Taking Back Our Government From “The Experts”

September 3, 2018

By David Flemming

Much ink has been spilled discussing the various merits and drawbacks of political leaders as we gear up for election season. While many Vermonters may dislike our current leaders because of their seeming disdain for the Vermont values of individual freedom and responsibility, the revolving door of politicians at the Statehouse belies a second, more insidious problem. Vermont’s government is burdened by a culture of micromanaged expertise.

In a recent CNN interview, Democratic nominee for Vermont Governor Christine Hallquist was asked if she was surprised that a poll showed Democrats viewing socialism more positively than capitalism. Her response: “I’m not sure I know what socialism is, so I don’t have the background to answer that question.”

Not having “the background to answer” simple questions is emblematic of a much deeper problem than one gubernatorial candidate’s jumbled answer. Namely, Vermont’s government has become so expertise-driven that candidates and legislators alike are hesitant to express even the most basic definitions.

In my first six months at the Statehouse in 2018, I sat in on countless presentations by progressive-leaning “experts in their fields” who, for the most part, told the audience how a laundry list of big government laws would make Vermont a better place. These experts often asserted that the academic literature recommended such policies “beyond a shadow of a doubt,” despite the fact that other research may have disputed such bold proclamations, or at least suggested they were far from certain. And for the most part, our legislators were happy to go along with “the” expert opinion.

Hallquist’s “I’m not sure I know what socialism is, so I don’t have the background to answer that question” is not an answer that shows a lack of intelligence. Rather, it reveals a “default of deference” that is all too common in our Statehouse.

Take the $15 minimum wage. Common sense suggests that Vermont business owners and employees should be able to negotiate a fair wage for employees’ time. And yet, since last August, we saw a proliferation of experts who argued before various legislative committees that having the freedom to negotiate a wage would leave thousands of Vermonters working for poverty wages, while discounting the possibility that thousands of Vermonters would be unable to get their first job and become dependent on the State. The experts have preferences, just like every day Vermonters who lack that big picture expertise.

When activist government is treated as the norm, there is no end to the government’s use of experts for crafting public policy. As Vermont policy becomes increasingly obtuse through the input of experts, there is only so much well-meaning representatives can do to prevent our government from becoming more informed by expert opinion than citizen input.

While it may take a while to get there, Vermonters have a right to government that doesn’t need experts because it is limited in scope. The only real alternative to a government of expertise is a government that stays true to the time-tested principles of limited government and free markets, which rely on everyday Vermonters rather than expertise to function. I for one, would much rather trust my neighbor than an expert.

David Flemming is a policy analyst at the Ethan Allen Institute

{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }

Deanne September 8, 2018 at 2:26 am

Definition of “expert:”
“X” = an unknown quantity
Spurt = water under pressure

Seen recently in The Shopper:
An expert is someone who lives more than 35 miles away.



Keith Stern September 9, 2018 at 12:02 pm

We had a chance to move Vermont from a government of experts and “new improved” socialist ideas to a government of what has worked well and common sense. Unfortunately we won’t have that anytime soon. So now we are stuck choosing between a democrat and a democrat choosing which one will do the least damage. A choice I won’t be making.


Peg Coutermarsh September 11, 2018 at 7:24 pm

Keith, I had a chance to talk face to face with Phil Scott in his office, when he first became Gov. I asked him directly what he meant on the phone conversation I had with him about his view on Obamacare. He said he was all for Obamacare, because it would cost him less money for his employees in his construction company. I knew then that Vermonters were in big trouble. Gov. Scott is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
When I asked Gov. Shumlin at a town hall in Bradford, VT to explain his then record/score of ZERO (0) with the VT Small Business, he said, quote, ” If I got a zero rating then I was doing my job.”
So hiw do you vote for a Socialist Democrat or Democrat labeling himself a Republican? Guess I wouldn’t even be able to hold my nose and choose.


Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post:

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

Paid Family Leave Hits an Ethical Snag

April 19, 2019 By David Flemming Those Vermont legislators committed to paid family leave regardless of cost could soon be faced with an unenviable choice. They can either...

Roll Call! House Allows Non-Citizen Voting in Montpelier (95-46), 2019


What is “Moral Government?”

April 18, 2019 by Rob Roper There has been a steady stream of testimony over the past two years on the proposed $15 minimum wage and the mandatory...

Tax Day. Thank the Rich!

April 15, 2019 It’s income tax day! And, as such, it makes sense to take a look at who is paying what in Vermont for support of our...

Roll Call! Senate Votes to Expand “Pay to Move” Program (27-2), 2019

. S.162 – AN ACT RELATING TO PROMOTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT . PASSED in the State Senate on April 12, 2019 by a vote of 27-2  . Purpose: To benefit economic development by...