I am told theres a hotspot at the site of the State Committee meeting today, called to discuss the grassroots movement to make a clear, strong statement on impeachment. There may or may not be. If there is, I will live blog from the meeting on this site, so please stay tuned a refresh a lot (Soapblox will love me for saying that, no doubt).
If you don’t hear from me…well, there ya go. I’ll fill folks in after the fact.
(Promoting – promoted by mataliandy)
There must be something about the name Taylor that generates extra spine.
First we heard about Jeffry Taylor of Rutland, who took that small, first step toward holding our President accountable for his actions.
Now we hear about Harry Taylor of Charlotte, North Carolina, daring to stand up and speak the truth directly to the President, despite being surrounded by people he believed were hostile to his ideals:
I feel like despite your rhetoric, that compassion and common sense have been left far behind during your administration, and I would hope from time to time that you have the humility and the grace to be ashamed of yourself inside yourself. And I also want to say I really appreciate the courtesy of allowing me to speak what I’m saying to you right now. That is part of what this country is about.
Tomorrow is a potentially historic moment for Vermont. The Democratic Party State Committee will hold vote on several resolutions designed to hold the President accountable.
The two primary differences among the resolutions are process-related. Do the people of Vermont ask their legislature to transmit articles of impeachment to the US House, or do we ask the legislature to support existing legislation already in committee at the national level.
I have never wavered in my opinion about which to support. In fact, I was the one “no” in my county last night when the county voted to support what is known as the Grand Isle resolution (amended for Orange County and to add the Vice President). This resolution begins by stating clearly that the President has committed impeachable offenses, but concludes by asking for an investigation into whether he has committed impeachable offenses. It says we support the work already being done at the national level, but leaves it at that.
My concern with that approach is that it removes a very powerful tool from the hands of all members of Congress who feel that the President must be held accountable: the power of privilege.
Here’s how it works, certain types of bills are granted special rights according to the rules of the house. Impeachment is one of those. These rights, called a “point of privilege,” allow any house member to bring a resolution or bill to the floor, to be read into the record. A privileged resolution can be brought to the floor at any time by any member. It can be accompanied by a statement relating to it. So for example, the member could simply ask that the request of the people be honored by initiating a full and independent investigation of the charges listed in the resolution, to be followed by impeachment should the charges be proved by the investigation.
It can be brought to the floor again if any time any foul offense of the administraton is revealed. The Rutland Resolution gives the power of privilege to the US House, specifically because it calls for impeachment. Calling for an investigation does not gove the power of privilege.
US House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has used privilege to call for investigation of House ethics rules very effectively. Getting the House cover-up into the Congressional Record over and over again (11 times so far). The Rutland Resolution will allow the same to be done regarding the President’s high crimes and misdemeanors and the associated cover-up.
In addition, a resolution passed up to the US House from a state legislature, at the behest of the citizens of that state, sends a very different and powerful message than a resolution that says “stay the course.”
My position is guided in part by President Teddy Roosevelt, who once said, “Walk Softly, but carry a big stick.”
I hope that tomorrow’s vote will be a vote for accountability that also hands the “big stick” of privilege to the Congress, since they already have “walking softly” down to an art form. The future of my children – and our country – may depend on it.
No matter what the outcome of tomorrow’s vote, it will still be a vote for accountability, and for that, I am grateful. It makes me proud to be a Vermonter.
According to Freyne, Rockingham Selectman and CPA Tom Salmon Jr. (yeah, junior of the former guv) is considering a run for Auditor. Nice to have new folks involved, but its amusing that the Dems had to go fishing so far away from the deep Dem bench to run (sorry for the mixed metaphor). Everyone sees Randy Brock as supremely qualified and shied away. Why the Dems don’t understand that at the end of the day, this is a partisan political office so it doesn’t matter that much if you’re not an “auditor” per se, is weird. It’s like they’ve already forgotten the last two auditors (trust me, Ready didn’t lose to Brock because she wasn’t a CPA…)
Windham County residents can’t be sleeping well. The ratcheting up of power output from Vermont Yankee towards the 120% goal is continuing. This facility has a history of seeming to be held together by duct tape and administrated by corporate monkeys. And folks are none too happy that the Dem majority in Montpelier is enabling this scary scenario. Stay tuned. Invest in lead.
…speaking of Windham County, I hear unconfirmed rumors that Peter Shumlin is planning a return to the VT Senate. Pete evokes strong feelings every whichaway from people, but I’ve always liked him. I notice he signed the impeachment petition as well…a big plus in my book.
Congratulations to the Carpetbagger Report for placing in the Best Blog category of the
Rob Williams at Vermont Commons doesn’t support the impeachment movement because it doesn’t include an allowance for the dismantling of this American “Empire clinging desperately to global hegemony.” Neither do the laws on the books outlawing armed robbery, but presumably those are still okay.
Republicans are heaving Bennington Senator Mark Shepard overboard in their desire to throw as much support as possible, as quickly as possible to Martha Rainville in the US House Race (who has shown no compunction about talking out of both sides of her mouth in regards to who she’ll take money from). You gotta almost feel bad for Shepard. When the Republicans could take lessons from Dems (who didn’t pick favorites in their own Lt Governor primary) on party unity, you know they’re in for trouble.
Philip Baruth has joined the choir wondering what’s up with Vermonters First and founder Adam Quinn. The rumors abound. Did Douglas run him out (ha!)? Is the site under investigation by the Secretary of State for directing campaign contributions to candidates (sorry, that’s legal)? Has Adam found gainful employment? I’ve heard all these things, but what’s as interesting to me is why equally-prolific front pager Nat Kinney left. Nat — I know you’re a GMD reader. Care to comment? Inquiring minds and all…
( – promoted by Jack McCullough)
I wouldn’t ordinarily post about a book before I’m done reading it, but this is so timely I just have to.
The book is Articles of Impeachment Against George W. Bush and it’s put out by the Center for Constitutional Rights. The book is a closely reasoned exposition of the compelling grounds for impeachment, including illegal electronic surveillance in violation of FISA and the Constitution; his illegal war in Iraq; arbitrary detentions of citizens and non-citizens; and arrogating excessive power to the executive branch in contravention of the doctrine of separation of powers.
The Democratic State Committee is meeting this Saturday to discuss whether to call on the Legislature to support an impeachment resolution. Maybe it would be a good idea for some of the delegates to familiarize themselves with this book to be prepared to make the sound legal arguments that compel impeachment.
I know that the central issue here is not legal but political. Nevertheless, when the legal and moral issues are as compelling as they are, I think they must take precedence over political considerations.
I also don’t think this idea is bad politics. The current slogan for the Democratic Party nationally is Together, America Can Do Better. Taking a stand on the impeachment resolution proves that the Democrats offer an alternative.
Hard to say what happened. Maybe she was bitten by a radioactive spider. Caught in a freak accident and bathed with gamma radiation or cosmic rays. Whatever the case, this latter half of the legislative session has brought us a Gaye Symington who is kicking butt and taking names. The caucus is tighter, morale is higher, and the Democrats are aggressively keeping control of the debate on their Legislative priorities. It wasn’t that long ago that I lamented the lack of disciplined and aggressive message work coming from the Democratic Legislative leadership. Little did I know at the time that a huge change was underway.
Insiders credit the change to Symington’s hiring of political consultant Bill Lofy, the superstar former Communications Director for the late Senator Paul Wellstone’s staff, and author of Politics the Wellstone Way : How to Elect Progressive Candidates and Win on Issues, and Paul Wellstone : The Life of a Passionate Progressive :
What Lofy does, he said, is help Symington and other House members define what they’ve done in terms the public can understand. “I spend a lot of time writing talking points,” he said. “This is really about how do we talk about what we’re doing in the legislative session.”
Last week, he helped Symington practice for a television panel on health care.
Did you read that? Practice! That’s what it said! No longer confident that pureness of heart and intellect are enough to sway Vermonters, Symington is prepping for political battles and coming out prepared.
And the changes aren’t just in Symington’s performance. She’s been on tour promoting the Health Plan. My jaw about fell off when I heard a radio ad for the House Health Plan. The ads are a result of a broad-based issue coalition put together by the leadership, and they’re going a long way towards controlling the debate.
And the Republicans can’t stand that they’re being outmaneuvered. One example:
They have bristled at the amount of work done by lawmakers over the summer, when the full General Assembly is not in session, and finally decided to ask the Legislative Council for documentation on how much was spent and who collected the money.
When they got it, though, they discovered that the information had also been shared with Symington and other Democratic leaders. Republicans complained that they should have been able to request information in private and could share it only if they wished.
“We think we have strict confidentiality and we’re entitled to that,” said Rep. Connie Houston, R-Ferrisburgh, a former Republican leader.
…[Symington]: “I assumed I got it because I’ve been asking, I’ve been impatient about it,” she said.
Republicans were looking for a “gotcha”, and they didn’t get it. Symington was way ahead of them. And to top it off, the Rs are left whining about it, trying to justify their grousing by complaining they aren’t being treated well — which is laughable when you remember life for the Dems under Speaker Freed:
New assignments brought drastic change to the House, were only one of 14 chairmen from 2004 remain. Republicans were given two seats of power, a change from recent times when former GOP Speaker Walter Freed of Dorset did not let a single Democrat run a committee.
So it’s time to shift our expectations. Dems are stepping up to the political-message plate in a way we haven’t seen. Sure it took them a while, but who cares? This time, they aren’t going to lose control of the health discussion five minutes after the gavel falls on the session.
The one thing political observers are missing is the issue of credit. Lofy is great, sure — but there have been great consultants around these parts before (although none with Lofy’s gravitas and profile). The difference now is that Symington has found one she trusts (who isn’t just telling her what she wants to hear or trying to blame every Dem woe on everybody else), and she’s deferring to him — giving him the trust and the room to work his craft.
And that means, at the end of the day, credit is mainly due to Symington herself.
SOPRANOS SPOILER ALERT:
Do you watch the Sopranos? This season the first three episodes revolved around Tony’s medical problem, with him spending time in a coma after being shot by his Uncle Junior. Two weeks ago one of the subplots had Paulie and Vito robbing some drug dealers of a million dollars, then deciding how much of Tony’s share they should kick up to Carmela, what with Tony being in the coma, maybe he won’t be around to reward them for their loyalty in giving him his share. Then, all of a sudden he comes out of the coma and they have to scramble to give Carmela the money before he realizes that they haven’t paid up. Of course, she’s smart enough to know this smells and that they’ve been holding out on him. Obviously they waited too long, and I suspect it will cost them in future episodes.
What does this have to do with Vermont?
Last week Philip Baruth was talking about the trouble Martha Rainville was having deciding whether to give Tom Delay his $2000 back. The story was that she was going to decide by the middle of this month, when her next campaign finance report is due.
Too bad for her she waited so long. Now, with Delay’s announcement that he is not only not going to run for reelection, but that he’s quitting his job so he can be more effective working outside of the House (the big house, I think he means), what can she do? She either keeps the money she got from an obvious crook, or gives it back so he can use it on his defense. And either way, even if she does get elected he’s not going to be around to reward her loyalty.
Maybe a decision based on principle would have worked better for her.
( – promoted by Jack McCullough)
Crossposted from Rational Resistance because we’ve had a big issue with Part D here in Vermont.
Remember when people were hassling the Bush administration about how complicated Part D is, and how especially difficult it is for old people, who are the primary beneficiaries of Medicare, to understand?
Not so, said the administration mouthpieces. Especially Mike Leavitt, Secretary of Health and Human Services. He was able to help his aged parents figure it out and sign up for the plan that was right for them, and pretty much anyone else can do the same.
Well, here’s what the Salt Lake Tribune is reporting:
Not even the senior parents of Washington’s top health official are immune from headaches caused by the new Medicare drug plan.
Dixie and Anne Leavitt – parents of Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt – recently were forced to change Medicare plans after learning that the one they chose imperiled their retiree medical coverage.
The elder Leavitts joined the program last fall with some fanfare and help from their son. Anne Leavitt, 73, was quoted in The Salt Lake Tribune touting the online enrollment as “smooth,” and a guaranteed money-saver.
Neither she nor Dixie, 76 – who made his fortune in the insurance business – could be reached for comment on Thursday. But they reportedly suffered no real lapse in coverage. Secretary Leavitt’s office confirmed that the couple signed up for another Medicare plan through their insurer, Utah’s Public Employee Health Plan.
So let’s see: you “made your fortune” in the insurance business, your son runs the program, and you still can’t figure it out.
I hate to argue with the President, but maybe there is a problem there after all.
It’s clear Martha Rainville is a woman who can’t make a decision. First, she couldn’t decide
what political party she belonged to. Next, she couldn’t decide if she was a candidate or not,
all the while using the VT National Guard for her photo ops. Now she can’t decide whether
she should return the two thousand dollars her campaign received from House Republican
Whip Roy Blunt’s “Rely On Your Beliefs” Political Action Committee. What are her beliefs?
She seems to have a lot of difficulty with that question. If she doesn’t know what her own
beliefs are, how can we trust her to make important decisions for us?
Vermonters can’t afford to exchange the leadership of Bernie Sanders for a Bush/Douglas
clone. The last thing we need in Washington right now is more Republican incompetence. Bush talks about draining the swamp of terrorists. It’s clear we need to drain the swamp in Congress, not send more of the same.
My vote will go to Peter Welch. He can make decisions. He knows who he is and what he
believes. He will represent Vermonters.
Yosarian –
“Save the bombardier, save the bombardier! Wait, I am the bombardier.”
Inside sources say that, in an extraordinary last-minute compromise during the waning weeks of Vermont’s Legislative session, Party leaders have joined together on both Parties’ biggest priorities; a bill expanding affordable Health Care coverage, and the long-stalled Civil Commitment bill. In fact, in a stunning turnaround, Civil Commitment (allowing for offenders to be kept under house arrest, or similar restriction for an indefinite period after their term has been served) will apply not only to sexual-based, but to all incarcerated felons.
The combined Health Care and Civil Commitment bill would create the Catamount Health Commitment Plan, and it actually combines the elements of both partisan priorities.
After their release, participating felons will be held under “house arrest” indefinitely at a series of group homes, which will also serve as free public clinics. Lawmakers are thrilled about the potential for savings to the system on paperwork — which will now be performed by the former felons, with the savings passed on to taxpayers.
And it won’t just be paperwork the felons will be performing. Appropriately skilled former inmates will participate in the medical practice as well. For example, a former drug offender may be qualified under the new evaluation to be trained as a pharmacist.
The program was the quiet brainchild of political consutant April Sciocco, who is particularly excited about the rehabilitative element to the bill:
“Offenders will be paying back society in a real, tangible way, and making Vermont better for everyone while improving themselves. The bill allows us to evaluate our “civil practitioner” participants with an eye towards an offender’s potential, not just their current skillset. While doing surveys of the prison population, I encountered an inmate due for parole for the murder of two people with a kitchen knife who is excited about the prospect of starting a new career as a surgeon! It’s quite inspiring!”
Asked how long the “civil practitioners” may be kept in service, Sciorro replied “that depends on how long people keep getting sick.”