( – promoted by odum)

According to deputy commissioner for the Banking, Insurance, Securities & Health Care Department  based on calls to the state mortgage assistance program, 53 percent of foreclosures in Vermont are blamed on job loss, 20 percent on medical problems, 14 percent on divorce and 14 percent on adjustable and subprime mortgages.

Although Vermont has been spared huge numbers of foreclosures lets run through a quick check list of how Douglas’s proposed budget might effect what are called Trigger Events of mortgage foreclosure.

His budget calls for saving $17 million by cutting 660 jobs, some of which are vacant but many of which would involve layoffs. The cuts come on top of 400 earlier layoffs and vacant job elimination in the last two years. A possible total of 1060 jobs overall .

The governor has proposed increasing premiums for state-sponsored insurance programs, cutting reimbursement rates for doctors and slashing in half state funding for anti-tobacco programs.

This remark the Governor ads at the close of his comments to WCAX regarding IBM layoff is amazing .  “The IBM employees are well paid, they recirculate their resources in the economy, they pay taxes, so any layoff of that magnitude has an impact not only on the economy of the region but also on the state’s fiscal health. It’s part of the reason we’re facing the budget challenges we are confronting.”  Out goes his heart .

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/…

My night started by heading over to the Old Labor Hall in Barre (diatribe: if you’ve never been, the Old Socialist Labor Hall in Barre is an absolutely amazing building: opened in 1900, it hosted some of the most radical thinkers of the early Twentieth Century and served as Barre’s central community space for decades).  There, the Vermont Worker’s Center was hosting a form on “Health Care as a Human Right” as part of their build-up to May 1st- for which every Vermonter is urged to call in sick to work and rally at the State House in Montpelier for universal health care now!

There were a number of moving testimonials from community members and then reactions from a panel of community “leaders”.  Before I left I got to hear Barre Rep Topper McFaun (R) take his turn on the panel and give an impassioned call out the the 60+ people in attendance to get in touch with their local representative’s and enact universal health care now… Rep McFaun, along with almost everyone else in attendance, was openly disgusted by the waste and greed and heartlessness of the American health care system and pleaded- pleaded- with everyone in attendance to “demonstrate outside the Statehouse” on May first, but also be in touch (“every chance you get”) with our local legislator’s to let them know that- like the rest of the industrialized world- we view health care as a human right that should be provided to every man, woman and child in this country.

There were many, many a moving speeches at the Old Labor Hall, but coming from an elected Republican, Topper’s was by far the most poignant to me.  Having heard the tales and woes of the previous speakers (as well as many others during his time in the legislature) Topper seemed just downright angry at the state of our health care system, and only passingly mentioned his recent “removal” from the Senate Health Care Committee (having, of course, nothing to do with the fact that he favors the immediate adoption of universal health care).

Summing up most of the evening’s speaker’s was Traven Leyshon of Middlesex, who noted (and offered to back up with cold, hard stats) that over the next three years a universal health care system in Vermont could save us “$240 million” merely on State employees and school system related costs.  “That’s not counting retirees” said Leyshon.

It was all very exciting and if you, like the rest of the industrialized world, consider health care- the chance to life a long and healthy and meaningful life- to be a human right like fire departments and running water and electric lights than you should join thousands of other Vermonter’s who will “call in sick” on May 1st and rally at the Statehouse in Montpelier.  If you do, and if you tell your friends that you’re going to do it, it will be meaningful and amazing and effective.

But so then later in the evening, on my way home, I stopped at Charlie-O’s for a beer or two, because hey, the ol’ lady is working overnight in Burlington.  And who should walk in but a local Senator who shall remain nameless (rhymes with “Will Rot”).  The (drunk) guy next to me sees him in his suit and tie and asks “So…. you’re a legislator?” to which he answers “yes” and introduces himself.  The patron asks the Washington County Republican “So… what’d ya say? if it was a Democrat in the governeor’s office, would he be proposing 600 layoffs?” (good fucking question, I thought) to which the Senator replied “Yes, you’ve got to do something, and there’s just nothing else to do; but hopefully you aim high and start a dialogue and what gets agreed upon isn’t so drastic…..” “Yeah, it’s bad out there” says the patron and “There’s just no other option” says the Senator, to which I say (loudly) “unless you want to close the capital gains tax loophole or otherwise tax the rich assholes in Stowe” to which the Senator smiles and turns around for a game of pool with his blond companion.

Shortly after, it was just time to come home to see the dogs and feed the fire.  But I still can’t help wondering: could the rest of the industrialized world be right? Do I really have a right to a chance at surviving illness debt free?  If I call my Senator’s and Representative’s and call out sick on May 1st will someone finally do something?

It’s worth a shot.

The Legislature's been back in town for a couple of weeks, which means that they've had time to start introducing bills. I thought this might be a good time to take a look at what's been introduced, and give GMD's readers a chance to take a look at them.

One point to be aware of is that nothing happens to most bills. They get introduced, read on the floor, assigned to a committee, and that's where they stay: on the wall, on an index card. This happens to bills that we really want, and also to bills that we're really worried about. It's a long session; in fact, even bills that don't pass this year are fair game to keep moving through the process and pass in the adjourned session, which will start next January.

At this point, though, we don't know which bills will have legs, and which will just expire on the wall, so it's important to keep checking and see what might be coming. Here's a quick view of some bills I noticed as I went through the newly introduced bills tonight.

H. 10. AN ACT RELATING TO INTERNET PUBLICATION OF STATE AGENCY RULES

Sounds like a real snoozer, right? Maybe not. In addition to legislation, a lot of the way we are governed is through regulations promulgated by the administrative agencies. This bill, sponsored by Willem Jewett, would require all state agencies to post their proposed rules on the Internet. I don't know if this is going anywhere, but if this passes it will make it easier for ordinary citizens to find out what their administrative agencies are doing, and maybe do something about it.

H. 29. AN ACT RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT OF MANDATORY BINDING ARBITRATION; THE ELIMINATION OF STRIKES AND IMPOSED CONTRACTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE EMPLOYMENT OF TEACHERS AND ADMINISTRATORS; AND VOTER APPROVAL OF SOME CONTRACTS

 Union busting, anyone? It outlaws teacher strikes (how often do we have them, anyway), requires binding arbitration that considers, among other things, prior salary and benefit increases and comparable contracts in other communities, and otherwise imposes a whole list of measures that will depress teacher compensation. This is bad news if it ever gets any play, but I'm hoping that it doesn't.

H.37  AN ACT RELATING TO THE REPEAL OF THE REQUIREMENT THAT SCHOOL BUDGETS IN EXCESS OF THE MAXIMUM INFLATION AMOUNT BE PRESENTED TO THE VOTERS AS A DIVIDED QUESTION

I'd like to see this pass. It's got a lot of sponsors and it would repeal the two vote requirement for school budgets that Douglas rammed through.

 H.80  AN ACT RELATING TO THE USE OF CHLORAMINE AS A DISINFECTANT IN PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS

 Chloramine is a highly toxic additive used in public water systems. This bill would prohibit its use in publc water systems until 2012 unless the prohibition is later extended. 

H.98  AN ACT RELATING TO LIBRARIES AND MINORS

Last year the Legislature protected our civil liberties by making library records confidential, but created an exception for parental access to the records of children under age 16; this bill would raise the age to 18, which means that parents would have access to their children's library records even if the kids are looking into information relating to sexuality, religion, politics, or other sensitive areas their parents may disapprove of. This seems to be a major attack on civil liberties. The bill is sponsored by three liberal Democrats from Windham County, which makes me think that there may be some local issue motivating it.

S.0014  AN ACT RELATING TO EXPANDING THE SCOPE OF THE BEVERAGE CONTAINER REDEMPTION LAW

When our bottle bill was passed the market for individual, portable beverage was basically soda and beer. Now we have bottled water, iced tea, and all kinds of noncarbonated beverages, none of which are subject to the bottle deposit. This bill would study the idea of expanding the deposit to noncarbonated beverages.

S.0018  AN ACT RELATING TO LIMITING THE POWER OF MUNICIPALITIES OR DEEDS TO PROHIBIT THE INSTALLATION OF SOLAR COLLECTORS, CLOTHESLINES, OR OTHER ENERGY DEVICES BASED ON RENEWABLE RESOURCES

Want a solar collector, wind generator, or clothesline? This bill says your town can't stop you.

 S.0024  AN ACT RELATING TO THE REPEAL OF THE REQUIREMENT THAT SCHOOL BUDGETS IN EXCESS OF THE MAXIMUM INFLATION AMOUNT BE PRESENTED TO THE VOTERS AS A DIVIDED QUESTION

 Same as H. 37–get rid of Douglas's two vote requirement for school budgets.

S.0048  AN ACT RELATING TO MARKETING OF PRESCRIBED PRODUCTS

Tired of wondering if your doctor is prescribing treatment because it's good for you, or because of the goodies he's getting from the drug company? This bill's for you.

 So far we've seen 109 House bills and 53 Senate bills introduced. By the end of the session it will be up in the hundreds. If I get the chance I'll do more reviews, especially as we see that some bills of interest to GMD readers are moving forward.

(Mr. Hoffer saves me the trouble. I’ll just add that this nonprofit schtick is the lamest, tackiest, and one of the more desperate Republican change-the-subject lines of attack I can remember for a long time. – promoted by odum)

Rep. O’Donnell’s call for non-profit executives who earn more than $60,000 to take a pay cut is a perfect example of Jim Douglas’ cynicism.  Attack (some) non-profits, ignore the elephant in the room, and divert attention from the core issues.  Let’s talk about “shared sacrifices” shall we.

The 40% capital gains exclusion has cost the state $160 million in only four years (2003 – 2006).  Yet the Gov. is focused on saving a few hundred thousand dollars by attacking non-profits (except I think they may have left out UVM and FAHC).  And what about the $300 million in personal contracts to consultants?  Many of whom earn hefty hourly wages (including the Snelling Center, a favorite of the Douglas administration).

And what about executives in the for-profit firms that do so much business with the state?

The fact that the VT media is giving so much time & ink to Rep. O’Donnell is shameful.  C’mon people, why do you give these folks a free ride?  

Although the analogy is stretched, I find myself thinking of the lawyer (Joseph Welch) who said to Sen. Joseph McCarthy during the Army-McCarthy hearings in 1954:

[Gov. Douglas] “Have you no sense of decency”?

Actually, it's probably just a coincidence, right?

Last week a bunch of nonprofits advocates came out and criticized the Douglas Administration for proposing to kill off the VPharm program. This is a program that provides money to cover prescription drugs for people who can't afford them, even after their Medicare Part D benefits.

Douglas of course mouthed the platitudinous I'd rather not be making this cut but blah blah blah, and the advocates have been standing up to him.

And then today, the Douglas administration, hiding behind the Republican caucus, came out with a new proposal: