To the editor: Charlton disputes recent contentions about voting record

It seems a lot of salient information has been omitted in some letters as of late. There are a few factual points that should be added to this wave of riveting but manipulative fan-fiction:

1. I voted against a data center bill because a) Senate democrats introduced too many loopholes allowing centers to buy their way past regulations in hopes of ‘raising revenue’ b) ACT 250 addresses all but power consumption: Perhaps we should include that in a reform of ACT 250 rather than introduce another regulatory structure to fund, staff and enforce? Not in favor of giant data centers – not in favor of a bill that wouldn’t work and another set of spurious regs Let’s try again.
2. I am an advocate of Act 250 reform (not complete repeal), which was asked of the democratic supermajority in 2023-24. We got no reform and a change of jurisdiction unfavorable to rural VT. One local leader / letter-to-the-editor-writer knows this but wants you to think otherwise.
3. I ran as a moderate, and still am. see my FB video way back in July of 2024. Same writer wants you to think otherwise … poor guy.
4. I did not support the House resolution echoing Gov. Phil Scott’s statement on ICE operations. Neither did the governor. I supported his original statement and passed on the House version because it failed to call for calm on everyone’s part. Same writer and others were in on the ensuing conversation and know this… but want you to think otherwise. You might want to consider FB video from 10/13/26.
5. Why I did not vote to expand funding for childcare: at the time of the vote we were collecting more money than was being utilized. Why on Earth were we being asked to raise the tax? Does that make sense? This writer may not have known this, but that’s the answer – no I am not opposed to childcare, just to blank checks.
6. I voted against the health care bill that would have helped some Vermonters but not the working class folks being asked to fund it. It was a show-off bill that didn’t solve the problem.
7. The ‘gun bill’ referred to by a local attorney did not lift background checks as she suggests. It sought to repeal an existing waiting period exemption. Data did not show that this would have made a difference. Surely a lawyer can read legislation.
8. Dark money? If it’s there, it’s so dark I have no idea what the poster is talking about, nor does the state Republican Caucus. The governor’s race? Perhaps the poster can clarify? How much has the VT Democratic Party spent in the last week alone in attack ads? How much of that came from outside the state? Is this “light money”? Did anyone bother to ask?
9. The color of my signs? Srsly? Green mountains and blue skies – same as last time. Because it’s about Vermont. I think my voters are intelligent enough to know the issues and candidates and not vote on the color of a sign, but apparently others don’t trust them that much.
10. I campaigned on bipartisanship and civility in 2024, and have followed through. I clearly cannot expect that from the writers of recent hit posts, smear campaigns and lowball deceit. This is not what my constituents want in Montpelier.

My constituents are decent, honest, hardworking and reasonable. They first elected me in part because they were tired of this sort of acrimony. They know that the difference between a half-truth and an outright lie is… nothing. I have run a clean campaign, without running attack ads or spooky doubt-casting editorials tearing down my opponent. Is this desperation? It’s not integrity. The differences here speak for themselves. Loudly.

Tom Charlton
Chester
Candidate for State House for Windsor-Windham