MONTPELIER – As the Senate passed its “Big Bill” on the state’s 2026 budget today, Senate Republicans took a big swing on a suite of environmental rollbacks.
Minority leader Sen. Scott Beck, R-Caledonia proposed two amendments to H.493: one would have repealed both the clean heat standard and a clause in the Global Warming Solutions Act that opens the state up to lawsuits for failing to meet mandated emissions reductions. Beck’s second amendment proposed pushing back the timeline for adopting California’s electric vehicle standards, which would phase in widespread EV adoption starting next year.
photo by Glenn Russell, VTDigger
Neither amendment got an up or down vote. Republican Lt. Gov. John Rodgers, who presides over the chamber, deemed each one “not germane” to the budget bill, in response to concerns raised by Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Baruth, D/P-Chittenden Central.
Both times, Beck called for suspending the Senate’s rules so the amendments could be taken up, regardless of their germaneness to the budget. But senators rejected those motions on mostly party-line, roll-call votes.
“I think he wanted to be able to have a roll call vote on it to have a political statement made,” said Sen. Becca White, D-Windsor, who sits on the Transportation Committee.
The time for looking at pushing back adoption of the California standards would have been when the Senate approved its transportation bill, White said. “I think he essentially missed his opportunity and was trying at a second bite of the apple to bring it onto the budget.”
Sen. Anne Watson, D/P-Washington, who chairs the Natural Resources & Energy Committee, disagreed with the floor amendment tactic too. “I think that trying to circumvent the committee process where you can properly vet ideas, where you can hear multiple perspectives, where you can tune language to be the best product is bad governance,” she said in an interview.
Repealing the clean heat standard became a rallying point for Republicans last fall, though current law required the Public Utility Commission to report to the Legislature on how to put the framework in place, which happened in January.
No further action has been proposed, but the lingering uncertainty surrounding whether lawmakers would implement the policy is an undue stress on Vermonters, Beck said in an interview. “Vermonters out there (are asking) ‘are you gonna put a 58 cent tax on me or not?’”
As for the Global Warming Solutions Act and California vehicle standards, Beck said the state is not on track to meet the deadlines on either mandate.
“There’s a whole lot of good that comes from shifting away from carbon, but we can only do that as fast as the technology and the affordability of the technology is,” he said. “We need to be more realistic about what that glide slope really looks like. Then, in three to five years, maybe there’s new technology, and maybe we have more resources, but we can’t bankrupt businesses and families to do this.”
Senate Democrats agree that the state is not on track to meet the mandates of the Global Warming Solutions Act.
“By 2030, Governor Scott will have had a decade to have gotten on track, and he has not,” Watson said. “What I am most interested in is not letting up. If you change the deadline, if you take away the teeth of any of the aspects of it, that reduces the sense of urgency that I think this issue deserves.”
In a well-timed vote that coincided with International Workers’ Day, the Vermont House of Representatives on Thursday passed Proposal 3, an amendment to the Vermont Constitution that would affirm the right of employees to organize unions and collectively bargain. The Senate approved the amendment in March. Both chambers had previously approved the measure in 2024.
The amendment states that “no law shall be adopted that interferes with, negates, or diminishes the right of employees to collectively bargain.”
The proposal also includes a constitutional protection for workplace agreements that require workers to join a union as a condition for employment. That means the measure would prohibit a future legislature from passing so-called “right to work” laws, which have been enacted in 26 states and which functionally outlaw such agreements.
Thursday’s vote was just the latest in a long series of steps in the state’s ratification process. The next hurdle will be the 2026 November election, when Vermont voters will weigh in. The amendment succeeds if the ballot question receives a majority vote.
