You Don’t Want to Miss This! 


On Thursday, December 3, 7:00pm to 8:30 pm at the Capitol Plaza in Montpelier, Rob Roper and John McClaughry representing the Ethan Allen Institute will debate Paul Burns and Jon Erikson representing the Vermont Public Interest Research Group over the issue of a Carbon Tax.

Should the Vermont Legislature levy a state-wide Carbon Tax on gasoline, diesel, propane, butane and heating oil?

EAI will be arguing the negative.

This event will be moderated by Peter Hirschfeld of Vermont Public Radio. It is open to the public and free of charge (though seating is somewhat limited), so we encourage all to come out and show your support. There will be 30-40 minutes allotted for audience questions. If you are unable to attend but have a question, please submit your question via email HERE. It will be forwarded to moderator.

Hope to see you there. It should be a heck of a show!

{ 1 comment }

by Chris Campion

Just because you surge in the polls doesn’t make you right, which means, I’m sorry to say, that what Bernie regularly posts on his taxpayer-funded Senate site is filled with the wrong ideas, the wrong policies, and the wrong fixes to problems that would not have been wrought had the government not intervened in the first place.

Oh, and in case Bernie’s supporters want to tout his lead in the laughable Democratic race for the nomination:  Bernie is competing against someone with more baggage than the 3rd-largest airline in the US.  And on the Republican side, Trump is still holding a lead in many polls.  So let’s hope Bernie’s supporters don’t count their allocated, government-issued Freedom Chickens before they hatch.

Since Bernie’s site is “dynamic”, a quick snap of the page, as I expect it to change and be filled with other topics such as “Sanders Questions Need for Soldiers to Have Ammo” and “Sanders Quiet on Vets Dying in VA Hospitals While He Was On the Senate Veterans Affairs Oversight Committee”.

Let’s start with jobs, since unlike a lot of Sanders supporters, most Americans want to work for a living.  What’s Big Bernie’s take on jobs?

Easy.  Let’s ban energy production in the US!

11.4:  Sanders, Merkley, Leahy Introduce Bill to Ban New Drilling on Public Land

WASHINGTON, Nov. 4 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) introduced legislation today to help accelerate the transition to clean energy by ending all new federal leases for oil, gas or coal extraction on public lands and waters.

As others have noted, since the Obama administration has already drastically reduced the leasing of public lands for commercial oil drilling, to a 3-decade low, what, exactly, does Bernie expect to accomplish?  Other than make it harder and more expensive, in the long run, for people who work for a living to put gas in their cars?

Here’s where Bernie really sticks it to those evil energy-producers:

“Worry less about your campaign contributions and worry more about your children and grandchildren,” Sanders told Republicans who continue to deny the science on climate change. “We are taking on the Koch brothers and some of the most powerful political forces in the world who are more concerned with short-term profits than the future of the planet. I’ve got four kids, and I’ve got seven beautiful grandchildren. We have a moral responsibility to leave our kids a planet that is healthy and inhabitable.”

Sanders doesn’t, however, apparently want to leave them a planet where when they turn on the light switch a light comes on.  First of all, there is no “clean” energy.  A wind turbine isn’t made from daisies and cow dung.  It’s made from steel, carbon, and many are routinely backed up by gas-fired energy when the wind doesn’t blow.  You need a gazillion of them to even hope to start matching current energy demands.

Also, Sanders seems to avoid mentioning those companies with their hands out for federal dollars that seek short-term profits rather than the future of the planet.  I guess not everyone is as saintly as Bernie when it comes to what power they choose to consume on a daily basis.

Oh, and since the national infrastructure won’t be divested of cars anytime soon, Bernie creates more dependency on Middle East oil – which is something no “leader” in American politics should be supporting.  Ever.

And how does restricting oil/gas drilling in the US help out those middle-class people who want a job, say, working for a company that drills for oil?

But enough about Americans wanting to do the jobs the government won’t let them do.  Let’s cut defense spending!

11.10:  Sanders Votes Against Increasing Defense Spending

Not three days before the Paris massacre, the ever-reliable Bernie Sanders took out his favorite whipping boy, and whipped him, just days before yet another massacre perpetrated by the insane might, just might, mean we shouldn’t be cutting defense spending even lower than it has been under Obama.

Timing, as always, is irrelevant when the dictatorship of the proletariat must be overthrown to make way for the pan-utopian Socialist future that awaits us, or whatever garbage is being peddled by Sanders and the mindless ilk that support an ideology responsible for 100 million deaths in the 20th century.

“If we are serious about ending waste, fraud, abuse and excessive spending, we have got to focus on all agencies – including the Department of Defense.”

Although Bernie fails to mention even one other agency that he wants to take a look at.  Like the Department of Energy, maybe?  Or maybe entitlements as a whole?  Nope.

But hey, are we really entitled to a defense here?

“This bloated Pentagon budget continues to pour money into outdated weapons systems that don’t function properly.”

The bloated Senate payroll continues to pour money into outdated anachronisms that don’t function properly, but Bernie still takes his paycheck.

Oh, and the outdated systems?  They’re outdated because new systems won’t be authorized by Barack Obama’s signature on the budget.  Secondly, if by “don’t function probably” Bernie means “able to strike with unmatched power anywhere in the world”, then he might be slightly confused about what the word “function” means.  Granted, he was barely an apprentice carpenter four decades ago, so what does he know about the design and function of weapons systems?  Other than that they don’t fire low-information votes into the ballot box for him?

“The Department of Defense is the only federal agency that cannot pass a clean audit.”

The Fed isn’t audited and 40% of every dollar spent, under budgets Bernie votes for, is paid for by borrowed funds.  Secondly, apparently Bernie’s never heard of DCAA (Defense Contract Audit Agency)and DCMA (Defense Contract Management Agency), two huuuuuuuge federal agencies that audit all DoD contracts, and if defense contractors fail the audit or have anything wrong in their estimates, the contractors are fined, and they eat the cost overruns if necessary.

Does Bernie know what an audit actually is?  Does Bernie know his budgets include funding these two agencies?

“Many of its major acquisition programs suffer from chronic cost overruns.”

As does nearly every government contract.  Bernie is silent on the Obamacare website’s cost overruns.  Why isn’t he crying out for an audit of HHS?  Nearly a trillion dollars spent on a website.  One.  Trillion.  Dollars.   That’s huuuuuuge money.  Did that “work properly”?  But hey, it’s health care, so whatever.

“Virtually every defense contractor has been found guilty or has reached a settlement with the government because of fraudulent and illegal activities. This has got to change.”

This is an enormous accusation, since the DFAR is so complex it is virtually impossible not to screw something up in terms of meeting the massive and frequently conflicting regulatory requirements.  So “settlements” are often small and routine fines for failure to comply with the DFAR.

And considering there are thousands of defense contractors and sub-contractors, Bernie is claiming that the hard-working Americans that work for these firms, and some of them are small, family-owned machining shops, are actively seeking to commit fraud.  Does any business model start with “How can we defraud the US Government”?

What Bernie really wants is the DoD budget to be spent on entitlements, not defense.  He figures there are more retired people than people working in the defense industry, and he can count votes.  It’s that simple.

And, finally, after trashing the Department that employed them, Bernie has a tribute to veterans. No word yet as to which side of his mouth he’s delivering this message from:

11.11:  Sanders Statement on Veterans Day

“Today, we honor the sacrifice of our nation’s veterans and their families. The truth is that we can never repay the debt that we owe to those men and women who put their lives on the line to defend our country. Our commitment to care for our veterans must extend to every day of the year – not just Veterans Day. We have a moral obligation to keep our promise to provide for the wounded and their families and ensure that all veterans receive every benefit they have earned and deserve.”

Oh, and look at how Captain Oversight honored veterans – by ignoring the facts of the outrages occurring in  VA hospitals that were plainly available to him.  Bernie was Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (2013 – 2015).  This occurred on his watch.

Bernie has all the qualities one looks for in a leader:  Hubris, an amazing ability to ignore innate contradictions in his policy positions, and an uncanny ability to ignore the deaths that he had the power and responsibility to prevent.  He doubles down on these massive, apoplexy-inducing failures, by now making trite statements regarding the sanctity of veterans on his website.

These are just a few samplings of how wrong Bernie is, but with a full head of steam (and taxpayer dollars, and “big” union dollars behind him), it’s hard to keep up with the Most Disingenuous Man In The World.


{ 1 comment }

by John McClaughry

John McClaughry

The ranks of people opposed to the controversial school consolidation act (Act 46) are rapidly growing. The Vermont School Boards Association has expressed grave displeasure with the provision that penalizes local school districts that spend more than the state thinks necessary.

Districts exploring merging into larger unified districts are complaining about the confusion and uncertainty of the process. And friends of parental choice in the 93 tuition districts fear – rightly – that the merger pressure will force them to abandon choice.

The latter two issues are interconnected, and fortunately there is a happier solution than the mare’s nest of Act 46.

Imagine this: the voters of several towns agree to join a larger Unified District. That new district enjoys the combined tax base of the component towns and receives its budget funding from the Education Fund just as if it were one oversized town district.

So far, that is the current plan for unified districts, such as the newly merged Essex Jct., Essex Town and Westford district.

Now suppose the voters, in choosing to create the Unified District, were allowed to choose to make it an “Educational Freedom District”. Here’s where things get interesting.

As defined by legislation proposed in 2001 by the then-chair of the House Education Committee, Rep. Howard Crawford (R-Burke), a majority of local voters could choose to opt their merged district out of the state-controlled public education system. They could, in its place,  create a locally-designed Unified District characterized by parental choice for their children, competition for pupils among public and independent schools (and perhaps other educational providers), diversity of educational experiences, and responsiveness to local voters.

The EDF could choose to supply educational materials and technology to home schoolers, allow home schoolers to take selected classes, make use of joint library and cultural resources, and take part in extracurricular activities at public schools. These pupils would count in the Average Daily Membership and thus hold down the district’s school homestead property tax rate.

The EDF could accelerate school completion for gifted students and dual enrollment of seniors for college credit. It could offer apprenticeship, community work-study alternatives, online blended learning, and exchange programs for study abroad.

The EDF could exempt teachers from state certification requirements, require periodic subject matter examinations for teachers, and offer merit pay. The teachers union, under state law, could of course try to organize the district, but the district could terminate the check-off of teachers’ union dues, disallow agency fees for political activities, and require periodic union recertification elections.

The EDF would be exempt from many state mandates and required supervisory overhead (except for civil rights, special education compliance, and financial accountability).  It would be free to lease or share public school facilities with independent schools, and contract for instruction, maintenance, transportation, and management.

It’s unlikely that any EDF planning committee would offer a proposal including all of these options, many of which would be intensely controversial. Its job is to offer the voters a proposal which is likely to win majority support.

Most Vermont towns probably would not merge into an Educational Freedom District, but a few would, especially if it were an alternative to the heavy handed requirements of Act 46.

The people of those EDFs would then have the opportunity to design their own innovative educational program for their children. In due course other towns would make similar choices and learn from the experience of the pioneers.

The proposal does not require radical wall-to-wall educational changes across the whole state, but it does allow voters to democratically approve a broad range of locally-favored innovations.

There are two political obstacles to allowing local voters to create an EDF. One is that as in any mega-district composed of formerly separate town districts,  the vested education interests will be far better able to organize and deliver the votes to defeat any disturbing (to them) innovations.

The other is this: creation of even one such district would threaten to undermine the overgrown public education establishment.  It – and especially the Vermont-NEA teachers union –  would leap into full battle mode to protect the iron hand of the Agency, the State Board of Education, and the union over citizens working for local democracy, innovation, greater opportunity for their children, and yes, freedom.

— John McClaughry is vice president of the Ethan Allen Institute (


by Rob Roper

According to an article in the Daily Caller, Vermont Congressman Peter Welch is one of two legislators actively seeking signatures from fellow lawmakers on a letter “demanding records from oil companies they say are ‘hiding and spreading disinformation to both the public and lawmakers alike concerning the science of climate change.’” To date, eighteen Democrats have signed on.

This is clearly little more than a bullying tactic, and an attempt to intimidate people from speaking out with counter-arguments and/or new scientific data that counters the politically correct narrative on climate change. Welch, and the people who voted for him, should be ashamed.

This action runs contrary to the First Amendment, guaranteeing freedom of speech, and the Fourth Amendment, which guarantees our rights to be secure in persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, and, not for nothing, science itself, which demands constant experimentation and challenges to existing hypotheses.

Increasingly we are seeing efforts by those entrenched in power to criminalize the actions and opinions citizens who oppose them. (See also proposed constitutional amendments banning freedom of political speech and association in reaction to Citizens United.) This is how you get to a police state.

It is ironic that Welch is so adamant to riffle through oil company documents when, at the same time, the lead government agency on climate change, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), is refusing to hand over documents to a congressional committee.

This from The Hill:

The federal government’s chief climate research agency is refusing to give House Republicans the detailed information they want on a controversial study on climate change.

Citing confidentiality concerns and the integrity of the scientific process, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said it won’t give Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) the research documents he subpoenaed.

At the center of the controversy is a study that concluded there has not been a 15-year “pause” in global warming. Some NOAA scientists contributed to the report.

Perhaps Congressman Welch will begin circulating a letter demanding a government agency turn over taxpayer funded data to a government oversight committee? He won’t, of course. And this is what’s 180 degrees wrong with our political class today.


by Rob Roper

The Tax Foundation is out with its annual State Business Tax Climate Index. “This year’s least competitive states include: 
New Jersey (#50) New York (#49), California (#48), Minnesota (#47), Vermont (#46), Rhode Island (#45), Connecticut (#44), Wisconsin (#43), Ohio (#42), and Maryland (#41).” Yes, there’s Vermont again in the bottom ten, a recurring theme for these sorts of things. Vermont has been stuck at 46th on this scale since 2013.

Screen Shot 2015-11-19 at 11.55.10 AM

According to the report, “The states in the bottom 10 tend to have a number of afflictions in common: complex, non- neutral taxes with comparatively high rates.”

The Tax Foundation takes into account 100 different variables in determining its overall rankings, but breaks these down into 5 main categories. Therefore, Vermont’s overall ranking of #46 is comprised of separate rankings in Corporate Tax (#44), Individual Income Tax (#44), Sales Tax (#15), Unemployment Insurance Tax (#17) , Property Tax (#48).

It is worth noting how Vermont’s neighbors performed. New Hampshire made the Top 10 with an impressive #7. New York, as noted above, scored worse than Vermont at #49, and Massachusetts settled in the middle of the pack at #25.

States can change these rankings dramatically if the political will exists to do so. North Carolina, for example, two years ago jumped from #44 to #15 after passing a number of tax reform measures, including lowering their corporate income tax rate and individual income tax rates.

In other words, it doesn’t need to be this way in Vermont.


by John McClaughry

Two weeks ago  President Obama announced that he had decided to veto the XL oil pipeline from Canada to American refineries in Texas. The reason he gave was that the US had to show the world at the upcoming climate change conference in Paris that we were willing to take strong action to not increase burning that awful carbon.

Of course, Canadian tar sands oil will be burned anyway when the price goes back up – it just won’t be refined in Houston.

Gov. Shumlin the Climate Change Warrior, issued a supportive statement that read: “Despite what some say, climate change is real and is in large part caused by human activity. But humans also have the capacity to do something about it. President Obama showed that today by rejecting this ill-conceived and dangerous project. For seven years, the Keystone XL Pipeline has represented a turning point in the battle between climate change deniers and those fighting to preserve our planet for future generations. Now that this project has been rejected, it’s also time to reject those who deny climate change.”

Now hold it. Who are these “climate change” deniers? They are people like me who won’t swallow Peter Shumlin and Bernie Sanders bogus, politicized climate non-science.  I find this derogatory labeling downright contemptible. Peter Shumlin and Bernie Sanders have made careers out of insulting and demonizing people who don’t agree with their bogus science, and I’m really sick of it  – and them.



by Matthew Strong

Governor Shumlin has made no secret of wanting to completely regulate how and how much doctors and hospitals are compensated. This raises a bigger issue: What business does the government have to be involved in determining how professionals in the private sector are paid? In their altruistic attempt at making things “fair” for everyone, the effect is actually the opposite. Every government action intervening in private enterprise creates a market distortion, which creates inefficiency, stifles innovation, and requires more resources to deal with regulation, increasing costs to consumers, eventually leading to the monopolies they claim to abhor.

Here’s why it matters to everyone and not just doctors. If Montpelier can tell one profession how they can be compensated, why would they stop there? A year ago I was in the middle of a conversation about the “healthcare is a human right” social media campaign. I jokingly told my friend I should start a similar campaign entitled “reasonably priced legal representation is a human right”. It doesn’t really roll off the tongue, but it seemed funny at the time.

Recently however, a report completed by a joint commission looks to take that joke seriously. In the report, “The Vermont Joint Commission On The Future Of Legal Services” determined the cost of legal representation to be too high for the average Vermonter (among many other issues with our legal system), and the summary encourages the legislature to get involved. Making our court systems more efficient and technologically advanced is a definite need. Attempting to legislate how much lawyers can charge, however, not so much. The commission was made up of a wide swath of legal professionals, but the rest of the lawyers in the state might have a few things to say about the matter.

There are many businesses which could easily be deemed to be just as vital to Vermont human rights as healthcare. Healthy, high quality food is vitally important to everyone’s health. Maybe Senator David Zuckerman’s organic farm should charge the same prices as Costco. Safe, well maintained vehicles are crucial for the safety of all Vermonters. Maybe the large Subaru dealerships should charge the same hourly rate as local neighborhood mechanics. A warm coat is an important health issue in this state. Maybe all North Face jackets sold in Vermont should be the same price as Wal-Mart brand jackets. If this seems like an over simplification, it’s not, you don’t have to be brain surgeon or a lawyer to know price variations occur for a myriad of reasons (even among doctors and lawyers), and the variation between individuals and businesses in the same line of work is the foundation of our economy, and freedom itself.

{ 1 comment }

by John J. Metzler

UNITED NATIONS—The human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran remains grim and dire despite a number of diplomatic breakthroughs and an overall thaw in relations between the Tehran regime and the West. Thus while Iran has profited by a nuclear “deal” with key Western powers and China and has moreover been included in talks for a long overdue political settlement in Syria, the situation inside the Islamic Republic is still characterized by fear, executions and religious intolerance.

A UN report on the “Situation of Human Rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran,” paints a bleak picture of a land gripped by political and social repression, gender discrimination and increasingly so, public executions. According to the Report, “The Islamic Republic of Iran continues, however to execute more individuals per capita than any other country in the world. Executions have been rising at an exponential rate since 2005 and packed in 2014, at a shocking 753 executions.”

The Report continues, “This spate reportedly accelerated at a further staggering rate during the first seven months of this year. At least 694 individuals were reportedly executed by hanging as of 15 September 2015.”   The pace of hangings puts the execution rate at the highest in 25 years.

Ahmed Shaheed, the UN’s Special Rapporteur on human rights in Iran, adds however that the escalation in executions is “seemingly related to the response of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the increasing influx of drugs and rising levels of drug abuse in the country.”   He says that “at least 69 percent of executions during the first six moths of 2025 were reportedly for drug related offenses.” Iran faces widespread illegal narcotics use, likely as a result of the depressing social and economic prospects for the population.

Dr. Shaheed, a former Foreign Minister from the Maldive islands and human rights advocate, complied the 26 page document.

The Report adds that laws and practices “continue to undermine the rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly in the Islamic Republic of Iran…at least 46 journalists and social media activists were reportedly either in detention or sentenced for their peaceful activities.”

“Journalists, social media activists and human rights defenders continued to be interrogated and arrested by government agencies,” states the survey. The notorious Revolutionary Guards Corps and cyber-policing units continue to spread this chill of suppression.

In what has become one of Iran’s rites of Autumn, protesters chanting “Death to America” and burning the US flag, marked the 36th anniversary of the seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran.

Sadly since the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979, women rights are under attack. Here the Report states equivocally, “Gender based discrimination in matters of civil, political, social and economic rights continue to overshadow the remarkable advances the Islamic Republic of Iran has achieved in women’s education and health. The country also remains in the bottom fifth percentile of 142 countries in overall equality for women.”

A “Plan to Protect Promoters of Virtue and Preventers of Vice” was adopted by parliament this year; in effect, according to Dr. Shaheed, the law “encourages Iranian citizens to enforce laws that prohibit acts considered to be vices under Islamic Sharia law. This includes strict enforcement of hijab (female dress) for all Iranian women.”

Current reformist President Rouhani signed an order to allow women to enter stadiums to watch the men’s national team play during the 2015 World League in Tehran. This seemingly innocuous move faced political pushback from the Interior Minister and local zealots who decried women watching men play sports and to “prevent sports authorities from allowing vice.”

And although the Iranian constitutions theoretically allows freedom of religions for non-Islamic minorities such as Zoroastrians, Jews and Christians, in fact strict restrictions and discrimination. Shaheed stated bluntly, “Restrictions on the rights of religious minorities in the Islamic Republic of Iran remain deeply concerning.”

The Report’s conclusions include encouraging the government to amend laws “that continue to undermine women’s full enjoyment of civl political, social, and economic rights, including rights in family law, the right to equal access to education and the right to work.”

Thus as Tehran’s diplomacy and image make new strides in the gullible West, largely due to the Obama Administration’s political desire to seal a nuclear deal with Iran, the grim facts remain that the Islamic Republic remains a theocratic and authoritarian regime who has not substantially changed its dour domestic policies of repression, coercion and intolerance. So what should we expect of their international intentions?


John J. Metzler is a United Nations correspondent covering diplomatic and defense issues. He is the author of Divided Dynamism The Diplomacy of Separated Nations: Germany, Korea, China.


by Frank Mazur

Prepare for a rapidly changing America.  Recently the census bureau estimated our population will double by 2100.  That did not include 200,000 Syrian Muslim refugees, 500,000 illegals each year and 100 million third world refugees that will be added within 30 years.

Think about the population in your community doubling.  We’re already struggling with water, pollution, energy, and affordable housing and too few jobs.  How will the refugee entitlements and dependency programs affect our quality of life?  Nobody ever voted for this transformation.

We welcome people and expect them to cherish our freedoms and constitutional values, and become net contributors.  Immense numbers of immigrants will upset the ethnic and political mix, increase poverty and become a fiscal drain on our society.

If we don’t control this influx we’ll have a society with competing languages, multiple world views, conflicting values and incompatible cultures.  Europe, England and Australia are already having conflicts over Sharia law and entitlements.

Our welfare system is overloaded and food stamps are at record levels. Our middle class is facing joblessness and the illiteracy of high school graduates is troubling.  Our health care costs are escalating and social unrest is taking its toll in cities.

Stop this insanity and don’t doom our kids to a fragmented culture.  We can’t save the world and destroy our own country.  Hold Congress accountable to rational controlled immigration that insures our constitutional values.

We get what we accept!

 Frank Mazur is former chair of the Vermont House Transportation Committee and a former member of the EAI board of directors. 




by Rob Roper

Tom Martin, the headmaster of the Village School of North Bennington (VSNB), which transitioned from a public elementary school to an independent town academy in 2013, spoke to a group of citizens in Stowe this week about his community’s experience.

Act 46, the school district consolidation bill passed by the legislature in 2015, has towns wondering what the future of education in their communities will look like, and considering what options will allow them to maintain control of that future. “Going independent” is one of those options.

The question Martin said communities need to ask themselves is “is the view worth the climb.” Taking the independent path is not an easy one. The process took three years and, according to Martin’s recollection, 128 town meetings/presentations of various sizes and venues, three town votes, and a run through the gauntlet of a hostile public education machine. Still, Martin says for North Bennington the climb was indeed worth it. “We wouldn’t go back.”

Among the VSNB’s accomplishments as an independent town academy, the baseline budget for operating the school has dropped roughly 7 percent since the transition. Even operating at lower cost, the town academy model has allowed VSNB the ability to add a pre-k program, a foreign language program including Spanish, French and Mandarin, an expanded music program, and “wrap around “ services for parents.

Martin also indicated that communities other than Stowe have expressed interest in exploring a town academy model.

There are four historic town academies in the state – St. Johnsbury Academy, Thetford Academy, Lyndon Institute, and Burr & Burton Academy. Only two other town academies exist – the Village School of North Bennington and the Mountain School at Winhall, both of which transitioned from public to independent in 2013 and 1998 respectively. As towns struggle with how to deal with Act 46, perhaps that number will increase.

Screen Shot 2015-11-12 at 10.05.55 AM

CLICK HERE FOR VIDEO of Martin’s Presentation.

Also of interest is this link: How to Privatize A Public School In Vermont, a Layman’s Guide by Vermonters for Better Education.


About Us

The Ethan Allen Institute is Vermont’s free-market public policy research and education organization. Founded in 1993, we are one of fifty-plus similar but independent state-level, public policy organizations around the country which exchange ideas and information through the State Policy Network.

Latest News

EAI and VPIRG to Debate the Carbon Tax

You Don’t Want to Miss This!  . On Thursday, December 3, 7:00pm to 8:30 pm at the Capitol Plaza in Montpelier, Rob Roper and John McClaughry representing the Ethan Allen Institute will...

11-24-15 – Bernie Sanders: Wrong On Everything

by Chris Campion Just because you surge in the polls doesn’t make you right, which means, I’m sorry to say, that what Bernie regularly posts on his taxpayer-funded...

11-20-15 – Welch Leading Effort to Advance Police State

by Rob Roper According to an article in the Daily Caller, Vermont Congressman Peter Welch is one of two legislators actively seeking signatures from fellow lawmakers on a...

11-19-15 – Tax Foundation Ranks Vermont 46th for Business Climate

by Rob Roper The Tax Foundation is out with its annual State Business Tax Climate Index. “This year’s least competitive states include: 
New Jersey (#50) New York (#49),...

11-18-15 – Shumlin on the XL Pipeline

by John McClaughry Two weeks ago  President Obama announced that he had decided to veto the XL oil pipeline from Canada to American refineries in Texas. The reason he...