THE SCRAPBOOK has cultivated a particular interest in Vermont this year. In these pages last spring, Geoffrey Norman and David Orgon Coolidge detailed the various depredations inflicted on the state by a progressive political class -- not the least of these being a "civil unions" (read: gay marriage) law rammed through the state legislature over the explicit objections of a majority of Vermonters. Immediately after the law's passage, "Take Back Vermont" signs popped up around the state. Many pro-civil union legislators lost unexpectedly during the primary in September, and the trend carried into Election Day. Republicans gained at least 12 seats (maybe more, pending recounts), to form a solid majority of 80 members in the 150-seat state house of representatives. Less dramatic but still substantial gains were made in the state senate, where a Democratic-progressive majority has fallen to 16-14.
Chances for any striking redirection in the state's political culture seem slender, though. As we go to press, Governor Howard Dean has avoided a runoff against his Republican opponent, Ruth Dwyer, by barely clinging to 50 percent of the vote. Not that a runoff would matter. Dwyer won only 39 percent, failing to match the 41 percent she won against Dean when she challenged him in 1998. She accepted her defeat with characteristic candor. "I think we did as well as any group of people could have done," she told supporters on election night. "But the people of Vermont clearly don't believe what we believe, and we've got to accept that."
The members of the new Republican majority in the house might have cause to dispute that assertion. Even so, the future of conservative politics in Vermont, if there is one, will depend on how they govern over the next two years.