Welcome to the Vermont public 2026 Primary election debates.

I'm Mikaela Lefrak, host of Vermont Edition.

This show is part of a series of candidate interviews and debates ahead of Vermont's August 11th primary.

Today, the Democratic candidates for governor here with me in the Vermont public studio are Amanda Janoo of Burlington.

She's an economist and a consultant, working recently with the Wellbeing Economy Alliance and the think tank New America.

Amanda, welcome.

Thanks so much for having me, Mikaela.

We also have Aly Richards of Montpelier with us.

She's the former CEO of Let's Grow Kids, an organization that advocated for child care reform in Vermont.

She's also served as former Governor Peter Shumlin, deputy chief of staff Aly Richards, good to see you.

Truly a pleasure to be here, Mikaela.

And with you too, Amanda.

All right.

Here's the format for today's debate.

In the first segment, I'm going to ask common questions to both of the candidates, some of which were submitted by you, our audience.

They'll each have 60s to answer.

I'll also likely ask short follow up questions, and the order in which the candidates answer was randomly selected before this program.

In the second segment, the candidates will have a chance to ask each other questions.

They'll have 30s to ask, 60s to answer.

We'll start our third segment with more questions for both candidates.

Then there's a lightning round questions with very brief answers, and we'll conclude with one minute closing statements from each candidate.

All right let's begin.

We're going to start with questions for both of you.

Again, please limit your answers to 60s.

Or you're going to hear a little bell from our timekeeper over there.

A recent poll from the University of New Hampshire found that more than half of likely Democratic primary voters are undecided about which candidate they prefer in this race, and more than half of voters don't know enough about either of you to say whether or not their opinion of you is favorable or not.

Yet neither of you has held elected office before, which might contribute to that last finding.

Janet in Randolph and Larry in Bristol both asked us similar questions about this.

Essentially, why are you prepared to enter Vermont politics at the top?

Amanda?

Janoo, we will start with you.

Great.

Well hello everyone, I'm Amanda Janine, I was born and raised in rural Vermont, very much being taught that strong communities aren't built by billionaires or big investors.

They're built by the people who know how to build what's needed and fix what's broken, to grow what sustains us in to care for one another.

And that's why I've spent 15 over 15 years working with governments across the US and around the world to build stronger, more resilient, thriving local economies.

And everywhere I've worked, I've come back to the same lesson that I was taught as a kid here in Vermont, that the strongest places don't wait for prosperity to trickle down.

They invest in their own people and their businesses, in their communities, and build prosperity from the bottom up.

And so I think that's why I'm running for governor, and I'm prepared to lead, because I believe that right now Vermont has a choice.

We can keep using the same economic playbook that got us here in the first place, where we can build an economy that really works for people who actually make Vermont work.

So much of your professional experience is focused on international governments, places all around the world.

What have you done to familiar to familiarize yourself with the unique challenges that Vermont faces?

Yeah, absolutely.

So I think one of the benefits of both having international experience and then also experience working both in Vermont and across the US is being able to bring the best of other places and also recognize the specificities here.

So one of the initiatives that I helped to co found here in Vermont is the Wellbeing Economy Alliance of Vermont.

And that is a coalition of many of the largest economic development leaders in the state, including the Sustainable Jobs Fund, Vermont businesses for Social responsibility, public assets, etc.

who are the leading thinkers and advocacy organizations to build really transformative economic policy and systems for our state.

Thank you.

Same question to you, Ali Richards.

Why are you prepared to enter Vermont politics at the top?

Great question.

It's a good one to ask.

Look, I basically spent my entire professional career on the ground working shoulder, shoulder with Vermonters to make change and going after our ability crisis.

I was actually just thinking the last time I was in this room, I was 15 years old when Howard Dean appointed me to the State Board of Education.

So it goes back even before my professional career.

I actually think it's a good thing that we haven't held office before.

You know, I have been speaking with Vermonters, understanding what they care about, which honestly, it's access to good paying jobs, the ability to live in this community that we love without being crushed by costs.

And I think having that deep understanding in the community, both locally and Montpelier, where I live now, I've been the co-chair of the Resilience and Recovery Commission there all the way to being the CEO of Let's Go Kids, where we let a movement of 40,000 people of all walks of life.

That's 6% of our population to pass the most significant child care law in the country.

And it worked, and we weren't even in charge.

So just imagine what we can do when we have state government working alongside us with this vision.

So you spent the last decade of your professional career hyper focused on child care reform through the Let's Grow Kids organization.

But why should Vermonters trust you to be an expert in other areas, like public safety or housing development, when you've been so focused on child care?

Yeah, well, everything is connected in this world and in Vermont.

And the thing is, the reason we went after child care was because of the economic development component of it.

Right?

It's the most best return on investment we can imagine.

And getting kids the most critical time in their development, what they need to thrive and getting employees, you know, into jobs.

So we worked hand in glove with the business community.

But also I worked for a governor in Vermont.

I was the catch all policy person.

I worked on every issue consumer protection, housing, transportation.

So I have deep experience in all policy arenas.

And you better believe ten years on the ground with all kinds of Vermonters in child care was pretty much a multi sectional approach.

Thank you.

Well, let's move on to our next topic, which is health care.

Universal state funded primary care has emerged as a popular progressive proposal for making health care more accessible in Vermont.

If elected, would universal primary care factor into your plans for health care reform for the state?

If so, how would you fund it?

And if not, how would you expect band health care access and make it more affordable otherwise?

Aly Richards will start with you this time.

Yeah, we absolutely need to commit to universal primary care.

So my goal is to deliver Vermont a roadmap to universal primary care and the first year in office, because we have been around this and around this in Vermont, and it's necessary to bend the cost curve.

But we have to have a real plan that is actionable.

And two of the root causes of not having enough primary care in Vermont.

One is we don't have enough physicians, skilled nurses, you know, we don't have enough folks in the jobs.

We haven't seen a real plan to build that pipeline.

And we also have a lot of folks that spend all their time working with health insurance instead of seeing patients.

So my plan is to build upon what we have seen, work in other parts of the country to Massachusetts, has actually spent seven years working out the kinks in a lot of this and taking what they've done, for example, supercharging it and adapting it right here in Vermont.

And so you do loan forgiveness.

You do rural incentive pay, you do worker supportive housing.

You build that pipeline, and you have the state step in as your intermediary to handle health insurance so that primary care don't have to spend any of their time doing that.

They can just see patients.

Just to clarify, when you say develop a roadmap towards universal primary care, does that include a funding mechanism to make it completely state funded?

How much does it cost and what are the steps to get there?

And so but yeah, completely state funded.

But I think we have to understand we live in a broken health care system nationally.

So we still have health insurance.

So the idea of the state being the intermediary and keeping some of that health insurance there, if it doesn't affect the primary care provider, you know, keep that money on the table to maximize all dollars.

So we're not just cost shifting to Vermonters to pay for it entirely.

Thank you.

Amanda.

Janoo, same question to you.

Yes, absolutely.

You know, I'm really proud from day one to have centered universal primary and preventative health care as one of the core aspects of my platform.

And I do think it's really important that it's state funded.

The major drivers of our health care crisis is a profit oriented insurance and fee for service structure and being able to advance universal primary care.

The Vermont Way is something that we have an opportunity ensuring that every Vermonter has a community doctor.

And so we're seeing around the state, for example, some small towns like Tunbridge, that have just started hiring their own town nurses as a way to ensure that everybody in their town has access to some free health care, can have home visits, etc.

and that's a great model.

The state can pay primary care providers directly, rather than having this go through insurance as a way to ensure that everybody has a primary care provider that is local, that knows them and can provide the best holistic and preventative care.

So one of the ways in which some of you and other politicians have proposed paying for something like universal primary care is for a tax surcharge on annual incomes over $500,000.

The proposals for this range from 2% to 8%.

First, I'd like to hear from both of you on this.

But Amanda, do you support that type of tax surcharge to pay for something like universal primary care?

Absolutely.

So I've been part of the Fun Vermont's Future coalition that helped to advance this fair share proposal.

And this coalition has really been looking at how do we reform the Vermont tax structure in order to ensure greater equity, to reduce pressure on working class Vermonters and to generate the kind of revenue we need?

And so the proposal that came out of the Fair Share Coalition this year was really about if we just advanced an income surcharge on the top 1% of income earners to just recoup the amount that they've already been given through the big beautiful bill, we would have more than enough to be able to pay for this universal primary and preventative care program.

So just to be clear, that is that the 3% surcharge on incomes over 500 K or so, the one that allows for recouping the amount, I believe it's more 6%.

That would be on people who earn more than half $1 million a year.

Ali Richardson Yeah, I think this is an incredibly important point for Vermonters to be looking into, because we need universal access to primary care.

There is no question it bends the cost curve.

But to actually move to a fully state funded plan, it really raises income taxes on 500 K and above and 250 K and above.

To meet the dollar figure, you actually need to do this.

That would more than double our top marginal rate.

The legislature will not pass that.

So you know, I cannot propose a plan that I know will not succeed on the ground.

So we all understand trickle down economics does not work.

People should be paying their fair share.

But I want a plan that's real and that actually, you know, is going to work in Vermont's economy.

So to be clear, you do not support that level of tax increase on incomes over $500,000 that Amanda says she does support.

Correct?

I've looked at what they were looking at now, and it's more like 2.5 to 3%.

One more follow up question for both of you here on this topic of health care.

Before we move on and let's do 30s for for each candidate.

I wanted to ask you about a detail in Governor Scott's executive order that he issued recently that's focused on deregulatory health care reforms.

Under his plan, Vermont insurers would be allowed for the first time to factor age into the price of health insurance premiums.

We got a number of questions about this from listeners, including Beth in Marshfield, who's worried that this is going to overly shift the cost burden to older adults who can't afford it.

But Vermont is one of the only states right now that doesn't allow for age rating.

Do you support it?

Why or why not?

Ali Richardson No, I do not support Adrian, and I thank you both for bringing this up.

Let's talk about this.

The governor says he wants to reduce health care costs.

The legislature worked on a plan that truly would produce millions of dollars of savings and actually targeted towards property tax savings, and he vetoed it after everyone came together to say they needed this, including the regulator that's in charge of doing this work.

And he said, you didn't go with my idea.

I don't want to give you a political win on the trail.

He literally said this in a press conference on July 8th.

He said, so I'm going to do my thing instead through an executive order, which actually raises premiums on older Vermonters.

We have to be all as Vermonters understanding this is happening.

Thank you.

Amanda.

Janell age rating.

Yeah, I do not agree with this.

I think some of the projections are that it's going to increase the amount that our elders are paying by like 20% in terms of their premiums.

And the reason why we haven't allowed for age rating is because we know that often when you get older, that's where you become more vulnerable of being having health care costs that are going to push you into poverty.

And so it's really important that we don't allow for this type of shift to occur and ensure that every Vermonter has access to the type of care that they need.

Well, thank you both.

Let's move on to our next topic, which is housing.

Steven wrote this to us.

Quote, when I was in my 20s, I could easily afford an apartment with 1 or 2 roommates on a Delhi workers salary.

Unfortunately, this is no longer true.

Today I have two young adults in my family, one in high school and one who has recently finished high school.

What is your plan to make Vermont more affordable for young people?

And I would like to ask you both to focus your answer here on housing in particular.

And Amanda, Janoo, it's your turn to go first.

Yes.

Thank you so much for that question.

And I can very much relate to it.

I am also a renter, and I can personally attest to how difficult it is with constantly increasing rental prices and also the cost of housing being really out of reach for most young Vermonters.

Most of the people I know my age, the only way they've been able to buy a house is if they had help from their family.

And that's just perpetuated these inequalities.

And so I think the reality is that we need to take a multi-pronged approach to housing right now.

One is we really need to limit private equity and large corporate ownership of the housing stock.

We need to increase taxation on second homes, luxury estates, Airbnbs.

ET cetera.

To actually reduce the property tax burden for residential Vermonters and to invest more in permanent affordable housing like housing trusts, co-ops and providing more support for first time homebuyers, first time home builders, and for working families to renovate their own homes.

Because all of that together, I think, will make it easier for young people to be able to afford to stay.

You brought up that you're a renter and also noted the presence of Airbnb in the state.

Vermont has one of the nation's highest percentages of vacant seasonal homes, one of the lowest rates of vacant rentals.

And sometimes, like Stowe, are trying right now to cap the number of short term rentals as a way to to allow for more short term housing for people that live in the area year round.

Do you think capping short term rentals is an effective way to increase the rental housing stock?

I mean, capping is definitely one way to do it, right?

Like you can always use a regulation or my proposal would be taxation actually, because what we want to do is use increased taxation on second home certification rentals as a way to also generate revenue to reduce the property tax burden for everyday Vermonters, which is rising really quickly and to generate more revenue.

And so ideally, that will encourage some folks to open those houses to more, longer term rentals.

But in the end, we also want to make sure that we're reducing the pressure for the people who are here.

Thank you.

And Alli Richards, how can you make Vermont more affordable for young people, particularly those looking for housing?

Yeah.

Thank you to Stephen for the question.

It's literally why I'm running for governor.

If you can't afford to live in the state, we have to be trying everything we've got.

So that's why I'm running.

I have a Vermont economic action plan as my entire goal to stabilize the economy.

And when you do that, you say, what are the key priorities?

And for me, it's housing and healthcare, the two root causes that we have to marshal all of our efforts, starting from the governor and all of state government, to say this is a culture of accountability.

How are we getting to yes, why are we building more houses?

Here's the regional housing targets, and here's what we're going to benefit from when we do that.

Higher grand, less lower property taxes, bigger tax base.

So lower taxes for everyone.

More money to invest, right?

I think it is incumbent on the governor to explain why this is the top priority.

So I have a kitchen sink approach to housing.

Everything we've got make it easier to build and cheaper to build and buy and rent.

Sales tax holiday on building materials templates for local zoning changes.

Technical assistance at the right place at the right time, including with funding to allow folks to use all the programs we have like the chip model and all these wonderful things that allow folks to build.

And absolutely a second home tax to put that revenue in and change behavior to keep our investment in our housing.

Same question to you about short term rental caps.

Do you think that's an effective way for towns to address this issue on the local level?

I love when towns see a problem that they have and take the agency to make a change themselves.

We've seen it work in places like Burlington.

That's great.

But I would also not have that stop.

You know, you're hearing from both of us.

We must, must, must get control over the houses that we are losing to the secondary market.

You know, we need every house we can get in every way.

And that's from building, recouping from that market, you know, subdividing, infilling, home, share everything.

And so yeah, the cap is great, but that doesn't preclude the idea of getting the second home tax and short term rental taxes.

We need that investment revenue to go back into building more housing.

Another housing related follow up for both of you.

During this last legislative session, we saw this groundswell movement of people who oppose certain elements of act 181, the the land use law, particularly the road rule and parts of the three tier mapping system parts, large parts of act 181 were repealed.

Do you have additional concerns about what remains of act 181, or should we let it stand?

Amanda, you know, that's a great question.

So I do still have concerns about 181, but I think that it's potentially different than a lot of folks where I feel like the starting premise of 181 was that our housing crisis is because of our environmental policies, which I don't think is true.

I actually think our housing crisis is because of the financial decision of housing.

We definitely want to encourage more dense, walkable village centers and downtowns, but purely removing large developers from community or environmental assessments, I don't think is ultimately going to get to the root of our housing crisis.

Thank you.

Ellie Richards yeah, act 21 is an example of just not how not to move public policy from idea to implementation.

Okay, the anger is real.

It's unlike anything I've really seen out there organically of you're coming to close my school and then my hospital and now my land.

This is so personal and intimate for Vermonters, and the ideas and the goals are worthy.

Develop more and protect our environment.

Everyone I've talked to from monitor stands that the problem was we didn't work with Vermonters enough on the ground to understand how a nice idea could actually work when it hit Vermonters and the implementation was absolutely botched.

You know, just not enough work with communities, you know, a couple people in a room by themselves.

It's not how you build trust.

It's not how you deliver real goals to the ground on the landscape in the state of Vermont.

Thank you.

Let's move on to our next topic, which is education.

Education reform, of course, has been a major issue in the past two legislative sessions because of how education costs affect property taxes.

We've talked a lot on Vermont addition about district consolidation and the proposed new financing system for schools, the foundation formula.

But we've had a couple of listeners ask us to focus on what's happening inside Vermont classrooms instead.

Adrienne and Barton notes that the latest results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress show steady declines in reading scores for fourth and eighth grade students here.

So how can the state increase student outcomes at a time when it's trying to cut costs?

And Ally Richards will start with you.

Adrienne thank you.

You have recenter the conversation on the right thing.

All right.

I my dad was a public high school teacher for 35 years.

He was my teacher at Oxbow High School.

I was on the state Board of Education as a 15 year old student member.

I don't think there's a conviction that I hold more dearly than the idea that public education is the foundation of our democracy, and the transformational power of education is real.

It's what we've got in our society.

And this education debate has torn our communities apart.

It's the only thing I see from community, community that is the same.

They're torn apart.

There's no vision, there's no North Star.

It should be centering the values of educational outcomes and opportunity.

And when we do that, we will find efficiencies.

I promise you, it's a very parallel to the work we did on the ground with early childhood education.

So in classrooms and I have visited many since I've been on the trail, big, small, all sorts of places.

When a community understands that their students are not getting what they need and are not getting the outcomes that they need, they take matters into their own hands and they make real changes in a way that is hard, but it doesn't harm the community, like force consolidation harms a community.

Thank you.

And so just to be clear, you do not support any type of top down consolidation from mandated by the state.

Correct.

We've seen it not work too many times.

We don't do our best work under duress.

We need to be in partnership with communities.

The agency of education has to be a service organization actively engaged with good data, good work out there and community supporting them to do this work around centering around how are your kids doing?

Thank you.

And Amanda.

Janoo.

Yeah, I would definitely agree that everywhere I've traveled across the state, education obviously comes up all of the time because people are really concerned about not only the closure of their small schools, but the importance that they play for the communities as well.

And so I do appreciate centering educational outcomes, because the reality is our kids are struggling because we're struggling like we're not doing super well.

I would say as a society right now, and teachers are increasingly they're working as hard as they can, but they're expected to be social workers, behavioral interventionists, mental health supporters and taking on more and more.

And so I really believe that this is a moment for us, again, to lean into some of the great pilots we've been seeing across the state, around community schools, and this is where you actually invest and support our teachers, our students, our communities by integrating a wider range of wraparound nonprofit and state services.

You actually do have free health care and food banks, social workers continue adult education.

ET cetera.

Integrated into the school itself.

So our kids and our communities have the necessary foundations to thrive.

And if it were to come back on the table at any point, would you support any type of force consolidation of school districts?

No.

Definitely not.

I really believe in the importance of schools for our communities.

And so I think the idea of community schools is great because it solves multiple issues and not only actually ensures that our kids can thrive, but also diversifies the budget streams that would be going to our schools so we can actually invest in them, rather than cutting public education in this moment.

Thank you.

Well, let's move on to the final topic in this segment of our debate.

In 2020, Vermont passed the Global Warming Solutions Act, which requires the state to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.

We are not on track to meet those goals, and if the state doesn't meet them, it can be sued.

Governor Scott has long opposed this law.

Should the state keep those mandates in place, modify the legislation to lower the targets, or eliminate that lawsuit provision entirely?

Amanda.

Janoo.

I mean, I think it is really important that there are mechanisms by which to hold our government accountable to achieving longer term aims.

And so it's a similar type of policy that is allowed, for example, young people in Montana to sue their government over potential destruction for future generations.

In terms of environmental policies, I think what's a critical right now in the opportunity we have, because I'm very worried about the cost of heating people's homes this winter is like, how do we lean in, really focus on investing more community renewable energy systems to really support with not only reducing emissions, but actually reducing costs for our communities through that level investment?

Because right now we've made it harder and harder for us to actually advance those types of clean energy solutions.

So to be clear about the Global Warming Solutions Act, do you think we should keep the mandates in place or lower the targets or get rid of that lawsuit provision?

I think it's good to just keep it.

Okay.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Ali Richards, this is another great conversation for Vermont to be having.

You know, I think what backfired with this bill.

And again, remember, Vermonters were very upset about how we approached this was that we centered lowering emissions instead of centering Vermonters.

And again, the thing here is now is the political moment for us to be the leader again in renewable energy.

Guess why?

Because it's cheaper and cleaner energy for Vermonters, and it's our most vulnerable Vermonters who are stuck at home and stuck at the pump because the president has waged a war and they cannot afford their cars.

And being at home, and they didn't have the upfront money to move on to a pellet stove, a heat pump, an EV.

We've done this before.

Low interest, no interest loans.

We already have a bunch actually out there through efficiency.

Vermont Vermonters are not accessing what's already available to them.

It's critically important that we make sure we are moving on to cheaper, cleaner energy.

And guess what?

It's good for the environment.

So I think we have a beautiful political moment right now to become a leader again in renewable energy and make Vermont more affordable for Vermonters and reduce our emissions.

But right.

We're starting with clean, cheaper, cleaner energy for Vermonters.

So yeah, I think we should reexamine the approach with a real plan, you know, again, showing that this is our moment to run, run, run to getting folks onto these, you know, cleaner energy.

So just very clearly so change the mandate, repeal it, lower the target should reexamine it together.

As we look at what is realistic for Vermont, I think it's good to have accountability 100%.

I think we should have accountability like that.

But let's look at the numbers together, the targets together.

See if they were listed and see if we can, you know, go, go, go in this political environment we've got.

Thank you.

Well, we do have to take a short break here.

This concludes the first segment of Vermont public's Democratic primary debate for governor.

When we come back, the candidates are going to have a chance to ask each other questions.

I'm Mikaela Lefrak.

Stay with us.

This is Vermont public's Democratic primary debate for governor.

I'm Mikaela Lefrak in the studio with our two candidates, Ali Richards of Montpelier and Amanda Janu of Burlington.

The candidates now have an opportunity to ask each other questions.

The question should be no longer than 30s and responses are limited to 60s, and there could be space for brief follow ups if I allow it.

All right, Ali Richards, you get to ask our first question.

Fantastic.

Thank you.

Mikaela.

Amanda, I'm so grateful that we have both stayed true to our commitment to a friendly primary.

Honestly, it's first of all important because one of us is going to take on Phil Scott in The General, and it's such a marked difference from what we see around this country.

So I'm really proud of that.

Will you join me in enthusiastically pledging to support the winner of this primary and work together in the future to make Vermont more affordable for Vermonters together?

Oh, absolutely.

100%, you know.

All right.

Yeah, I, I also am so grateful that we've been able to model a different way.

I think everybody's just tired of the negativity and the sort of rage based politics, and to really focus on just a positive vision and to support one another.

So after this, whatever happens in the primary, I got you back and I'll definitely be behind you.

Right back at you.

Amanda.

Janoo, what's your question for Aly Richards?

So I know that we've both committed to very much running people powered campaigns.

And so I wanted to see if you would join me in a commitment to not accept any like, dollars or support from PACs ahead of the primary.

Great question.

Yeah, I totally believe in the fact that Citizens United was the seed of destruction in our democracy.

It's why I live in Vermont now.

I moved home as fast as I could because I was working in D.C.

and, you know, it just wasn't broken.

It was totally broken.

So I've taken no corporate money, no corporate PAC money, and I don't plan to.

And I actually think we can not wait for the federal government and actually pass laws here that say we aren't going to accept corporate and corporate PAC money.

So, yes, I'm happy to not accept PAC money.

I do believe I received an endorsement from a union, and they did give me a small donation and it might be under their PAC.

So but other than that, I mean, again, that was an endorsement from a union, which is something I'm very, very proud to have their support.

But otherwise, yes, we need to fight against more money takeover of our democracy.

Does that type of of donation concern you in any way?

A donation from a union like the one that Ali's describing?

I mean, I think, you know, if you're clear that that was, you know, a small amount of money, I do think with a people powered campaign, ideally it's really it's individuals who are providing the amount up to the limit that we have within this campaign, as opposed to institutions who can then funnel much more to a candidate.

So centering a people powered campaign is really about just taking donations from people, not their institutions or PACs.

And both of us have, I think, a lot of grassroots individual support, which is wonderful.

Aly Richards, we have time for you to ask a second question to Amanda Janu.

I know we both also agree that dysfunction in Washington is really hurting Vermonters.

I've also heard you state a desire for us to reduce our reliance on federal funding, but that funding is more than a third of our state budget.

So it really does worry me because it's for housing and health care and disaster relief and so much more.

So I also think it's money we've paid in, and part of the fight is to fight for those dollars.

So how would you make sure Vermonters were taken care of with, you know, reducing reliance on federal funding of potentially up to $3 billion in our budget?

Absolutely.

Yeah.

Thank you so much for raising that.

Could I do think that this is a really important priority in this moment.

So again, being part of Fund Vermont's future, recognizing how much of our budget is coming from the federal government is incredibly concerning in this moment.

And so this is partially why, for example, I know a lot of the funding is for health care.

That's why it's important to advance the fair share proposal and increased progressive income tax to help ensure we have a state funded program that is not dependent on federal funding, because we're seeing the way that Medicare cuts are being used to try to coerce states into compliance.

We're seeing more and more of federal funding coming with a lot of strings attached in terms of whether or not you recognize transgender rights, for example, or other types of ideological strings, as it were.

And I think it's very important that we do not capitulate to this administration based on budgetary concerns.

And so it's not just about progressive taxation, but also production.

We need to make sure we're producing the things that we need.

So we have those basic foundations to stand strong and live up to our values in this moment.

Do you see a difference between you and Amanda's stance there that if you do, would you be able to distill that for listeners then Amanda, you can respond.

I agree, we need to fight against the attack on our democratic government that we've never seen before.

And I think part of the fight is fighting for federal dollars that we've paid into in are owed $3 billion is real money.

And, you know, we can fight against Trump and we can protect our communities.

And I don't believe we actually can protect our communities if we give up a third of our state budget or even a part of that $3 billion, there's no way I believe we could recoup money just by leaning harder on Vermonters.

Amanda.

That's there.

Yeah.

I think it's important to also be clear.

It's not that, you know, overnight we're going to get rid of a third of our budget.

I think the point is that we want to reduce our reliance on the federal government and that funding, because that's also just important good fiscal policy.

And so that is something which we have not been managing our budget in a smart way.

And we have seen a massive increase in terms of expenditure without a huge amount of improvement in people's quality of life.

And so it's about being more strategic, about how do we ensure that government is able to provide the things that people need in this moment, like free healthcare or affordable housing, so we can once again revive people's faith in democracy?

Yeah.

$9 billion state budget.

I think we all agree we're not spending that money wisely right now.

Amanda, you have time to ask one more question to Aly Richards.

Yes.

Oh, okay.

So one of the questions I've always been curious about is for less grow kids.

I know that it was funded through like a flat payroll tax.

And my I was just curious, like why you ended up choosing a flat tax?

Because flat taxes are always inherently more regressive.

They put more pressure on working class Vermonters than it does those who have the greatest ability to pay.

Great question.

So I will say we had a coalition of over 40,000 people, and the business community wasn't just on the sideline, they were really leading the charge because ultimately, childcare is a broken business model, and we've been able to shine a light on that in Vermont.

And honestly, other folks, including mom Danny's office, have said thank you.

You have set the precedent.

You need a sustainable funding source.

That's the solution to a broken business model in child care.

It's become the model.

And that's what we knew we needed a sustainable funding source.

And honestly, as a movement, we were agnostic as to that source.

So it was ultimately the legislature that decided on the payroll tax.

It's a 0.44% payroll tax, 75% is employer.

And they were the ones at the table saying, look, we invest to grow all the time.

We're asking for Vermont to invest, to grow.

We will be the ones shouldering the majority of this.

And, you know, 75% of a 0.44% is not going to break the bank.

But when it goes to child care, we know it's going to get a return.

25% of that 0.44 goes to the employee.

And so and the employer is allowed to do the whole thing themselves.

And many are.

So if you make 60 K a year, you're paying $60 a year towards this investment in child care.

And we're all benefiting from it from an economic standpoint.

Yeah.

Amanda, you just pointed out some of your concerns about the type of payroll tax that that activity was based on.

If elected, would you would you support act 76 and keep that payroll tax in place?

I mean, push to keep it in place, I think it would be important to push, at least for it to be more of a progressive as opposed to a flat tax, because I do think even when we're talking about business, the burden that is on like a small business versus a large business, in terms of even if we're talking about 0.44% can often be huge, actually.

And I do think right now we do have a regressive tax structure, which is why a lot of working class Vermonters, self-employed people, small businesses are really struggling in this moment.

Aly.

That's there, just that this is the biggest economic relief we've delivered to working families in well over a decade.

You know, The New York Times came to Vermont to do a piece to actually say, who's actually done something to make life more affordable for Americans.

And they chose child care in Vermont as their national example, which I'm really proud of.

So, you know, all these things are about trade offs.

But if we're making smart investments in Vermont, we didn't make sure that they're real and they're going to have a real return.

And that's what we were able to do with child care.

And I think that's why we had such bipartisan support overriding the governor's veto, because even the libertarian and independents and Republicans voted, you know, to override that veto.

Thank you.

Well, that wraps up the second segment of our program.

This is the Democratic primary debate for governor on Vermont public.

And when we come back, the candidates will answer lots more questions, take part in a lightning round and share their closing statements with you.

Stay with us.

This is for Mont public's democratic primary debate for governor.

I'm Mikaela Lefrak in the studio with our two candidates, Amanda Janu of Burlington and Aly Richards of Montpelier.

Well now return to questions for both of the candidates.

And again, please limit your answers to 60s.

Let's talk here about business.

You both include expanding Vermont's workforce and your platforms.

Vermont has a top marginal tax rate for corporations of 8.5%, while neighboring states like New York and New Hampshire's are in the sevens.

Do you see this as a disincentive for companies locating themselves in Vermont?

And if not, if you support that corporate tax rate, how else would you try to bring more business into the state?

And Amanda Janu, we'll start with you for this one.

Yes.

Well, I would say, first of all, a lot of the problems we're facing is because we focus so much on attracting external business.

So a lot of our economic philosophy has been with a deficit mindset that we are struggling because we lack enough people or lack enough investment or lack the right corporations, rather than focusing on really supporting the businesses, the innovations and the skills that we already have here.

So a lot of my background has been working in economic policy that focuses on supporting local businesses, keeping more wealth circulating within our own local economy, as opposed to it flowing F to some offshore bank account of some corporate, you know, shareholders somewhere.

And so what that looks like, I believe, for example, that Vermont has an opportunity to be a leader of the green economy of the future.

So there's a policy that would require any product that entrance into the EU to have certain durability, reuse, repairability standards.

And we already have a lot of companies that have lifetime warranties, circular production processes, regenerative farming, like that's the kind of innovation, entrepreneurship and business development.

I think that will not only create great jobs, but actually be competitive in the generations to come.

Thank you Ali.

Vermont's corporate tax rate.

Yeah, I spent a lot of time talking to business owners.

You know, small businesses, which is the majority in the state of Vermont.

I was in a business last night in downtown Montpelier, having an event, talking to them about their struggles all the way up to the larger, you know, businesses here.

What they tell me is they can't grow here in Vermont.

You know, they get to a certain point and they can't grow.

They find the choice of sort of making a difficult financial decision just to stay.

You know, and so we don't have jobs without business.

I don't know why we have a lot of us versus them emerging in the state where we're almost like vilifying the business community.

Many ways.

There are Vermonters who are creating jobs, you know, for us, and we know we need more.

And so I will say there's a beautiful venture capital work happening in Vermont.

It's very concentrated in Chittenden County.

Other places do things like actually give you a tax credit for doing venture capital.

The reason why it's so successful is they marry it with mentorship and technical assistance, which is amazing.

We could expand that.

Outside of these are things we can do to keep our sort of rates as they are, but expand growth.

But I just want to say you said workforce at the center of everything in my platform is workforce.

And I really hope you ask again about this, because I'd like to tell you more about it.

Okay.

We'll try to get back to that.

But I do want to go a little bit deeper on the Trump administration.

We talked about this a little bit earlier, but let's talk a bit more.

So in the past two years, the Trump administration has threatened to withhold or suspend federal funding from some states.

And given that many Vermont voters expectation of their governor run counter to the administration's, but also considering the fact that the state is often reliant on federal funds, as we talked about earlier, how do you envision your working relationship with this administration?

Because there's a very good chance that the governor ends up in the same room as the president.

Ali Ali Richards oh my goodness.

Yeah.

So again, this is an unprecedented time of attack on our very idea of democratic government, government.

And we need to be clear.

You need as a governor, you need to use that bully pulpit.

To be clear, this is a this is there's no nuance in this.

So for me, it's the number one thing is I want our attorney general to have a partner in the governor.

Every day we have a conversation.

How are we suing the federal government today?

And a scale from 1 to 10, how likely are we to win?

So we know where we put our resources?

You know, just as far as protecting our Vermonters, protecting our communities, which I do not believe this current governor has protected our communities.

And Trump 2.0, he gave our Snap data, gave our Medicaid data.

We didn't even need to do that.

It's not healthy for Vermonters.

So for me, you know, if I'm in a room with Trump, you better believe I'm not smiling.

Okay?

You know, if we need to be doing the going through the motions to make sure we are doing what a state has to do within the federal government, right.

We're partnering.

We're not being unreasonable, but we are calling it on the mark when it is unconstitutional.

We are calling on the mark when Ice is here as an unlawful force attacking our communities.

Right.

We're protecting our Vermonters against those specific things.

We're not.

Given our snap indicated over, Governor Scott has come on Vermont and said, essentially, though, that Vermont's a really small state.

We don't have a lot of poker chips to play in this game.

So what if you know, the the strategy that you're proposing puts us some of that federal dollars at threat?

I mean, we all know what we are dealing with here with Trump.

He is an unstable bully.

And bullies react to power, you know, to to standing up with confidence, you know, in a way.

And I would just say that, you know, this is something that is incredibly important, as the governor, to know you're not going to be negotiating with someone who is unstable.

You're going to stand up for Vermont, you're going to stand up for what's right, you know, and you're going to do the clinical work on the ground with specific agencies.

But, you know, I really think we can fight.

We've seen other states do it in a way that is just being clear about what's happening here and not put ourselves at risk.

Thank you.

Amanda.

Janoo.

I mean, this was a lot of my motivation for running, actually, was just looking at the state of our country and recognizing that when all branches of the federal government seem to be aligned towards a very authoritarian, nationalist agenda.

This is a moment where we really need states to be standing up and illustrating a different way forward.

And so in this moment, I do think that there is a lot more power that states have than we may recognize, and it's important that we utilize that power.

So even if you talk about, for example, I know Ali, you asked about this earlier as well around we are owed certain amounts of federal funding.

There are multiple states that are looking into how you could actually withhold federal taxes as a way to the amount that is actually owed back as a way to not only sort of undercut some of that economic power, but create a bit of, as you say, the sort of bargaining chip.

I think this is an important moment where we need to make sure that every Vermonter is safe and secure in their basic needs, but also join other states to really push back against this administration before it's too late.

So you would support Vermont potentially withholding its federal taxes as as a way of leveraging with the federal government.

Yeah.

And I think that it's also first and foremost about ensuring that we have very strong supply chain resiliency and also working with some other states as well, because there is power, for example, in how we are investing our pensions in terms of how we were using our taxes, and most of all, just ensuring that people have access to the basics that they need, like food, for example.

Because we know throughout history that authoritarian regimes will often, in times of crisis, utilize things like food or job fairs as a way to field greater loyalty.

And if we do not have those vulnerabilities, that allows us to be much more brave and bold in this moment.

Thank you both.

I want to ask you about Vermont's prison system, because it faces a very serious shortage of correctional officers, as we recently heard on Vermont Edition from Department of Corrections Commissioner John Murad.

Northern State Correctional Facility, in particular in Newport, has a 35% vacancy rate for correctional officers.

Should Vermont increase funding to the Department of Corrections in order to aid recruitment and retention?

Amanda know.

Yeah, this is something I've heard from quite a few folks.

Also, you know, I was when I was talking with the Vermont Employees Union, which varied employees.

Yeah.

The Vermont VCI very proud to have their endorsement.

They were talking about this as well because it has put us in a really terrible, also ethical situation where often because there aren't enough correctional, you know, officers are prisoners, are being placed in their cells for much longer than they should, for example.

And the quality of life is, is significantly undermined.

And so this is an area where there's both the issue of the correctional facility officers, but also of having enough judges to make sure that we're processing, because I know we also have a huge backlog of people who are being held because they haven't been able to actually go through the process of looking for bail hearings, etc.. And so I think we're in a moment of needing to really fundamentally recontextualize of some of our correctional systems.

But we want to make sure, first and foremost, that we're living up to our standards of human rights and dignity.

Briefly, would you consider increasing funding to the Doc in order to to help them attract more?

Yeah.

Okay.

Great question.

I think this is an example of how this governor has basically just denied inflation is real.

And yet, you know, increases the state budget by a couple of percent every year, which means he's just we're withering on the vine.

We're cutting services because we cannot deny that health care is going up and salaries are going up.

And so everything else around it gets cut, cut, cut to a point where things are not safe from state government perspective.

And they're not efficient, right.

We're not it's like it's like burning money.

When you are funding state government in a way that is not effective and efficient to do what it needs to do.

So yes, of course, we need to make sure that we're funding all agencies of the state government, including Department of Corrections, to do the basic job to have the folks in those, you know, those jobs.

But here's here's where I'm going to go back to work for us, okay?

We got to make sure folks are not getting criminal justice involved in the first place, which is why I'm so excited to have just announced a free community college and technical degree program, because so many of my classmates at Oxbow High School, we have lost to overdose.

We've lost a suicide.

We have lots of the criminal justice system.

They are disengaged.

And yet we have the fewest high school students going on to anything past high school.

So workforce shortages everywhere.

We got to connect these dots.

And straight up here just again, to be clear, would you support increasing the docs budget?

Okay.

We do have to move on to our lightning round.

We're flying through it.

Please keep your answers as short as possible.

10s or less.

First question for you two should Vermont lengthen its two year terms for governor Amanda?

Sure.

But I actually think it's more about setting clear, longer term targets for the government that are held across political administrations and cycles.

Ally.

Yeah.

Everything we can do to do more multiyear plans.

The Netherlands has a 500 year plan, and they reclaimed land from the sea.

So everything we can do for that.

But the problem is this is a very time honored tradition in Vermont, and it might not be the first place to go for it.

All right.

Remind you both lightning round.

Real quick.

Do you support a data center being built at the former Yankee Nuclear power plant in Vernon, or anywhere else in the state?

Ali.

No, no.

Nice.

There we go.

All right.

What do you think Vermont's minimum wage should be?

It is currently $14.42 an hour.

Amanda, I believe the recent estimates are $25 an hour.

Is a living wage in Vermont.

Alex.

Yeah.

I would want to build a coalition of folks who understand this the best and understand what that target is, but we have to have to make progress.

Look at the gap between what it is now and a livable wage.

Way too big.

Do you support overdose prevention centers in Vermont?

There's work underway to open one in Burlington right now.

Yeah, this is a matter of humanity.

And it's also important to, you know, folks get it's a safety.

It's health.

And so the question is in communication with communities where are they cited.

That's the key.

Thank you.

Amanda.

Yes, I think if Burlington residents believe that that's the way to solve their crisis, I think they should be allowed to.

I believe in local control and also that type of self-determination.

Do you support the Defend the Guard Act, which was proposed and recent legislative session but did not pass?

Amanda.

Yes.

Alex.

We have to be really strategic together as we are fighting against our attack on democracy.

And this is where we pass them like this.

It puts a big, big target on the back of the National Guard, which is incredibly important.

I've talked to a lot of guard families and said yes or no, sorry, I, I have to say, guard families are not asking for this that I've talked to.

So at this point.

No.

Okay.

Do you consider nuclear energy to be green energy?

Ali Richards no.

Prove it to the nuclear industry, I'd say.

Amanda.

No.

Who is a Vermonter that you look up to?

Amanda.

Oh my goodness.

There's so many.

But I would say one of my personal heroes is Ellen Kaylor.

She is the executive director of the Sustainable Jobs Fund and helped to double local food consumption in Vermont in a decade.

Thank you.

Ali Richards I have to say, Beth Robinson, I had the honor of working with her in governor's office, and she was on the Supreme Court.

Now she's a federal judge.

And she was is the reason we have freedom to marry in the state as an advocate.

We actually took a lot of the lessons from that and let her kids thank you.

All right.

Time now for closing statements from each candidate.

The order was determined randomly before the show.

And, Ali Richards, you're going to start us off.

Fantastic.

Thank you so much, Mikaela.

Thank you.

Amanda, it's amazing to be here.

It's truly an honor to be on this journey.

So look, I grew up in Newbury, Vermont, on a dirt road because my family thought is a best place in the world to raise kids.

And they were right.

But that Vermont I grew up in is not affordable.

It's not accessible.

So I rolled up my sleeves and went after a root cause of the crisis, which was child care.

We built a movement of 40,000 people and passed the most significant child care law in the country, and it's working.

And that's when Governor Scott tried to stop us.

He vetoed that bill, but we overrode him with all the Dems, all the Prague's, a bunch of Republicans, a bunch of independents, and the only libertarian in that building.

That is a real Vermont conversation.

So we beat Phil Scott once, and we have to do it again, folks.

Because look, if you can't afford to live in Vermont, it is time for a new approach.

Everything else we care about five alarm fire.

We have to tackle it together with the emergency that it is.

And we were able to accomplish that and we weren't even in charge.

We know how to organize.

We know how to make a plan.

Just imagine what we can do for our economy, for affordability, for health care, for housing when we're in that office.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Amanda.

Janoo, thanks.

Well, thank you so much for having me as well.

So I'm Amanda Janu, I'm running for governor because I love Vermont.

I love that we've got the only state capital without a McDonald's.

But we've got more farmers markets, breweries and co-ops than any other state.

I love how handy and creative and generous we are, and I love how in Vermont, neighbors look out for each other.

And I know that we can build an economy that does that to one that meets our needs and ensures our communities have a real voice and power over the future.

And so I'm running for governor because I think in this moment, many of us are feeling scared and uncertain about the future.

And so we look to leaders not just for answers, but for permission to believe that change is possible.

And I want to be that kind of leader, someone who tells the truth about the challenges we face, but also reminds Vermonters that together we already have everything we need to meet them.

Because I know that if we're willing to be bold and brave in this moment, we will not only whether the storms ahead, but actually lay foundations for a much better future to come.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That concludes the Democratic primary debate for governor on Vermont public.

Many thanks to the two candidates for being part of the program today.

Aly Richards of Montpelier and Amanda Janu of Burlington.

The winner of this primary will face Governor Phil Scott in the elections now ahead of the primary.

We're working to either host debates or record interviews with all the candidates in contested elections.

You can find all that content on Vermont public elections, including our recent debate with the Democratic candidates for lieutenant governor and with the Democratic primary candidates for state auditor.

All right.

The Vermont Public Debate series is produced by Daniella Fierro and Holt Albee, with key production support from Frank Alwyn, Kyle Ambusk, Rick Barrett, Phil Edwards, John Ehrens, Mary Angus, Andrea Lauren, Joey Palumbo, Dave Rice, and Brian Stevenson.

I'm Mikaela Lefrak.

Thank you so much for listening and we will catch up again soon.