When the Democrat supermajority passed Act 18, the Clean Heat Standard, back in 2023 it came with a provision called the “check back” wherein the legislature would have to vote to approve (or not) rules subsequently drafted by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) for operating the law’s carbon credit exchange. During the 2024 campaign, incumbents catching heat for voting for this politically toxic tax on home heating fuels claimed – dishonestly – that the “check back” meant Act 18 was “just a study.” It wasn’t. (See HERE and HERE.)
As I have pointed out numerous times, Act 18 mandates that multiple components of the Clean Heat carbon tax scheme went into effect immediately and remain so, the only one subject to the future “check back” being the rules for running the credit exchange. In fact, the reason Democrats and Progressives refused to repeal the despised Act 18 this year was, ostensibly, the need to keep those other components in law, most specifically a fuel dealer registry.
But here’s the current problem caused by this spectacularly incompetent, boneheaded lawmaking: the fuel dealer registry, which the Democrats and Progressives insist we need, was designed for the most part to collect data specific to the operation of a carbon credit exchange. The exchange, determined to be unworkable and unaffordable, will not be implemented. Ergo, collecting most of the data legally required for the registry under Act 18, which is itself impossibly complicated – some of it literally impossible to calculate — is now unneeded. Therefore – obvious to all but the morons who passed the law and are too lazy and/or embarrassed by the mess they’ve made to fix it — collecting that data is a waste of a lot of time and resources.
This is a conclusion the PUC seems to have come to as well, informing (rather hilariously) the legislature in a public letter:
Chapter 94 of Title 30 contains provisions requiring action by entities other than the Commission. One such obligation is that, under the existing language of 30 V.S.A. § 8124(b)(1), each entity that sells heating fuel into or in Vermont must register with the Commission by June 30, 2025. However, absent a legislatively approved Clean Heat Standard, the Commission will not [emphasis added] process fuel dealer registrations, designate obligated parties, set annual clean heat credit obligations, update its website of fuel dealer registrants, or enforce against nonregistration.
In other words, screw you and your stupid law. We ain’t playing.
Moreover, they go on:
Nonetheless, and to facilitate each fuel dealer’s own independent determination of its obligations [emphasis added] under Chapter 94 of Title 30, the Commission will make available a spreadsheet template for fuel dealers to enter and report the registration information.
And this is funny – I mean what dealer is going to register in a non-existent registry – but also troubling. It appears that the PUC is trying to shift legal liability for not complying with Act 18, which they are refusing to do themselves, onto the fuel dealers. I’m not a lawyer, but someone needs to call road apples on this. Businesses need and deserve clarity from the legislature on what their legal obligations are.
If the majority party really wants to insist that the fuel dealer registry is necessary and therefore worth keeping Act 18 on the books, they had all session to amend the law to fix the registry so that its legal requirements made sense in light of the decision to not move forward with the carbon credit exchange. They refused to do this. They also refused to fund the positions in the PUC that would manage the dealer registry, so how serious can they really be about the need for it?
One does have to question if the registry is really what’s motivating them to keep this atrocious law on the books, and not just a desire to press the “go” button on the whole thing after the next election. (Ya think!) But in the meantime, it will be interesting to see if the lawmakers who passed Act 18 and insist on keeping it in law, blocking multiple Republican attempts to repeal it, will stand up to the PUC, defend their policy’s worth and insist on the need for compliance. Or will they quietly endure the humiliation of this insolent refusal to pretend the last pathetic vestiges of their flagship Climate Change initiative serve any worthwhile purpose whatsoever.
