From Green Mountain Daily

Taxpayers to denounce Jim Douglas' use of state money for his campaign

Robb wrote:

there seems to be a lacking of discussion on how Symington may be/is or will be better than Douglass or Pollina, the dialogue is a constant attack on Pollina.

So glad you asked.

Let’s take a substantial proposal from each one of them and compare.

For Symington, I like her idea to basically “front” the funds to homeowners to improve the energy efficiency of their homes, and then repay it through an amount tacked on to their utility bills, which will be lower due to the improvements. The most substantial proposal I can remember recently from Gov Dougless (besides that one to improve VTers’ health through McDonald’s Playspaces) was to sell the lottery to Lehman. I heard Pollina on the radio this morning saying that his idea for a VT credit card was the most discussed issue he’s ever had.

These 3 proposals offer a good perspective on the 3 candidates. Douglass wants to offer as many opportunities for private business to profit as he possibly can. Whether he actually believes this will ultimately help the other 95% of us or not is beside the point as this approach has now been pretty thoroughly exposed. Bad idea, bad ideology, Vermont needs to get rid of him and move in another direction as quickly as possible.

Symington’s idea is effective and elegant, imo. Little long term impact to the state budget, with high returns on investment in reduced energy costs, reduced use to lower the need for power plants of any kind, and good for the environment. A nerdy, intelligent, politically-workable idea.

Pollina’s credit card plan is to get VT banks to offer CC’s that have both a lower interest rate and also generate “frequent-flyer” type rewards that will be diverted to a fund used to support local agricultural and renewable energy projects. This is a gimmicky, impractical idea. Like we need more credit cards, right? And how exactly does this happen? Banks just decide to lower interest rates and offer cash back??? Pollina asks “Pretty please”? If this could be done, why not just set up “Vermont gas stations” that will offer gas at lower prices AND give drivers free oil changes?! We could still have the cute credit cards. How about “VT Bars” while we’re at it and feature discounted Long Trail or Switchback? This sounds more like something from the Onion than a serious policy proposal.

Pollina has been very eloquent about the problems facing Vermonters but has not shown any ability to address them seriously. Symington on the other hand, may lack some campaigning skills, but has offered intelligent ideas. I think she’d make a very good state executive. Douglas wants to continue the failed economic policies that got us into this mess.

 Loading ...

More detailed breakouts of the recent poll from Research 2000 commissioned by WCAX below the fold. They include some details on the highly-discussed Governor poll, but also polling on the Presidential race, as well as the elections for Secretary of State, Attorney General and Lieutenant Governor (with Costello only 14 points behind Dubie).

R2k does a great job with Vermont. I wish the sample sizes were a little bigger (a 5% margin of error is a bit high for political geeks), but that’s what WCAX is willing to pay for, I guess.

Methodology and sample:

Those interviewed were selected by the random variation of the last four digits of telephone numbers. A cross-section of exchanges was utilized in order to ensure an accurate reflection of the state. Quotas were assigned to reflect the voter registration of distribution by county.

The margin for error, according to standards customarily used by statisticians, is no more than plus or minus 5% percentage points. This means that there is a 95 percent probability that the “true” figure would fall within that range if the entire population were sampled. The margin for error is higher for any subgroup, such as a gender or region.

SAMPLE FIGURES

Men                        189    (48%)

Women                   211   (52%)

North                      255   (64%)

South                      145   (36%)

PRESIDENTIAL RACE:

QUESTION: If the election for President were held today, would you vote for the Democratic ticket of Barack Obama and Joe Biden, the Republican ticket of John McCain and Sarah Palin, or another candidate?

                                OBAMA        MCCAIN    OTHER    UNDECIDED

ALL                             57%                36%             3%               4%

MEN                            53%                40%             4%               3%

WOMEN                     61%                32%             2%               5%

NORTH                       55%                38%             4%               3%

SOUTH                       61%                33%             2%               4%

GOVERNOR RACE:

                                      FAV      UNFAV      NO OPINION      

Jim Douglas                    50%          42%                  8%

Gaye Symington             34%          45%                21%

Anthony Pollina              45%         35%                 20%

QUESTION:  If the election for Governor were held today, would you vote for Gaye Symington, the Democrat, Jim Douglas, the Republican, Anthony Pollina, an Independent, or another candidate?

                     DOUGLAS      SYMINGTON    POLLINA    OTH    UNDECIDED

ALL                   47%                  24%                    23%            2%             4%

MEN                  50%                  20%                    25%            2%             3%

WOMEN           44%                  28%                    21%            2%             5%

NORTH             49%                  22%                    23%            2%             4%

SOUTH             42%                  28%                    24%            2%              4%

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR RACE:

                                      FAV      UNFAV      NO OPINION      

Brian Dubie                     48%          36%               16%

Tom Costello                   39%         15%                46%

QUESTION: If the election for Lieutenant Governor were held today, would you vote for Tom Costello, the Democrat, Brian Dubie, the Republican, or another candidate?

                   DUBIE       COSTELLO      OTHER     UNDECIDED

ALL                47%             33%                   2%              18%

MEN               50%             31%                   3%              16%

WOMEN        44%             35%                   1%               20%

NORTH          48%             32%                   2%               18%

SOUTH          45%             34%                   2%               19%

ATTORNEY GENERAL RACE:

                                      FAV      UNFAV      NO OPINION      

Bill Sorrell                      47%           24%               29%                    

Karen Kerin                    28%           27%               45%

QUESTION: If the election for Attorney General were held today, would you vote for Bill Sorrell, the Democrat, Karen Kerin, the Republican, or another candidate?

                               SORRELL        KERIN        OTHER       UNDECIDED

ALL                            58%                33%               1%                      8%

MEN                           57%                35%               1%                      7%

WOMEN                    59%                31%               1%                      9%

NORTH                      57%                34%               1%                      8%

SOUTH                      60%                31%                1%                     8%

SECRETARY OF STATE RACE:

                                      FAV      UNFAV      NO OPINION      

Deb Markowitz               51%         24%               25%

Eugene Bifano                31%         18%               51%        

QUESTION: If the election for Secretary of State were held today, would you vote for Deb Markowitz, the Democrat, Eugene Bifano, the Republican, or another candidate?

                   MARKOWITZ      BIFANO      OTHER     UNDECIDED

ALL                    55%                     34%               1%                 10%

MEN                   51%                     38%               1%                 10%        

WOMEN            59%                     30%               1%                 10%

NORTH              54%                     36%               1%                   9%          

SOUTH              58%                      30%               1%                11%

In today’s Times Agus an article titled Entergy: Yankee dismantling in 2067 provides some interesting points:

1) Even if Entergy Yankee were to shut down in four years, dismantling won’t commence until 2067.

2) Entergy Yankee does not intend to make another contribution to the dismantling trust fund until 2026.

3) Actually Entergy Yankee doesn’t intend to make that contribution at all … the buck will be passed off to Spinco … err … “Enexus” Yankee (yeah – the proposal by Entergy to spin off its older reactors into a super highly leveraged/built on borrowed money corporate entity owned by, but not the responsibility of, Entergy.)

4) And that radiation stuff we’re told is so safe … well it ain’t really safe. “The long delay also allows some of the radioactivity to decay, lessening the danger to workers.”

Thanks Douglas, for helping Vermonters Entergy!

it’s simple really: vote for him/her (I honestly flipped a coin to see which pro-noun would come first).

In the meantime here’s an update from Pollster.com:

The big thing is … get out there and be active. On or before November 4th, being active definitely includes voting.

( – promoted by Jack McCullough)

If the polls are right — and they are reinforced by the abundant signs of panic in the national GOP — then our nation is about to survive a close brush with the Ghost of Richard Nixon.

One of the tragically underreported aspects of the 2000 campaign was the fact that Dick Cheney was not (as he was usually depicted) the wise grey eminence who could rein in the young, impetuous W. He was, indeed, Richard Nixon’s revenge. He firmly believed in Nixon’s broad view of executive power and Nixon’s contempt for checks and balances and constitutional rights.

The Bush Administration has been a combination of the worst aspects of Nixon and Reagan. Nixon’s unconstitutional excesses and invasions of privacy; Reagan’s tax-cut-and-spend fiscal trainwreck and kowtowing to the religious right; both men’s warmongering tendencies, politicization of the federal bureaucracy, and ruthless demonization of political opponents.  

So now the Republican Party offers us John McCain, probably the last major political figure who learned his lessons during the Nixon years. McCain still believes — as does Cheney — the discredited view that we “lost Vietnam” through a lack of political will. Hence the endless commitment to the quagmire of Iraq. And while McCain has sometimes been at odds with Bush, he has said nothing to disavow Bush’s power-grabs and invasions of privacy.  

McCain’s occasional (and oh so beguiling to the chattering class) maverick forays are straight out of the Nixon playbook: Nixon did, after all, open the door to China, establish the EPA, and expand some Great Society programs. He did some positive things, in other words, while otherwise taking a sledgehammer to our political and social systems.

There are clear echoes of Nixon in McCain’s campaign tactics: sliming his opponents, lying about Obama with a straight face. And repeating those lies endlessly, even after they’re thoroughly discredited. And doing it with a fakey Nixonian smile on his face. And refusing (except for that one town meeting) to disavow the even worse things that his surrogates have said.  

Picture an undead Nixon as Emperor Palpatine, looking on the work of his political heirs with an evil cackle. And imagine his unrestrained glee if McCain actually captured the White House, and continued the Nixonian transformation of America into a Big Brother oligarchy that operates for the benefit of the rich and powerful and seeks to impose its will on the world.

Assuming Obama wins, he will face the daunting task of dismantling the executive powers and unconstitutional excesses pioneered by Nixon and promulgated by Bush-Cheney. Obama the politician will have to deny himself the advantages of the Nixonian brand of political power. He will have the opportunity to tear down — or firmly establish — the Nixon/Reagan/Bush vision of government.

In other words, to continue the Star Wars analogy, he will have to choose whether to be Luke, or Anakin, Skywalker. If he chooses wisely, the Emperor Nixon might finally fade away into history.  

(I was about to write something up about it.  Thanks for saving me the trouble 🙂 – promoted by JulieWaters)

I hope you are reading this story in your morning paper and it is making you as mad as hell on a bunch of different levels.

Gaye Symington called out Jim Douglas yesterday on using taxpayer money to help his campaign. And did a pretty good job I think because the Douglas campaign still has NO answers to why they are flat out stealing from Vermonters:

“It's unfortunate that she's taken this low road in an attempt to distract the voters from the important issues,” Casey said.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2008/10/29/symington_says_douglas_spends_public__on_campaign/

Ironic considering the negative ads Douglas has been running against Symington are clearly “an attempt to distract the voters”

Casey argued that much of the expense of Douglas' travel is due to the state trooper who drives and provides security for the governor and the official vehicle in which they travel.

“… much of the expense…” OK, even if we take that for face value, how about the rest of the expense?

Dean reimbursed the state for his own travel costs, paid them himself to begin with or had organizations that supported him pay them. But he declined to pay for the trooper who traveled with him, saying it wasn't his decision that he should be accompanied.

Uhm… Douglas incurs NO personal expenses?

“According to Howard Dean's own finance reports, he traveled only 1,800 miles in 2000 for campaign stuff. That's about four trips to Bennington. That's ridiculous. That's not accurate,” Casey said.

And instead of answering the charges, they attack Dean? Funny if it wasn't so maddening…  

Still waiting for an answer from Douglas, Casey, Gibbs, or anyone who can answer how every other elected offical in the country repays their government. Oops, I know one. Sarah Palin (supported by Douglas) doesn’t think she needs to repay Alaska for personal expenses while being Governor.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081030/ap_on_el_pr/palin_ethics_complaint;_ylt=AnObRONCeYyisFW6gkhuiMUEtbAF

(Ok, not exactly the same, but close, which just proves every other elected official repays the government while mixing business and campaigning)

Also a quick interlude, Casey is Douglas’ campaign manager and very surprising it is NOT Jason Gibbs responding to this scandal. The Douglas campaign uses Gibbs eight months a year as a spokesperson, which is another theft of taxpayer money. And another whole story.

Lastly, if you missed Shay’s original article, Casey is usually a state employee, paid for by you guessed it, your taxpayer money. She was busted misusing government resources for campaign purposes and will go back to getting paid by the taxpayer as soon as the election is over.  You don’t think Casey and Gibbs ever do any “campaign” work in their government jobs do you?

And don’t give me any bull about how everyone does it…

(Good job, Nate! – promoted by JulieWaters)

UPDATE: A Call For You to Act, please.  (We can't forget to say, “please.”)

Please call WCAX, WPTZ, Burlington Free Press and Vermont Press Bureau this afternoon and tomorrow.  Please be willing to offer your quote on this issue.  This is your opportunity to affect the decision with more influence than your vote.

What you need to know:  The AG met on this issue and has taken the position that there is no legal violation here.  However, please call the print and television reporters in follow up. 

Here is my official response for the record.  Please call and follow up in similar vien.  Thanks for your help.

“While the AG has made a decision in regard to the law, Douglas has clearly violated his own Code of Ethics.  Amazingly Douglas is now questioning the integrity of former Governor Dean, who reimbursed thousands of dollars to Vermont taxpayers over 5 election cycles.  The question of integrity lands at the feet of Governor Douglas as he refuses to accept his responsibility to and continues to pass the blame to anyone else he can accuse.”

Two weeks ago Shay Totten broke the story about Jim Douglas campaigning on the taxpayer dime in “The Governor's Free Ride.”  In his report, Totten refers to Vermont's Personnel Policies & Procedures regarding the appropriate — and inappropriate — use of state property.

Yesterday, Gaye Symington added Governor Douglas' 2003 Executive Code of Ethics as she demanded accountability on this issue.

In addition to the inappropriate use of state proprety, Symington called out Jim Douglas for his use of state funds to support his campaign.  Douglas has now repeatedly dismissed this concern, despite the fact that every government official, business owner and private accountant understands that co-mingling of funds violates standard practices and general rules of accounting.

To make a comparison, every business owner in Vermont is well aware that co-mingling of business and personal funds is neither ethically correct nor legally accepted. In the private sector, such co-mingling of funds carries the risk of an audit, fines, penalities and possibly legal charges from the IRS. 

Prior governors separated official business expenditures from their private campaign expenses, reimbursing the state when the expenses overlapped in a way they could not prevent.  Vermont's other statewide elected officials, including the Auditor, Treasurer and Secretary of State, would not be excused for co-mingling public resources within their private political campaigns.  Despite the standards practiced by every other leading official in Vermont government, it appears that Governor Douglas feels he is “beyond reproach” and therefore not required to separate or reimburse public expenses from his campaign in 2004, 2006 and now again in 2008. 

How much money are we talking about?  Without transparency or the use of standard accounting it's impossible to know for certain.  According to Totten's “The Governor Gets a Free Ride,” Howard Dean reimbursed Vermont taxpayers to the tune of $7500 over 5 election cycles.  But Douglas has been a bit more lavish on himself than Howard Dean.  One of his first initiatives as Governor in 2002 was to give himself a raise in salary by more than $30,000.  Add to this circumstantial evidence Douglas' constant trips around the state, and it's even more difficult to estimate expenses incurred for his security detail.  

This isn't the first time Jim Douglas has turned his back on his empty Code.  In April of 2007 Douglas appointee, Neale Lunderville, attempted to bribe Representative James Fitzgerald.  As reported by Ross Sneyd, Fitzgerald said Lunderville offeed $50,000 for a highway project in Fiztgerald's district in exchange for a “no” vote on major budget bill.  At that time, Douglas defended his former campaign manager, then Secretary of Transportation.  Lunderville has since been promoted to the highest post in government for politcal appointees as Douglas' Secretary of Administration.

Both then and now, Douglas has participated in clear violations in ethical practices and standards of conduct.  Additionally, he has refused to take corrective action.  In 2007 House Speaker Gaye Symington wrote a formal letter to the governor in response to Lunderville's bribery attempt, calling for the creation of a state ethics code in law.  Douglas refused, suggesting that members of both the executive and legislative branch are, “people who for the most part are above reproach.”

People above reproach should not be people above the law.  Perhaps this is why Jim Douglas refused to help Symington strengthen the code of ethics with the force of law. 

How much value do Vermonters place in the ethical practice of government?  Do business owners and accountants believe that the IRS will overlook obvious co-mingling of professional and personal funds?  How do we hold our public officials accountable when we are told they are “above reproach?”

Two days ago, Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens was convicted of lying about financial gifts he recieved from an oil pipeline services company, and yet he continues to run as a candidate for office.  While Jim Douglas hasn't engaged in criminal activity, his easy dismissal of ethics violations and personnel policies echoes the perplexing audacity of politicians who don't accept the fact that they must be held accountable.  The only measure of accountability preventing Ted Stevens, a convicted criminal, from continuing his campaign as an incummbent, is the force of peer pressure. 

Since Governor Douglas refuses to measure up to his own standards of conduct and Code of Ethics, Vermonters must hold him accountable on November 4th.  A governor who dismisses ethical violations should be summarily dismissed from office.  

UPDATE, Oct. 30, 11:25am:  Formal Complaint filed with AG below the fold.  Times Argus article and link provided.

From the Times Argus:

To:  The Attorney Generals Office

( – promoted by Jack McCullough)

I think this recent ad from the

Vermont League Of Conservation Voters has got to be one of the best in the gubernatorial campaign. This is the kind of messaging that works.

Great attack, I especially like how the production quality, refreshingly, doesn’t suck. I hope they bought a LOT of airtime.  

Go figure.

Today I received my second Robo-Call from the spouse of arch-conservative, chickenhawk, Bush corruption enabling WhackJob John Cornyn of Texas.  Mrs. Cornyn is dutifully helping her Big John in his reelection bid.

Either Acorn transferred me to Texas when I wasn't looking or this is one extremely and ambitiously wasteful GOTV effort, even by Texas standards. This is now (at least) the second time I am aware that Sandy Dearest Cornyn has called to remind me to vote in “my” district in Texas (.WMA file).

I hope this means there is a Republican in Texas (who thinks he has an Vermont 802 area code) and who is also in the process of forgetting to vote.  More hopefully, this is probably a healthy anecdote of the state of Republican GOTV when it comes to finding willing campaign workers.  Seems there is a chronic lack of volunteers with dialing fingers and enthusiasm for a notoriously shitty stable of GOP candidates, such as the delusionally unhinged War-Pig from Texas whose wife keeps calling me at home. 

Robocalls are ubiquitous.  However, if you listen to the text of this one, you will hear that this call is targetted to the identified faithful. A lack of people willing to volunteer for GOP campaigns like Cornyn's and make the personal calls to party generated “Identified Republican Voter Lists” (shit, I am still shaking my head over this one) leads to these types mistakes.

Seriously folks, how hard is it to explain to the phone bank programmer that “802” is NOT in Texas? Does a crudely cynical conservative Christofacistzombie running in another time zone really need a memo to know that yours truly is not registered as, sympathetic to, voting with or amendably disposed toward, Republicans at any level?