( – promoted by odum)

Speaker Symington is often criticized in the diaries of this blog and among those of us who support the Democratic legislature for her lack of political savvy – especially when contrasted to her considerable strength in the public policy arena.

So it is only fair to acknowledge her efforts when she unveils a proposal that simultaneously represents good public policy AND exposes Jim Douglas’ hyperpolitical doublespeak. The Speaker’s recent press release accomplishes both feats.

The Speaker accepts the Governor’s proposal to close the capital gains loophole in Vermont’s income tax; but rather than turn around and give this money back disproportionately to those who earn the most in Vermont, she proposes using the money to fund state transportation and school construction obligations – a plan that would mean less pressure to raise fuel or property taxes to meet these needs.

Paradoxically, Jim Douglas is now calling his own proposal to close the capital gains loophole a tax increase. Does anyone have their stopwatch handy? That had to be one of the fastest flip-flops in state history.

Kudos are also due to the Vermont Democratic Party for their “Weekly Digest” on the issue that pulled together clips from the Brattleboro Reformer and Rutland Herald which called attention to the Governor’s twofaced approach. Sure, the digest can be a bit hit or miss, and sometimes the tone is a bit too strident for my taste, but they hit this one out of the park.

I’m sure many of you just rec’d an email from Matt Dunne, explaining that he will not be running in 2008.  It was a very nice, thoughtful, articulate letter.  Matt is really good at communicating.

And it was the teaser that was most interesting.  

…for reasons that will become clear in the near future, I have decided not to run for office in 2008.

Hmmmm… What does that mean, Matt?

Speculations below the fold.

In his concluding remarks, Matt speaks very highly of Peter Galbraith, our assumed Democratic candidate for Governor.  Maybe it’s the sequence of the narrative that intrigues me the most about these mysterious “reasons that will become clear in the near future.”

I can be a jaded, cynical, snarky political slueth at times — often times dead wrong.  But I can’t help but hear a story beneath the story in Dunne’s letter.

For example, has he made an agreement to run in a coordinated race in 2010?

Is he being promoted to a service politics position in DC?

Are he and his wife having another child?

My first cynical reaction was the first — that a behind the door deal has been made between Dunne and a strong, centrist gubernatorial candidate in a strategic holdout to 2010, leaving Galbraith with some nice words and a thin branch to hang out on.  But maybe that’s not being fair.

I’m curious to hear what you all think.  

Well, maybe I’m still buzzed.

I’m just so thrilled by the sense of enthusiasm that has spread across the country. Whatever the driving motivation behind it, apathy does not seem to be a problem.

Hold onto your hats, peeps. This is going to be some ride.  

Per the Rutland Herald:

Lawmakers in the House Tuesday rejected a proposed repeal of last year’s bill restricting “data mining” research by companies into doctors’ prescription writing habits. Instead, they voted to tweak the law while leaving its basic structure in place.

[…]

“I don’t think it is going to accomplish much,” Rep. Tom Koch, R-Barre Town, said of the law passed last year. “You really have to look at your chances of success and what there is to be gained.”

Koch proposed an amendment essentially eliminating the data mining restriction from last year’s law. Koch’s amendment was defeated in a 42-86 roll call vote, and the underlying bill adjusting the law gained initial approval in the House by a voice vote. If the bill wins final approval today it will move on to the Senate.

Unsurprisingly, corporations which specialize in data mining oppose the law:

Companies that specialize in that prescription research have been critical of the law.

“We don’t understand why they passed this law in the first place,” Randy Frankel, vice president for external affairs for IMS Health, one of a few companies that specialize in gathering and selling prescription-writing data, said recently. “They hastily wrote a bad bill that is now a bad law.

My thoughts, after the fold

So here’s the deal: private entities have absolutely no right to this information whatsoever.  

I’m going to tie this back to Pharmacy Fishing, because it does tie in.  One of the biggest problems with collecting medical data about people and storing it in a private database is that most of these databases are not particularly secure.  This means that if someone does hack in, that data security is screwed.  

Vermont is no stranger to data loss.  In 2006, a Vermont State Colleges laptop was stolen which contained data personal data on thousands of employees and students.  I don’t remember if this was in the news reports or not, but I know from direct conversation with the VSC Chancellor’s office that this data contained bank account numbers and social security numbers.

There need to be tighter restrictions on what data can and can not be collected by agencies and to what purposes they’ll be used.   Awareness on this issue is seriously lacking across the state and unless we start addressing privacy concerns in a serious fashion in a serious way, we’re royally screwed.  

Did anyone else see this today?

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080205/OPINION/802050317/1006

I think this piece is really annoying.  It is poorly written and only semi-coherent.  Billy Joel, Jimmy Carter, sheep, bass and subaru all covered in 700 words.  I am stunned that a paper, even one of the Freeps somewhat dubious editorial standards, would publish it.

What bugs me about this piece is its 'holier than thou' tone. Goss may be right about full-size SUVs, but this is not the way to change people's minds.  Being self-righteous always invites a backlash.      

Whatever you want, about whatever is or isn’t happening…

7:00 PM Obama draws first blood. MSNBC just called Georgia for Senator O, and if the exit polls are right, he may well have pocketed two-thirds of the delegates. His win looks like it was that big.

7:40 Some national exit poll data leaked… … and the numbers look good for Obama (except in California), but they’re probably raw, unweighted data, so they should be considered unreliable given how close they all are. Interesting, though.

7:45 Mein Fuhrer! I can walk!

8:10 Illinois for Obama, Mitt takes Mass, McCain wins CT and IL Sounding like Obama may not have padded his delegate count in Illinois by as much as some in his camp may have wanted to… numbers still coming in, though. Johnny Mac finally gets on the board – he’ll dominate the night, of course, but doesn’t seem to be doing as well as expected. Huckabee still leading in GA. ALSO: NBC retracted their projection of a Clinton victory in Oklahoma, as its too close. Doofuses. (A close race in OK? That one looked solidly in the Clinton column…. hm.)

8:15 Clinton takes Tennessee easily. AND Oklahoma. The world makes sense again.

8:30 Clinton and Huckabee take Arkansas. Duh.

8:55 Clinton cleans up in Mass. Despite Obama endorsements from Kennedy, Kerry and Gov. Patrick. DE and NJ go for McCain on the GOP side. This is my last update for a long while… have fun!

10 pm: Hillary Clinton: New York, Tennessee, Oklahoma, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Arkansas

              Barack Obama: Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Alabama, Kansas

10:15 pm: ABC News calls it for Obama in North Dakota

10:25 pm: CNN calls it for Obama in Connecticut

10:54 pm: Daily Kos and ABC News calls it for Obama in Minnesota

11:00 Thanks to whoever did the 10-11:00 updates. Going into the 11:00 hour, it looked like a pretty even split i terms of delegates, with Clinton doing better with most of the big ticket states, but it looks like Clinton is taking California by a more lopsided margin than expected, as exit polls showing (as expected) women and hispanics breaking hard for Clinton, and making up a disproportionately high amount of the turnout, suggesting that Obama may have been beaten on the ground game,

Clinton will have more delegates, but it will be far from decided, and Obama has a lot to look forward to in the upcoming states – plus, given recent fundraising, he’ll likely be able to outspend Clinton, barring a big shift.

And guess what? Our votes in li’l ol’ Vermont may well matter after all.