I beg you, over the next 2 years, to pay attention to the actual actions he takes. He does a great job coming across with a "shucks, I'm just a nice guy" personality, but his policies do not play that out.

He vetoed the residential contractor registry. This registry would have required contractors to register with the state, carry liability insurance, and would have created a coordinated process for the state to take action against companies committing fraud. 84% of other states have a registry like this. Scott vetoed it claiming that it would hurt small businesses, however he simultaneously claimed that to avoid fraud, consumers should rely on trade publications, word of mouth and social media. Who benefits from distrust of businesses that they haven't seen splashed in advertisements? Not small businesses.

It's almost like someone who spent 30 years in the construction industry, who is still being paid his $2.5M for selling his share of a large business, might not have the best interest of the consumer and small businesses in his heart. And that, in fact, he's not the nice guy he plays on TV.

In 6 years, Governor Scott has vetoed 32 bills that were debated and passed by the legislature. Some highlights of the bills, that the people we elected to the legislature would have made law, include: *H505- to create a drug use standards advisory board. Which would include experts from health, mental health, substance use disorder and the drug user community to establish penalties for possession. *H715- which would have reformed the Vermont clean heat standard to align with the climate action plan. When asked about how this was vetoed, when his administration was included in the development of the plan, Scott said "they asked my staff, but they didn't ask me." Leads one to wonder the purpose of having staff included in all of these groups if they don't represent you. *H728- to commission a study on overdose sites. When asked about it in a debate, he noted that since it wouldn't be feasible to have overdose site everywhere, we shouldn't have them at all. *H157- creating a statewide registry of residential building contractors. This would have created a coordinated system for responding to complaints of fraud, and required contractor to carry liability insurance. *H107 - establishing statewide paid family leave that would be paid for out of a payroll tax for workers and employees, instead saying it should be voluntary for people to offer it. Spoiler- it's already voluntary. That's why so many people have no access to paid leave.

There are clearly many more - but the long and short of it is that we have different ideas of what "doing a good job" is. Imagine if these vetos hadn't happened and these bills, passed by the legislature, had become law. Imagine living in that Vermont - where everyone had access to paid family leave, you could shop for a home contractor with less worry about fraud, we were working towards some solution on overdosing, we were actually enacting the largest portion of the climate action plan, and we had experts making decisions on drug penalties based on evidence. Vermont would be a nicer place to live for everyone.

*Edit: issues with tense.

"Vermont will not apologize for it's delicious cheese!"