LEGISLATORS HOPING FOR WEDNESDAY EXIT

MONTPELIER - And on the 129th day, they are still here.

Abandoning all hope of adjourning Vermont's 67th biennium by tonight,
lawmakers are expected to be back at work in an attempt to get out of
town by the middle of next week.

"I think we can do it," said Sen. Susan Bartlett, D-Lamoille, who, as
chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, wields great control
over the only bill the Legislature is required to pass before
adjournment: the $955 million general fund budget. "Right now, we're
just waiting to see what else needs to be finished."

In fact, the differences between the House and Senate versions of the
general fund budget are under $1 million, and, according to
legislative fiscal staffers, have more to do with policy
considerations than actual dollar amounts.

In all, the state is slated to spend about $3.8 billion in the year
beginning July 1; the rest of the money comes from the federal
government and from the statewide education property tax.

"We're kind of just waiting around to see what everybody else is up
to," Bartlett said wistfully Thursday afternoon before trying to take
five minutes to eat her lunch.

While the money committee was waiting around, lawmakers on other
panels were desperately trying to move their priorities onto the
impossibly fast end-of-session legislative fast track and toward an
unlikely - but not impossible - date with Gov. James Douglas' pen.

One such measure was a medical marijuana bill that garnered
preliminary approval in the House late Thursday. Although the bill
differs from one passed last year by the Senate, it is significant
because of the widespread support of Republicans. The state's top
Republican - Douglas - has indicated his opposition to a medical
marijuana measure despite its apparent approval by the majority of
Vermonters, although sources said the governor would let the House
version become law without signing it.

The House bill, which is up for final approval today, is much more
restrictive than its Senate counterpart, which allows anyone suffering
from a "life threatening progressive or debilitating disease" to use
marijuana to treat "severe, persistent and intractable" symptoms, such
as wasting syndrome, nausea, pain and seizures.

Vermont's legislature would be only the second in the country to pass
such a measure. Seven other states have medical marijuana laws on the
books that have been approved by voters.

Another issue vexing lawmakers is how to spend the estimated $33
million that was once earmarked for Chittenden County's
circumferential highway now that a U.S. District Court judge ruled the
project can't start this summer.

Many lawmakers say they want the money to fund a variety of bridge and
road projects statewide, but the Chittenden County Metropolitan
Planning Organization says much of the money should stay in Chittenden
County.

The suggestion is more than just a request, because the planning
organization actually controls how the money can be spent: The federal
government, which pays for 80 percent of highway projects, gave the
Circ money to the Chittenden County organization and not the state.

Agency of Transportation officials, who control the 20 percent state
match that triggers the federal money, spent all day Thursday
consulting with Chittenden planning officials. A proposal will be
presented to lawmakers today. Everyone will be focused on what
percentage goes to Chittenden County. How big that percentage is will
either create transportation peace or spawn a major political brawl.

Legislators are also pondering a prescription drug measure that would
reduce drug costs for low-income families who have no health care
insurance. Its fate is uncertain, because some lawmakers say the
savings would come at the expense of local pharmacies.

The bill would allow a family of four with a household income of
$63,000 to buy drugs at the price paid by Medicaid, which is about
half the retail price. Currently, a family of four must have no more
than $56,000 in income to qualify for the benefit.

The Senate is firmly behind that change, but some House leaders are
not ready to agree.

The two sides are also squabbling over laws that regulate pharmacy
benefit managers and whether they will have to disclose what they
charge for drugs. Pharmacy benefit managers are the brokers who
negotiate wholesale drug prices for both pharmacies and insurance plans.

Debate over those two issues is so intense that some legislators are
already predicting impasse, calling the bill dead.