I’ve found it difficult to chose between the great candidates running for governor, especially three that I think are excellent choices. I started out in Racine’s camp, even attended a supporters gathering. But as this campaign went on, I heard Dunne and Racine talking in terms of how they would navigate the waters, Shumlin sounds more like he will carve his own canal. Not the best analogy but that’s the sense I got.
With the political environment today being what it is, promoting things like internet for all, transparency, efficient government, etc is not going to cut it. We need someone to run on firm positions and win, then it will be possible to bring about the level of change we need.
In the VPR debate, I heard the other candidates take prudent, reasonable positions on what they would do as governor. Then Shumlin came in a laid out a vision:
Reduce the number of non-violent offenders in jail, redirect the money to early education, pass single payer health care, and relieve business of the burden of that cost and make VT a business mecca.
Boom.
Education, not incarceration. Shift money from the corporate interests of corrections and insurance companies, and reinvest it in getting our kids a solid educational foundation, universal health coverage, and a better job market. These have the possibility of making a real difference.
Using the rainy day fund, broadband for all, jump starts, etc… they are not enough at this point. Whatever is being proposed now, in the heady days of the democratic primary, this is the high water mark. Candidates who are running an essentially defensive position or a effective government approach have no vision to stand on going forward. Whatever hints we hear now will get’s diluted in the general election, unless there is a clear vision thrown down.
When you listen to the candidates, ask your self what exactly they are committing to, not what you are reading into the rhetoric.
As always in this primary, I have probably exaggerated the differences and some points to draw some distinctions. I think all 3 of these democrats would be great nominees.
I’ve appreciated the constructive exchanges in recent weeks. How refreshing to be choosing between a number of quality candidates, and doing so civilly? (Could we just get rid of the Republican party?)
That said, I’m really looking forward to Wednesday when we all get back on the same team.
Chris, I’m sorry that Shumlin’s prison plan is the magic that turned you in his favor, because that less-prison curtain is hiding a huge hole in the budget.
Imprisoning fewer nonviolent offenders will cost less money, but it won’t likely free up anything like $60 million. Here’s why: the services required to supervise offenders in the community — and the people who provide them — have already been cut to the bone, if not beyond. A huge proportion of Shumlin’s touted savings will have to go into hiring or rehiring parole officers, social workers, drug treatment counselors, cognitive-behavioral therapists, job-skills trainers, remedial reading tutors, parenting teachers, and the like, in order to help these guys and gals stay out of jail and keep our communities safer.
There’s no magic to this “vision,” unless denial of budget reality can be considered “magic.”
And I’m in favor of the plan! As I said in another thread: I believe in treatment and community supervision as a more humane and potentially more successful approach to rehabilitating nonviolent offenders, but it does cost money.
NanuqFC
The first prison I ever saw had inscribed on it, ‘Cease to do evil: learn to do well’; but as the inscription was on the outside, the prisoners could not read it. ~ George Bernard Shaw