Few Vermonters know more about state government and how it's funded than Caledonia County Senator Jane Kitchell.
As Human Resources Commissioner, Kitchell helped restructure Vermont's social services system, and as chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, he has played a major role in determining which government programs get funded and which don't.
Kitchell shocked Vermont political circles last week when he announced he would not seek re-election this year.
Vermont Public reporter Peter Hirschfeld spoke with Kichel about his career. This interview was produced for audio listening, which we highly recommend. A transcript, edited for length and clarity, is also available.
Peter Hirschfeld: What is your guiding philosophy in determining how much aid and support the government should provide to those in need?
Jane Kitchell: Well, I think that was one of the fundamental problems that we had as we were designing welfare reform, and the fundamental principle was that parents have primary responsibility for their children's support and that we would invest in them to be able to do so if they were able.
Unlike many states after welfare reform, we focused on education, on training. We looked at research that showed that a mother's level of education is a determining factor in a child's educational success. So the question was, “How do we equip parents to do their job? How do we prepare them for the workforce?” That was the framework for our approach. [with]It was, “How do we invest in, provide support, provide incentives, address the structural disincentives for this group of welfare-dependent parents so that they can do what is expected of them as parents?” And that means providing financial support.
Peter Hirschfeld
/
Vermont Public
Peter Hirschfeld: I imagine Vermont has had to make difficult decisions about which programs to spend taxpayer money on and which programs not to spend it on. Has your humanity ever clashed with your definition of fiscal responsibility?
Jane Kitchell: Well, that's kind of hard to answer. Yes. I'll tell you where I've seen it the most. There used to be existing funding programs, like assistance for the elderly, the blind, the disabled, and assistance to poor families, and those benefits were renewed every year. And that was just accepted. When the federal government changed the grants to lump sums, that weakened the support for the poorest families.
This year, I'll be honest with you, I've struggled a lot. There's always this focus, and there's lobbying and advocacy groups pushing the government to do more. And one of the things that I've found very important as budget chair is, “How well are we meeting our current obligations?” Right now, the Reach Up program pays parents about 50% of what they need to support their children. Twenty-five years ago, it paid 100% of what they need. Asking a mother of two to live on a $900 a month benefit, when you think about rent and all the other expenses, is very difficult. It's very difficult to say to people, “That shiny new thing is great, but don't you care about the poorest kids in Vermont?”
I certainly do feel that way. I deeply regret not doing more for the benefit of Reach Up. I think that's one of the things I regret not doing. But I also feel that we did a lot of other good things, so overall I feel like the budget was appropriate.
Zoe MacDonald
/
Vermont Public
Peter Hirschfeld: You are well known in Montpellier for your negotiation skills. What advice would you give to someone who wants to hone their negotiating skills to get their place in life?
Jane Kitchell: Think about how you're going to defend your position. What's the data that supports it? What's the policy that supports it? What are your priorities? Having this information obviously helps you in negotiations, because even if on the surface it looks really attractive or it looks like a shiny new product, it helps you in negotiations. But ask yourself, “What does this actually mean? Who benefits? Who is ultimately going to pay the cost?”
Peter Hirschfeld: You're also known in Montpellier as a carer for your colleagues, especially when it comes to food. You take homemade sandwiches in Ziploc bags to lunch, or bake cakes for birthdays. Why do you do that?
Jane Kitchell: I grew up on a farm, and we always served food to anyone who came into the kitchen, so it was a part of the environment I grew up in. It's about compassion, it's about generosity, and food has this incredible ability to bring people together.
So for Senator Sears' birthday, I made a raspberry trifle. All the senators got together and we were able to celebrate. It didn't matter what party. It's a way to bring people together.
Peter Hirschfeld: Finally, Senator Kichel, you have a great influence in Montpellier. People were shocked by your decision not to seek reelection. Why are you stepping down at what many consider to be the height of your power?
Jane Kitchell: Well, I guess there's a song about knowing when to give up. 57 years has been a big part of my life. And I said, “Now is the time.” I want to travel. There are things I want to do. And I can say that I'm in a totally different place in my life than I was 10 years ago, which is, what do I want to do and what opportunities are there?
It was a real struggle because it's hard to walk away. But I decided that this was something I had to do for myself. I had to give myself the time and freedom to start doing the things I'd been putting off. If you look around you — you don't have to look far — you'll realize that time is precious. One of my coworkers said to me, “You have more money than time.” That quote has stuck with me.
Sometimes we put things off and say, “I should have done it.” You can't live life with regrets.
If you have any questions, comments or tips, Send us a message.
