just can’t afford it anymore. I just can’t stay here anymore, because I’ve talked to my cousin in Tennessee or Florida, and things aren’t as bad there as they are here.”1 Asked directly about the record, he conceded the point: “When I talk with Vermonters today, they certainly don’t think Vermont is more affordable than it was 10 years ago.”2 He added that they did not think it was affordable then, either — which is true, and which is rather the point. Vermont’s affordability problem is exactly the problem he was elected to solve. He diagnosed it, named it the highest priority of his administration, and told us how to measure whether he was fixing it. A decade on, the man who made the promise agrees it has not been kept.

In the first essay in this series I called Phil Scott Vermont’s No Plan Man, and closed by pointing to a plan he presented to Vermonters in the 2016 election. This essay is about that document — what it was, what it promised, and why it remains the fairest standard by which to judge him.

A serious plan

The Comprehensive Blueprint for Economic Growth was the most detailed governing plan any Vermont candidate had put before the voters in recent memory. It ran to a twelve-part economic growth plan and a set of addenda — on truth in budgeting, government modernization, transportation, restoring faith and trust in government, and the opiate epidemic — and it carried, by its own count, “more than 50 specific ideas, initiatives and proposals.”3 It was organized under three words: Progress. Affordability. Opportunity. It may have been the deciding factor in his defeat of Sue Minter, with whom he was polling neck and neck just three weeks before the election.

The Blueprint did not hedge about the stakes. It diagnosed a “Crisis of Affordability” and declared that making Vermont more affordable for families and businesses “must be Montpelier’s highest priority.” Around that diagnosis it arranged its pillars: protect the jobs we have, expand a shrinking workforce, put health care reform “back on track,” revitalize the economies of every county, build housing working families could afford, reform taxes to keep people here, modernize a costly government. I will address each of these in a separate essay in this series, because each came with commitments specific enough to check.

“We will not overpromise and we will always follow through.”

Near the front of the Blueprint, Candidate Phil Scott wrote: “We will not overpromise and we will always follow through.”4 Throughout the document he returns, again and again, to a single demand — that government be judged by “measurable results.”5

Scott told Vermonters how to grade him, and he set the bar himself. So, this series takes him at his word. The essays that follow will hold up the yardstick he handed us and ask the question he invited: did he follow through?

He framed Vermont’s slow-motion crisis in three numbers — what his administration came to call “6-3-1.” Every single day, he said, there are on average six fewer workers in our workforce, three fewer children in our schools, and nearly one baby born exposed to opioids.6 It was an effective appeal precisely because it was not just a statistic. It was six neighbors gone, three empty desks, a newborn shaking in a hospital crib — every day.

It was not just a campaign document

On his first day in office, Governor Scott signed an executive order built around reversing the 6-3-1 trends, and his administration then translated the Blueprint into the formal machinery of government: a State Strategic Plan for 2018 through 2023, the official strategic plan of the State of Vermont, with measurable goals and target dates. True, it’s only one page, which makes it more an outline of a plan than one that shows how it will be put into effect. But it clearly states a vision of a Vermont whose “economy is growing faster than the costs of living” and that is “measurably more affordable each year for families and businesses.”7

Scott made affordability in Vermont the standard for measuring his own government and committed the state to keeping score.

Then the measuring stopped

The State Strategic Plan covered the years 2018 through 2023. It expired on June 30, 2023, and it was never renewed.8 The Vermont that was promised to grow “measurably more affordable each year” has instead grown less affordable, year after year, and Governor Scott stopped keeping score.

He did not follow the plan with a new strategic plan. Instead, he replaced it with a set of slogans. The administration’s priorities are now described in three words — “Workers, Kids and Communities” — and three mandates: grow the economy, make Vermont more affordable, protect the most vulnerable.9 There are no targets. There are no dates. There is no way to keep score, which may be the point. The score has never gone as he promised. The man who in 2016 said Vermont, under his watch, would stop losing six workers a day no longer reports the number at all.

The State’s website tells visitors that “a regularly updated strategic plan guides this work.”10 But if you click on the link for this updated plan, you get a page that says, “Strategic plan is currently under maintenance. Thank you for your patience.” There has not been a new plan at least since 2023.

How this series will proceed

Each essay in this series will take up one promise from Scott’s 2016 Blueprint, state it in Scott’s own words, and set it beside what Vermonters actually got — using his administration’s own data and reputable Vermont reporting.

This series is not about Phil Scott’s character or motives. It’s about results.

If you have felt, these last few years, that you are working harder just to stay in place, you are not imagining it, and you are not alone. Phil Scott gave us the yardstick for assessing his stewardship. In the essays that follow, we are simply going to use that measuring rod.

We will begin where Vermonters feel it first: the cost of their schools, and the property tax bill that arrives every summer.

Get Involved with Janoo Campaign

Click on this link to learn about and get involved with the Amanda Janoo Campaign.

Previous Essays in this Series

Phil Scott: Vermont’s No Plan Man, June 7, 2026

Leave a comment

Share

The Job of a Governor

The job of a state governor has three parts:

• First, develop a vision for what the state could and should be.

• Second, create a strategy for achieving that vision.

• Third, inspire legislators, administrators, NGO’s, and citizens to get the job done.

You cannot achieve what you do not first conceive. Thinking — proactive, disciplined thinking — is the first job of the governor. Other people help with the thinking, of course. But the buck stops with the governor. Making the final judgment on any policy or program is the governor's responsibility. So is setting up the processes that produce the thinking in the first place.

Three Priorities But No Strategy to Achieve Them

For eight years, Governor Scott has named three priorities:

• Grow the economy,

• make Vermont more affordable, and

• protect the most vulnerable.

These are his priorities, by his own statement, in every State of the State and every budget address. They are good priorities. The intentions are admirable. The question this essay asks is not whether Phil Scott wants the right things for Vermont. The question is whether, in eight years of holding the office that has the power to deliver those things, he has done the work the office requires.

We must ask, therefore, how has he done? We owe it to the people whose lives these intentions were to have made better to ask: Has he succeeded in growing the economy, making Vermont more affordable, and protecting the most vulnerable?

Sadly, we must conclude that by each of these measures, Governor Scott has failed, abysmally so.

The economy. Wages have not kept pace with the rest of the country.1 “Over the past two decades, real wages for the lowest earners in Vermont grew more slowly than in any other New England state or in the U.S. as a whole.”2

Affordability? In a February 2026 interview with the Boston Globe, Governor Scott admitted, “the affordability crisis that some of us have been talking about for decades is real.” Scott has heard friends and family members say, “I just can’t afford it anymore. I just can’t stay here anymore, because I’ve talked to my cousin in Tennessee or Florida, and things aren’t as bad there as they are here.” “And Scott himself readily concedes the picture has not improved during his time in office. ‘When I talk with Vermonters today, they certainly don’t think Vermont is more affordable than it was 10 years ago,’ he said. ‘Nor do they think it was affordable then.’”3 Vermont has the most unaffordable housing in the United States.4

The most vulnerable. Vermont has the second highest homeless rate in the country.5 Over 45% of 2-adult households with no children do not have livable incomes. That is, they have to cut corners and go without some basic necessities. Over 187,000 underinsured Vermonters can’t afford to see a primary care provider to address early-stage illnesses or preventable diseases like hypertension and diabetes because their deductibles are $4,000 or more. They are more, not less, vulnerable.6

For all Governor Scott’s congeniality, he has failed where it matters in the daily lives of Vermonters.

To quote the cliché: Are you better off now than you were eight years ago? By Scott’s own admission, most Vermonters would say NO.

Why Good Governance Requires Strategic Planning

The work of state agencies cannot be coordinated without a strategic plan. A good plan sets short-, medium-, and long-term goals that agencies can use to direct their work. It identifies necessary resources and how to get them. It develops legislation to support the work. It determines who will do the work. It sets a timeline for achieving them. And it sets measurable, time-bound goals against which everyone involved can be held accountable.

Without a strategic plan, agencies make it up as they go along. Voters cannot hold a governor accountable for missing goals he never set. Journalists cannot ask agency heads about progress against benchmarks that do not exist. Legislators cannot draft bills to advance an agenda that has never been articulated. Everything stays at the level of amorphous generalities like “growing the economy.”7

Strategic planning has been the consensus best practice in American public administration for nearly a century. John Bryson’s standard reference, Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations (6th edition), defines it as the disciplined work of producing the fundamental decisions that shape what an organization does and why it does it. Scott has not produced a strategic plan since 2017.

He Once Had a Blueprint

In 2016, candidate Phil Scott handed Vermont voters a forty-page comprehensive blueprint for economic growth. It contained more than fifty specific proposals across twelve subject areas — a Government Modernization plan, a Truth in Budgeting plan, a Transportation Priorities plan, an Opiate Action plan, and an Economic Growth plan with a dozen parts of its own.

In 2017, Governor Scott followed it with a State Strategic Plan covering 2018 through 2023. That was the first, last, and only such strategic plan. If you go on the website where the latest plan should be, you will find a picture stating “Site under maintenance. Strategic Plan is currently under maintenance. Thank you for your patience.”

For at least the past 3 years, there has been no plan. Phil Scott is the No Plan Man.

Subscribe now

What Vermont Has Lost

Much of Vermont’s decline over the past nine years could have been avoided if competent professionals had been appointed to lead agencies guided by a well-written plan. You can see the cost in hospitals struggling to survive, in property taxes rising at double-digit rates, in greenhouse-gas-reduction goals quietly missed, in young Vermonters leaving and too few moving in to replace them, in schools underperforming, and in the second-highest homelessness rate in the union.

This bleak scorecard is the result of failed leadership at the most basic level.

Vermonters have been patient long enough. They deserve a governor who has a vision for the state, a strategy for achieving it, and the discipline to do the hard thinking the office requires.

Action You Can Take

You can help change the course of Vermont history by sharing just one fact from this essay with friends and neighbors. For example, “Did you know that Governor Scott has not put a strategic plan in place for over 3 years and that the site where it would normally be says it’s ‘under maintenance.’?” Start a conversation. Share this essay. Download, print, and share the Report Card below.

We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.

Share

Leave a comment

If you want to get help elect Amanda Janoo, click on the picture below, then download and print the page. Cut it into four squares and hand them out to friends and neighbors.

Editor’s Note: This is the first in a series of essays on the Governor Vermont needs to meet its current challenges. Subscribe to get every essay and leave a comment to join the conversation.

Get your own copy of A Report Card for Phil Scott and share with friends and neighbors.