Vermont high court rules lobbyist tax unconstitutional
By The Associated Press
06.11.01
Printer-friendly page
MONTPELIER, Vt. — The Vermont Supreme Court has rejected the state's tax on lobbyists, ruling it violates the laws that allow all citizens to petition their government.
A divided court on June 8 affirmed a 1999 Washington Superior Court decision that threw out the 5% tax.
The majority, composed of Chief Justice Jeffrey Amestoy and Associate Justices Marilyn Skoglund and John Dooley, described the tradition of petitioning one's government as "a venerable right" that began in America with the New Englander's personal appearance at town meeting.
From that tradition arose the special-interest lobbying known today, the court said.
There has been no detailed judicial analysis of the right to lobby, the decision said, "perhaps because of the lingering distrust of lobbying that has persisted in our society."
But although lobbying need not be immune from some regulation, the justices added, "it is beyond dispute that lobbying directly involves core political speech that lies at the very heart of what the First Amendment was designed to safeguard."
Dissenting were Associate Justices James Morse and Alan Cheever, who served in place of Associate Justice Denise Johnson.
They said that the lobbyist tax was a general tax that merely discriminated between speakers, and that it was not intended to inhibit freedom of speech. They also said the lobby tax did not suppress a particular viewpoint.
But in its majority decision, written by Skoglund, the court found that wasn't enough to make the tax legal.
"Indeed, the Supreme Court has never upheld a tax that singled out First Amendment interests, irrespective of whether it suppressed particular viewpoints," the justices said.
Vermont's lobbyist tax went into effect in January 1998 as part of the state's 1997 campaign-finance law. Among other things, that law set strict limits on the amounts individuals could contribute to candidates or political parties and on the amounts the candidates could spend.
Last year, a federal judge in Burlington overturned some elements of that law in a decision that is now under appeal.
Proceeds from the lobbyist tax went toward public financing of the campaigns for governor and lieutenant governor.
Among the nonprofit groups that sued to overturn the lobbyist tax were the Home Builders Association of Northern Vermont and the Vermont Society of Association Executives. They said the tax was unconstitutional.
In defense of the tax, lawyers for the state of Vermont argued it was a justifiable way of raising money for the publicly financed campaigns and amounted merely to an extension of the sales tax.
Like the lower court, the state Supreme Court rejected that argument, saying the lobby tax was special and required extra scrutiny.
"Indeed, it would be difficult to conceive of a more distinct, independent tax singling out a discrete group of First Amendment speakers," the justices wrote.
Previous
Vermont judge strikes down state tax on lobbyists
Court rejects key provision of larger campaign law, finding it infringes on lobbyists' free-speech rights.
11.23.99
Related
Critics lambaste clean-elections effort as curtailment of speech
Analysis Hundreds of candidates in four states are running publicly funded campaigns, but some dub movement 'welfare for politicians,' while others say it limits political speech.
09.10.02
Public-interest firm renews challenge of Arizona's 'clean-election' plan
Group claims system of publicly funded elections compels citizens to support political speech.
04.30.01
