the Governor is concerned about the number of non-profits in VT and suggested that they consider merging to reduce costs (way to really focus on the core of the budget problem)

if we follow this logic, many VT towns would be well advised to merge; it’s so inefficient (and inconsiderate) for them to waste money being separate jurisdictions; and what about all those small businesses? oh wait, the Governor supports Wal-Mart so there will be fewer small businesses going forward; and how about all those tiny churches that don’t pay property taxes? couldn’t they come together and free up some of that land for more important stuff?

Jim Douglas is an unemployment machine and an embarrassment to this state  

FYI:

Playwright Spencer Smith is hosting her Readers’ Theater Play Voices from Chernobyl tonight 7:30 p.m., Unitarian Church (head of Church Street) Burlington. Smith, a Fulbright Scholar and Burlington College Professor, has traveled extensively in the Ukraine.  The play was adapted from the book Voices from Chernobyl: The Oral History of a Nuclear Disaster by Svetlana Alexievich.

In the play the survivors of the Chernobyl disaster tell their stories.  Smith said, “This is timely as we are considering whether to relicense Vermont Yankee which is also a plant run by nuclear fuel. The dangers of radiation have been long suppressed by those hoping to profit from these plants and who have disregarded those hazards.”  

Now, yes, I know, there's still a lot of corporate-friendly types in the Obama administration, as well a a heckuva lot of rich people in there, so I'm not being naive. And of course, there's a big difference between saying and actually doing. We well know Obama has no shortage of lofty rhetoric. Some people dig it and swoon, some people see it for what it is, and some people think it's a complete crock. But that's not what this about.

As one who's had to listen to the supply-side b.s. since I can remember, I'm detecting a whiff of change here… in the conventional wisdom, that is. As been repeated many times elsewhere, there were many things in the inaugural speech that said, in no uncertain terms, that Reaganism is finally dead, or at the very least, should be on death watch, as the “cut taxes/spending, no matter what” nonsense that's driven the country to the edge of ruin has finally exposed itself to the broader public for what it really is.

We have recent Krugman:

Old-fashioned voodoo economics — the belief in tax-cut magic — has been banished from civilized discourse. The supply-side cult has shrunk to the point that it contains only cranks, charlatans, and Republicans.

Of course, Krugman is saying this in the context of the new “voodoo”, i.e. just throw money at everything, but his point stands. And Pelosi (I know, for whatever her word is worth) is pushing for a repeal of the Bush tax cuts now.

Now, once again, I'm putting this out there to talk about the conventional wisdom may be changing to… how “mainstream thought” (whatever that is) may be changing, not necessarily what the pols will do. Is it changing?

( – promoted by odum)

Below is an article from today’s Burlington Free Press.  Fletcher Allen management is clearly worried that employees are banding together to improve their working conditions.  Anyone who has been subjected to the so-called “other side of the story” by management knows how nasty – not to mention inaccurate – it can get.  

Workers looking to organize are often pressured and subjected to captive audience meetings and anti-union literature, in hopes they will turn against the union.  It is because of this that we must pass the Employee Free Choice under President Obama.  I urge the Green Mountain Daily community to familiarize themselves with this legislation if they haven’t already:

http://www.americanrightsatwor…

http://www.aflcio.org/joinauni…

http://www.freechoiceact.org/

————-

Workers at hospital consider union

By Matt Sutkoski, Free Press Staff Writer

A group of technical health care employees who are considering joining a union at Fletcher Allen Health Care said Wednesday that management is pressuring them against joining the collective bargaining unit.

Hospital officials deny the charge.

(Note from odum – Click here for the complete article… diarists please remember we can only excerpt from published articles and link to the full piece, we cannot copy them in toto, as that’s a copyright violation)

Per Today’s Rutland Herald:

I propose a budget adjustment that includes a number of difficult changes. Eliminating the VPharm programs, which provide supplemental prescription drug assistance to Medicare beneficiaries, is particularly difficult. When the federal Medicare prescription drug benefit, part D, was instituted, my Administration and the Legislature authorized a new wrap-around benefit to allow coverage comparable to the state assistance programs that were previously in place.

[…]

For exempt employees, I have taken steps to exercise those alternatives – as well as eliminating positions – to save state money and share the sacrifice broadly. Last summer, I denied cost of living adjustments to exempt employees making over $60,000 per year. Further, as part of the most recent rescission, I ordered the same group to take a 5% reduction in pay. I am grateful that most elected officials and the Judiciary voluntarily joined me in this cost saving measure.

Unfortunately, the state’s multi-year contract precludes such options for classified employees – despite the fact that many state employees have requested such measures to avoid layoffs. This leaves a single, blunt instrument, reductions-in-force, as the only option to reduce labor expenses for remaining state employees.

Reducing our workforce in the middle of a recession is not our first choice. But the growth in payroll costs in the current economy make this difficult step a necessity. In addition to 60 positions eliminated through program changes, my recommended fiscal 2010 budget includes $17 million in General Fund savings by eliminating 600 positions within state government. While some of these positions may be cut through further vacancies and retirements, there will be reductions-in-force and an impact to state services.

I know this is difficult news that will affect the lives of many people. But given our current contract and the need to make labor costs sustainable for the long-term, a reduction in the state workforce must be part of our overall plan.

And now for the shell game:

At the other end of the spectrum, I propose increased support by 20% for early care and education to bring greater balance to our education continuum. This funding will be directed through the Department for Children and Families for increased quality to ensure that more children arrive at kindergarten ready to learn and for improved access for lower income families through the child care subsidy program.

While he might be claiming to propose this, it’s kind of odd, since at the exact same time he’s doing this, the administration has been drastically cutting child care benefits.  See this piece from December 11th for some details on that.

He can pretend to have a commitment to and interest in child care, but at the same time, propose a $2,000,000 cut to human services grants.  All the local resource and referral agencies which provide support for child care providers, parents receiving subsidized child care, referral services and a host of other benefits get part of their funding from those human services grants.

He can pretend to have a commitment to and an interest in early childhood education, but without an understanding of what child care is and what the purpose of it is (it is not so that they arrive at kindergarten “ready to learn”), false increases in funding provide no useful service.  

He can pretend to have a commitment to and support for children, but without being willing to support reach-up and TANF, he’s basically saying he doesn’t give a damn about children.

He can pretend to support early childhood curricula but without having a sufficient number of workers to review the operating conditions of child care providers, he’s saying that their safety is irrelevant.

Jim Douglas clearly wants the cover of being able to say he’s supporting Vermont’s kids.  

We can’t let him get away with that.