Rep. Avis Gervais is my rep. She's a very conservative Catholic Democrat in a conservative, Republican-dominated district. The Republicans don't run candidates against her because they wouldn't win if they did.

(I unexpectedly ended up back on Martha's Vineyard this weekend, but I had a chance to get in a quick diary…)

Even casual readers have probably gathered that the Gubernatorial race is stressing me out. The old election calendar in Vermont, which says you can kick it around the first part of the election year and not come out as a candidate until April or May, is a ticket to utter and complete failure for so many reasons. At the top of that list is that, to be taken seriously by the Press Corps who loooooove Jim Douglas, you have to come into the traditional election period already with a big head of steam (read: money, enthusiasm, poll numbers and momentum) which requires an early start (like, NOW) to a serious ground game. But the lack of a candidate has created a vacuum. Shumlin and others have tried to fill the vacuum with Republican Senator Vince Illuzzi. Given that the A-listers on the political bench refuse to consider taking on Douglas, I've been trying to fill the vacuum from completely off the bench with our international superstar, Bill McKibben.

But the other option is to look deeper onto the bench, which could open up more potential names (none of them well known across the state, but that doesn't seem to be an option, frankly. Whoever goes for is going to have to make themselves known to the state before the traditional beginning of the campaign season – next summer – to have a chance). Among those names are Democratic women, who many feel would be a more ideal foil to Jim Douglas's condescending campaign stylings.

Click after the fold for some possible female candidates from deeper on the Dem bench. Feel free to add your own thoughts or candidates in the discussion, and take a minute to fill out the poll of who you think might be a viable candidate…

The first place to look is on the list of Senators, given that they come with a bigger geographic constituency. Those Senators that have to struggle to get in every time are probably not the safest bets. This would leave off Sara Kittell of Franklin County, and unfortunately Susan Bartlett of Lamoille, who is one of the sharpest and most skilled legislators we have. Neither would necessarily deliver their own county to the Dems, however, and would face a strong likelihood of being replaced by an R, so I hesitate to encourage either to consider such a promotion.

Then there are some safe Senators who likely own their seats who don't seem to have the fire in the belly for such a run. Ann Cummings of Washington County seems to fit right where she is. Ginny Lyons of Chittenden also, even though she is one of the most reliable progressive voices. Then there is Hinda Miller, who very likely was on a statewide trajectory until she hit a wall in the form of Bob Kiss and the Burlington mayoral race.

Jane Kitchel of Caledonia County has a solid resume for the position, but hasn't held her seat in the swing county long enough to seem solid – and again, her departure would likely turn the seat back into the red column.

For a few others who haven't held the positions for long, the story might be different. Jeanette White of Windham County holds a seat that would not turn over to GOP hands. White is well liked by the liberal base but doesn't immediately strike one as the sort that is looking beyond her county's borders. Fellow Senators Alice Nitka (D-Windsor) – and particularly Claire Ayer (D-Addison). Nitka is relatively quiet, but served several terms as a state Representative from a swing, gold-town dominated district before moving up to Senator. In that position, she had to stay friendly with a variety of constituencies – including ski resorts, frustrated antiAct 60 types, and the hunter/sportsmen crowd that she is still tight with. Ideologically, that's put her on shaky ground with many issues near and dear to the left, but she has shown unquestionable ability to make cross-ideological friends. Not necessarily a real go-get 'em type, though.

Claire Ayer, on the other hand, is a different story. Ayer was on the edge of a leadership position in the Senate caucus before Campbell and Shumlin worked out their deal, and likely stands to move up if Shumlin faces a mutiny after the next biennium. Ayer is highly charismatic, has been a solid legislator, and gets in front of many issues near and dear to the base. She is also very sharp and well-liked by many and of all the 'B' listers on the bench is one with some of the clearest 'A' list potential. Coming from solidly Democratic performing Addison County, Ayer could make a difficult statewide run without leaving the seat in jeopardy (as Nitka probably could as well).

Moving on from the Senate, the House doesn't yield the obvious options. There are some potential rising stars there, but for the most part, the Representatives seem very much a part of their districts, and in most cases it's hard to imagine them campaigning beyond them, or having any interest in doing so. Even Majority Leader Carolyn Partridge (D-Windham) who is a talented legislator, politically seems very Windham-4. Janet Ancel also has the resume, but it's still a controversial resume after her time at the tax department that she needs to develop more in the legislature. This is not to say that some of them wouldn't be great Governors (I would love to see a Mitzi Johnson administration…), but I'm just not seeing it.

One exception might be Johanna Leddy Donovan of Burlington who has certainly put in the legislative time, has developed the credentials, and as such could deliver Burlington and much of Chittenden County. Sue Minter of Waterbury is another who has all the right stuff as far as smarts and charisma and communication skills and is someone who should be considered a rising star – but likely hasn't put in the time in the electoral world to justify such a jump as truly viable.

Another name from way off the bench who recently popped up in the context of the Vermont Obama fundraiser is Jane Watson Stetson. Stetson has been a Democratic regular for a long time, and is one of the go-to funders for Democratic candidates. Campaign finance laws being what they are (or rather, what they aren't) the wealthy, charismatic and socially active/conscious Stetson could jump start a dark horse campaign with her own money and connections, and if she sold herself correctly to the public could potentially work up a head of steam and interest between now and next summer. Obviously, she hasn't got the experience and comes with no constituency – as opposed to the other names who have a constituency but would have a devil of a time raising the money. The question is, which handicap is more limiting – and that's a tougher question to answer than it may seem at first glance.

So there are a few names to jumpstart the conversation. Any others? Below is a vote-as-many-times-as-you-want poll as to who you might consider a viable candidate for the top post.

 Loading ...

Jose Padilla, center, is escorted to a waiting police vechicle by federal marshals in this Jan. 5, 2006, file photo. He has been on trial in Miami for most of this year, charged with conspiring with al Qaeda to detonate a “dirty bomb” in the United States. Photo by J. Pat Carter, AP

On Thurday August 16 2007 A federal jury convicted Jose Padilla of three counts of conspiracy in a trial that was the culmination of five years of a criminal proceeding that is among the most shameful in the history of the United States justice system.

I am not an apologist for Jose Padilla, I belong to no “Free Jose” organizations nor am I a member of any “Jose Padilla defense funds,” although maybe I should have been, maybe we all should have been because when they throw away the keys to Padilla’s cell we will also throw away any pretense to being a nation of laws, a nation that respects human rights, we will throw away a large measure of what once made us a great and civilized nation.

I am also not a terrorist, nor am I a member of any terrorist organization and that declaration alone, in the modern, mandatory, cocoon of fear within which we are now required to live by governmental decree, is probably enough to have a tap placed on my phone and a couple of guys who look like the Blues Brothers parked in front of my house at odd hours. After all, if I have nothing to hide, why would I bring it up. Under the new Department of Justice rule book I must be indictable for something.

Jose Padilla was arrested over five years ago in May of 2002, picked up in Chicago after returning  from Europe and allegedly carrying over 10 grand in cash. He was held for  about a month as a material witness before Attorney General John Ashcroft delayed a trip to Moscow in order to announce that the US had discovered a plot to explode “dirty bombs” inside the country. Padilla was branded as the “Dirty Bomber” and George Bush declared him to be an illegal enemy combatant.

Padilla was a small time criminal, a US citizen born in Brooklyn, he had lived in Chicago and been a member of a street gang known as the Maniac Latin Disciples. He had been in prison at least once for aggravated assault after a gang member died as a result of fight in which he was involved. While in prison Padilla converted to Islam under the tutelage of someone who is reported to have preached a non violent, mainstream version of the religion. He attended mosques in Florida for years with one of the men who was convicted with him.

Padilla was probably a bad actor, I have seen nothing in his resume that would lead me to hire him as a youth counselor, but was he a terrorist? Who knows? That is the problem.

Had the government arrested him and presented it’s evidence in a court of law, as is done every day, in conspiracies great and small in every city in this country, had Padilla been afforded the guarantees of the constitution of the nation of which he was a citizen, we might have learned the truth.

Now we probably never will, because what the government did was search for shortcuts, the law was inconvenient, due process, criminal procedure, rights of the accused, all that stuff was an impediment to the speedy production of positive results in their war on terror public relations campaign, which followed on the heels of 9/11 and continues unabated to this day.

Padilla was shipped off to a Naval brig in Charleston to spend the next three and one half years in total isolation, held in constant darkness, or constant light, under extremes of temperature, subjected to physical and psychological “enhanced interrogation methods,” the Bush administration’s Orwellian euphemism for torture. And the government got nothing. Nothing.

When all was said and done, after more than three years of criminal treatment, the government, faced with the likelihood that the courts were about to require them to put up or shut up, finally indicted Padilla on the three conspiracy charges of which, last week, he was ultimately convicted.

Padilla was never charged with being a member of al Queada, he was never charged with being a dirty bomber, he was not indicted on nor was he ever charged with any what was alleged at the beginning of this exercise in injustice over three years before.

Our current Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales last week called the conviction of Jose Padilla and his co-conspirators ” a significant victory in our efforts to fight the threat posed by terrorists and their supporters.”

If holding an American citizen or anyone else, for years, years, in military custody, without charging him with a crime, subjecting him to torture during the entire period, and then failing to indict or convict him of anything close to what they originally alleged is “a significant victory” then it helps me to understand their constant claims of significant progress in Iraq or in the “War on Terror.”

Make no mistake, this was no victory. This was a failure of our system of justice deliberately brought about by an executive department and two Attorneys General who had, and have, nothing but, disdain, in fact, utter contempt for the American system of justice and for due process of law.

I’m not bleeding for Jose Padilla here, I doubt if Jose even knows who he is at this point.

By accounts  that I have read he has been driven insane by the circumstances of his confinement. It is reported that as part of the process of breaking him down he was forced to sign documents with the name “John Doe.” One of their goals was to relieve him of his personal identity, they succeeded, all too well.

The government on Thursday convicted “John Doe” of three counts of conspiring to participate in terrorist acts. They can do the same to me, more importantly, they can do the same to you.

They have spared no expense of time, energy and money over the last six years. they have gone to great lengths in establishing shortcuts that enable them to investigate, arrest, imprison and torture any one they want, at any time and for any reason.

To this government, this Cheney/Bush administration, this criminal enterprise that is destroying America one liberty at a time, we are all, each and every one of us “John Doe.”

Bob Higgins

Worldwide Sawdust

Related Story
Window Into a Terror Suspect’s Isolation