Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky: Does Gov. Scott see himself as beholden to the Vermont Constitution?

This commentary is by Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky, P/D-Chittenden Central.

Much has been made lately about the appointment of Zoie Saunders as interim secretary of education. Saunders’ nomination for Vermont’s highest executive educational position raised eyebrows among senators given she only had three months of public school experience while actively pursuing the top education job in another state. After an outpouring of grassroots messages from parents, teachers and concerned Vermonters about her qualifications, the Senate rejected Zoie Saunders’ confirmation by a wide margin of 19-9, fulfilling the Senate’s statutory obligation for our governor’s cabinet nominee — appointees serve at the pleasure of the governor with “the advice and CONSENT OF THE SENATE”. Our governor decided to disregard our Senate’s rejection, in a clear violation of separation of powers, by appointing Ms. Saunders interim secretary of education anyway. He also indicated he may well appoint Saunders in a permanent capacity after the session.

Gove. Scott had several opportunities to work with our Senate — by including them in the candidate search, listening to the concerns of the overwhelming majority of our body or selecting a new candidate — and instead, he simply installed his chosen candidate, disregarding the Senate’s lack of consent and the separation of powers. The majority of our Senate  — elected by a majority of Vermonters — chose to reject his nominee. Many Vermont voters split their ticket when voting precisely because of our system of checks and balances — Gov. Scott’s actions fly in the face of that.

Gov. Scott’s choice here is dangerous. His reasoning is based on a dubious interpretation of our Vermont Statute directly dealing with the appointment of a secretary of education. Vermont State title 3 § 2702 says that “With the advice and consent of the Senate, the Governor shall appoint a Secretary of Education from among no fewer than three candidates proposed by the State Board of Education. The Secretary shall serve at the pleasure of the Governor.”

While our Senate overwhelmingly voted against this appointment, our governor has taken neither the advice nor the consent of our Senate. One of the core components of our Vermont Constitution, and democracy, is the system of checks and balances — where each branch has the ability to check overreach from another branch. In this instance, Gov. Scott has effectively trampled the intent and wisdom of our checks and balances — refusing to listen to our Senate’s reasoning for his nominee’s rejection and installing his appointee regardless, not only a clear violation of our statute, but also of the way that our Vermont political process works, and of our constitutional separation of powers.

Does Gov. Scott believe that this should be the precedent — that any governor should be enabled to ignore the Constitution whenever they desire? Scott has often prided himself on being “a different type of Republican,” but the Trump-ian attitude toward ignoring the Constitution is unfortunately not different at all — it’s straight out of the D.C. GOP playbook of ignoring the intent of law and the will of the majority. This is a dangerous precedent to set, and one that places our Senate at a crossroads.

Our regular legislative session has come to an end. This is an arbitrary date set by Senate leadership and we can return anytime before June 17. By refusing to extend the session or return early for a veto session, we implicitly condone the governor’s executive overreach. To avoid a constitutional crisis, we cannot allow it to become precedent that the governor’s whims can functionally override his constitutional limits, rendering the Senate’s constitutional check redundant and irrelevant.

Members of the Senate must pursue every possible avenue to cure this issue. In the face of this threat to the democratic process, we must uphold our oath of office to protect and defend the Vermont constitutional requirement of separate but equal branches of government. Gov. Scott likes to set himself apart from the national attacks on democracy, but this is an affront to the rule of law and our Vermont Constitution. While nationally our democracy is under attack, Vermonters deserve to know that their state elected officials will uphold and protect the state Constitution. Where should executive authority end before it pushes the Constitution to its breaking point?

Read the story on VTDigger here: Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky: Does Gov. Scott see himself as beholden to the Vermont Constitution? .