Yes, spending can support affordability

Dear Editor, The recent commentary in VTDigger claiming that Vermont cannot 'spend its way into affordability' ignores the fact that spending in one area frequently results in even larger savings in another. In healthcare, for example, spending tax dollars can significantly reduce spending on premiums and deductibles, making healthcare more affordable overall. One healthcare claim in the commentary is flat-out wrong. Former Gov. Peter Shumlin did not decide in 2014 that 'single-payer was not affordable.' His administration found that 'At a growth rate of four percent, [Green Mountain Care] would yield savings of $378 Million over the first five years of the program …' This calculation did not even take into account reduced administrative costs under a single-payer plan. The commentary's claim that a single-payer primary care system does not solve the shortage of primary care doctors is certainly questionable. There is every reason to believe that relieving primary care doctors of the massive burden of insurance billing and collections would attract more of them to Vermont and encourage those already here to stay. The commentary's perspective certainly represents the concerns of the author's organization, the Fiscal Alliance Foundation, one of a large network of nonprofits dedicated to reducing taxes and regulation. The alliance is an affiliate of the State Policy Network, which shares some of the same funding sources as the American Legislative Exchange Council. I doubt that the alliance itself has affordability problems, given that its 2024 tax filing shows $754,008 in total revenue, with $259,844 going to salaries. Lee Russ, Bennington, Vt.