Our American society is like a runaway train.  Everything is moving so fast we never have time to step back, and look at the big picture.  We concentrate on our strengths so much we overlook our own weaknesses.  It’s time to re-asses

Our own Central Intelligence Agency website confirms this; www.cia.gov/publications/html to see for yourself.  We have the highest military expenditures of any nation in the world.  We have the most number of incarcerated persons in the world.  We also lead the world in illicit drug use.

There is a third world developing within the U.S.  As the divide between wealthy and middle class grows, more working class families are becoming working poor.  All a result of inflated costs of living, and high taxes due to out of control government spending.

Our government of by and for the people, has become a tool of the rich and powerful.  Tax-cuts for the wealthy allow the rich to get richer at the expense of people who have work harder to earn a living.  Our taxes pay for our government to use its military to make the world safe for American corporations.  We trade soldiers lives for business overseas, that makes the rich, richer.

Where is the benefit to the common man?  If the future of American industry is overseas, what is to be the future of the American people?  What jobs can they expect to have in this outsourcing, do business at the lowest cost, world?  Goods may get cheaper, but if Americans are without gainful employ, how will they be able to afford those goods?

I blame corporations for being greedy and pursueing the almighty dollar at any cost.  I blame our government for being unresponsive to the needs of the people.  I blame politicians who vote based on party lines and special interest money, instead of their constituents desires.

I challenge politicians and government to fully fund education rather than spending all our money on defense.  I challenge corporations and business to provide American workers with livable wages and meaningful employ.  I challenge ALL Americans to end the cycle of voter apathy, and send a clear message to our government by voting in record turnouts.

It is time for change.

Well, anyone reading this blog knows that the Vermont Democratic State Committee passed an impeachment resolution yesterday.

It was an interesting meeting, beginning with some “dirty tricks” wherein someone claiming to be from the Democratic Party HQ had apparently called the venue and cancelled the reservation sometime during the week. Our new Executive Director, Jill Krowinski, handled the situation admirably, securing the space for the day after a brief discussion with the building supervisor.

The meeting began with Peter Shumlin, President Pro Tempore of the VT Senate, who had some sobering reflections on the Governor’s lack of leadership ability. While the Governor is very good at the public face portion of his role (things like ribbon cuttings and other public appearances), he is woefully inadequate at his more important management role, leaving the legislature in the difficult position of having to not only do policy, but to provide the leadership and management that should be the Governor’s responsibility.

Some examples provided: On jobs, the Governor has failed to recognize the decline in skiing and maple syrup industries and prepare for the future induced by global climate change. As a result, the Governor has done little to support the creation of a robust alternative energy industry in the state, which could easily supplant the declining industries with the kind of jobs that we really need.

The Governor hasn’t created jobs, seems not to understand that next economic revolution will be global warming-related. If VT can get a piece of it, then we will be part of the boom. People will come from out of state for those jobs. This Governor doesn’t have the management skills to do it.”

He also discussed the way the Governor, rather than “do” anything about the state hospital in Waterbury, relied on the crutch of federal regulations as an excuse for an absurd plan to build a huge hospital, someday, on one of the most expensive pieces of land in the state.  A Governor who was a good manager would have made a few phone calls to get a waiver from those regulations – regulations designed for states with very large populations – so a plan appropriate to our small state could be developed. Governor Doesless, unfortunately, failed to figure this out, and instead has proposed another Fletcher-Allen style high-cost boondoggle.

He then went on to dicsuss global climate change, from the perspective of someone who has lived, farmed, and hunted on the same piece of land for half a century. He mentioned that the governor’s version of “leadership” on the issue is to say “There’s not much Vermont can do,” then fly off to China to “advise’ them on how to deal with it.

One arresting quote on this topic:

Governor Aiken once said: “Only Vermont could take 4 ft of snow and 20 below and turn it into economic opportunity.”

I bet Aiken could never imagine a Vermont that couldn’t keep snow on its mountains. “

He ended with a brief mention of impeachment:

If one can have impeachment hearings for an indiscretion, then one should be able to have impeachment hearings for a war that killed many Vermonters, Americans, Iraqis, and others.

He stated that he sympathizes with Speaker Symington’s position – the House has a lot of business to address this session, and working people in our citizen legislature need to get back to their real lives in May, it’s hard to do it all. But in the final sentence, he said “I personally would like us to do it, but I’m out of the loop with others on that.”

After Senator Shumlin’s remarks, a discussion of property taxes (worth its own diary), and the usual mundane committee stuff regarding office space, new hires, budget, etc, we came to the impeachment discussion. The discussion was remarkably brief (in stark contrast to the “unusual” discussion in Brattleboro).

Highlights from the discussion and the resolution after the jump:

I don’t know all the speakers’ names, so for consistency’s sake, I’ll leave them out. Also, things were moving so quickly, it was hard to catch the exact wording of all the comments. As a result, some of the comments below are paraphrased slightly. I did my best to capture the meaning and context of each comment. If I misrepresent anyone’s comment, I encourage the commenter to let me know, and I will be more than happy to correct the record.

The last few sentences of this comment struck a chord:

What is the harm? I see no harm in asking our legislators. It may not go anywhere, but how can we look ourselves in the mirror and see ourselves as people who did not do every single thing possible to stop this administration. I don’t want to be a “Good German.”

This commenter was pretty frustrated by some of the excuses we’ve been hearing about the “lack of time” and “other priorities”:

I have a problem with this “priority” thing we keep hearing about. This IS a priority. I propose an amendment: change “early passage” to “2007 passage” in last the paragraph of the resolution.

And a constitutional angle:

The Constitution says the legislature “shall remove…” It doesn’t say anything about “unless it’s politically inexpedient, or inconvenient.” It says “shall.”

Another constitutional angle:

Impeachment is not mandatory. It’s archaic, risky, with an uncertain outcome.  There are alternatives that will leave historical record that this outlaw president has done more damage than any other in history.  Be careful what you wish for.

There was also a bunch of discussion about how hard the legislature works (or not, depending on who was speaking).  One speaker suggested that the legislature may have “impeachment deficit disorder.”

It was also noted that as a result of last year’s resolution, 69 members of the House and Senate sent an official letter to the Vermont delegation in DC “asking them to pursue all remedies available under the constitution.” 

And now, without further ado, the Resolution:

WHEREAS, on April 8, 2006 the Vermont Democratic State Committee by unanimous vote adopted a resolution calling for the impeachment, trial and removal from office of George W. Bush, President of the United States, and directing the State Committee Secretary to send the resolution to the Vermont General Assembly for “appropriate action”, and

WHEREAS, twenty-one members of the Vermont  House, including many Democrats, are co-sponsoring Joint Resolution 15 (JRH 15) that incorporates substantially most of the April 8, 2006 State Committee resolution, and

WHEREAS,  on February 15, 2007 JRH 15 was referred to the House Judiciary Committee where it awaits action, and

WHEREAS, on March 6, 2007 more than three dozen Vermont towns passed resolutions calling for the impeachment, trial and removal of George W, Bush as President of the United States, and/or Richard B. Cheney as Vice President of the United States, and

WHEREAS, the State Committee recognizes that  a President and Vice President can abuse his or her authority and power, thereby oppressing the people, diminishing their liberties, imperiling their lives and impoverishing their substance in illegal wars and conflicts, all in subversion  of the Constitution and the rule of law, and

WHEREAS such abuses and subversions can, and should, be checked and restrained by the Constitutional engine and remedy of  impeachment,

NOW THEREFORE, be it

RESOLVED that the Vermont Democratic State Committee transmit this resolution to the Speaker of the Vermont House of Representatives, the President Pro Tempore of the Vermont Senate, and the Vermont delegation to the US House of Representatives and Senate, and

RESOLVED that the Vermont Democratic State Committee advocates that JRH 15 be amended to include Vice President Richard B. Cheney, and

RESOLVED that the Vermont Democratic State Committee strongly supports and advocates, as “appropriate action” the 2007 passage of JRH 15, for the State of Vermont, under Section 603 of Jefferson’s Manual of Parliamentary Practice, for the US House of Representatives to submit, as soon as possible, impeachment charges against George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney for their trial and removal as President and Vice President of the United States.

(Let patrioticresponse share the truth on the front page! – promoted by Brattlerouser)

Over the dissent of their executive committee, the Vermont Democratic State Committee today (March 24) voted overwhelmingly to call on the Vermont Legislature to endorse an impeachment resolution that has been until now stuck in the House Judiciary Committee in Montpelier.

Although the Vermont Speaker of the House, Democrat Gaye Symington, does not want to take up the issue, her counterpart in the Senate, President Pro-Temp Peter Shumlin,  called on the delegates to support impeachment. The vote was lopsided, with less than eight votes against, The State Committee also included Dick Cheney in their call for accountability, and demanded that the legislature take up the issue in this session.

This is a clear victory for the people of Vermont, who have followed up their town meeting calls for impeachment with a grass roots lobbying effort at the Vermont Statehouse.

Vermont’s Congressional delegation of Patrick Leahy, Bernie Sanders and Peter Welch have all voiced opposition to Vermont calls for impeachment. While Sanders and Leahy have great influence in the state, and receive support and admiration from a large majority of the population, they should be starting to realize that citizens know the difference between blind loyalty and thoughtful consideration. Vermonters are acting to save the Constitution and the Republic. Mr. Leahy and Mr. Sanders first interests on this issue seem to be staying loyal to the Democratic Party leadership. Maybe with the Democratic State Committee’s rejection of their anti-impeachment attitude, they will begin to see the light.

Peter Welch, who claims to be all about ending the war, is content to put all of his efforts into supporting resolutions that fund the war and make demands that the troops come home in a year and a half. Of course, Mr. Welch knows that if these demands survive a Senate vote (which they won’t) they will be greeted with a Presidential veto. But he persists in claiming that they are significant and carry the weight of law. Passing a House bill calling for withdrawal is a worthy symbolic gesture, but by itself is a rather pathetic one. If Mr. Welch wants to get serious about ending this war, then he will recognize that Vermonters are on the right track with their calls for impeachment and he will honor our calls by working with his counterparts in Washington to initiate the impeachment process.

The people’s voices are growing louder. As we saw today, even when their “leaders” are aligned against them, they will not be stopped. Today the Dems. Tomorrow the legislature. The next day the nation. We will not be stopped, because the law, the truth and the values of our Republic are on our side.

As Senator Leahy bravely tightens the noose around the neck of the Bush “administration,” Vermont Democrats have lent him invaluable political backing in signaling their support for the remedy that ultimately gives him his power in his subpoena showdown — impeachment. The Vermont legislature now stands poised to lend its voice to the growing chorus joining Leahy’s charge.

In her continuing opposition, however, the understandably cautious Speaker Gaye Symington clings ever more tenuously to the excuses she’s invented for herself not to act. With the nation’s eyes on the contest of resolve now being waged between Leahy and Bush, her expressions of concern become increasingly indistinguishable from willful protection of the Bush White House.

Just as principled, anti-war Democrats in Washington were this week called upon to support an Iraq appropriations bill about which they had grave misgivings, so the time has come for Symington to reconsider the bottom line consequences of her trepidation. Senator Leahy, on behalf of Vermonters and all Americans, stands eyeball-to-eyeball with Bush in a high stakes staring contest in which even Republicans are backing away from the President. Gaye Symington, though, busies herself with watching the clock, insisting that the overwhelming weight of Vermont’s legislative agenda precludes an expression of support for Leahy’s brave stand in defense of the Constitution.

In a statement issued following the adoption of the Vermont Democratic Party’s impeachment resolution, which calls for a similar act from the legislature, Symington concocted her most self-serving excuse to date:

I do not believe that it is appropriate for the Vermont legislature to initiate an impeachment process of a president — any president — until the United States Congress conducts a formal investigation using its Constitutional prerogative.

Symington continues — probably willfully — to misunderstand her role in all this. Vermont’s legislature cannot force the Congress to do anything it doesn’t want to do. Congress can easily ignore Vermont’s resolution if they don’t feel they’ve conducted enough inquiry to warrant moving immediately forward with impeachment.

One might well ask why the legislature should proceed if the resolution can be ignored. But one might have asked the same question about the legislature’s resolution calling for an immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq — a resolution Symington both supported and somehow found the time to allow to the floor.

To borrow the Speaker’s phrasing, I do not believe that it is appropriate for the Vermont legislature to imagine it can cause complications with the Congress’ Constitutional prerogative that it in fact has no direct influence over. Symington’s excuse is that she’s worried that she’ll be short-circuiting the Constitutional process, when in fact all the resolution can do is ask that that process be initiated by the very people whose prerogative it actually is.

Ironically, if she were right, and the legislature truly did have the power to force immediate consideration of impeachment, many Vermonters would consider her reluctance to act an even more egregious dereliction of duty. The fact that she’s wrong only makes her tremorous indecision that much more indefensible.

Cross posted on EvolvingPeace (http://www.evolvingw…)

This last week the Vermont House or Representatives unanimously voted in favor to support the recommendations of the Agricultural committee’s bill entitled THE VIABILITY OF VERMONT AGRICULTURE (H.R.522). While many proposals float in and out of committee meetings that offer suggestions and highlight faults of current policies too often there is little action that is taken in finding real solutions to the problems of the day. Many bills and aid packages come to the legislative process that are mere band-aid solutions and never take a proactive approach to solving a situation; however this latest action by the Vermont Legislature goes beyond that and is a beginning step in protecting family farms and our rural landscape.

Including within the bill is a provision that allows small scale poultry producers to sell their poultry to local restaurants and directly to consumers at local farmers markets without going through the costly and restrictive inspection process. The provisions are only for small scale producers of less than a thousand birds per year. Restaurants and farmers will be required to label each sale as “non-inspected.” To refute critics of those that oppose the measure on the grounds of public health, many feel that locally produced meats are much safer than those that come from factory farms that genetically modify poultry or inject the poultry with untested antibiotics.

There are many amongst the population who are calling for a more locally based agriculture. This past summer American Flatbread in Waitsfield tried to use organically raised poultry from a farm across the street, but was shut down by Health Department regulations. George Schenk, the owner during his recent testimony to the House Agriculture declared that we as a society have turned our backs on our agrarian roots and that we are responsible for the failures of the family farm. While regulation after regulation have been put in place to check on the large scale factory farms of Purdue and Tyson the responsible and local based producers of our local rural economies have been straitjacketed into poverty.

We have seen rises of food and animal produced illness from the factory farm industry and the debate is beginning to take fold of the roots of the problem. The most important factor to returning food safety is to fortify and support a local based food system and that will require your support. Small farmers have been bankrupted by a system that was supposedly designed to check on the larger scale producers, but instead we the populace have been left to pay the price with inferior quality meats and the paving over our rural communities.

There are many issues to be addressed when it comes to agricultural policy and while there are those farmers that are left struggling by anachronistic regulations I am proud to say there are representatives proactively seeking solutions to the demise of family farms and rural communities. If you live in Vermont, I recommend you thank Agriculture Committee Chair Zuckerman (P), Vice-Chair Perry (D) and all the other members of the committee for being proactive in finding solutions to the crisis in local agriculture. If you are not from Vermont I suggest you recommend that your representatives follow Vermont’s lead and be proactive.

Peace
Robb Kidd

“Cultivators of the earth are the most valuable citizens. They are the most vigorous, the most independent, the most virtuous, and they are tied to their country and wedded to it’s liberty and interests by the most lasting bands” Thomas Jefferson