(I have to disclose that I identify myself as a Vermont Progressive Party member and currently serve as Chair for St. Albans City.)
If Governor Shumlin’s ears were burning yesterday, it could have been because he was so often the topic of conversation at Saturday’s Progressive Party Convention in Montpelier.
But that is not to say that he was anything like the focus of the Convention, which elected a roster of officers including Martha Abbott (who was reconfirmed as Chair), passed the revised party platform, and endorsed three significant resolutions.
The first resolution, in support of labor, represented more or less exactly the same one which Democrats failed to introduce at their State Committee meeting two weeks ago.
The second, supports restrictions on corporate funding of political campaigns, and encourages local citizens to petition for similar language to be included in the vote on Town Meeting Day.
The third, is an expression of solidarity with Occupy Wall Street.
The agenda of the Convention was shaped around those topics. Guest speakers included Chicago-based political podcaster, Norman Goldman and labor organizer, Steve Early.
Based on feedback he has received from around the country Mr. Goldman believes that there is growing interest in forming a national Progressive Party with Vermont’s home-grown example as the model. He said that California may already be poised to begin the initiative.
Mr. Early asserts that, in step with Occupy Wall Street, the time is ripe for a mutually beneficial alliance between the Vermont Progressive Party and labor to promote a statewide agenda consistent with the interests of both.
Once again, it was a pleasure to join a gathering that focussed primarily on policy, with political pragmatism a decidedly secondary consideration.
If only the Democratic Leadership would accept that they are too far to the right and graciously step aside to allow the non-Republican voters in Vermont a chance at voting in an actual non-Republican to run the state.
And after the attack on IRV, we are back to giving the GOP the governorship because the centerists (Democrats) and leftists (progressives) split their vote.
or both…. but I draw a distinction between the dem leadership and the people who manage for the most part at the TOP of the tickets, to get ELECTED. These folks continue to say that “we need to be in the middle to get elected/reelected” but they fail to recognize that the middle is shifting like the tide – but the tide isn’t reversing at all to center, so we keep sliding further and farther to the right…
Shumlin and Jeb and Phil are all headed in the same direction. Non of them need the job they have, being part of the richest group in the state, but they seem to like the flash of the bulbs and the Mic in their face too much.
Unfortunately it is virtually impossible to have someone like US get enough funding to become competitive with them. Campaign finance reform is a great thing to talk about for elections between the Right and Left…. but may also be worthy of consideration WITHIN the party. I see no reason that just because shumlin has 10 million in the bank, that he should be able to outspend (insert name of favorite left leaning Dem or Prog)
See subject line…
The labor resolution you write of was, in fact, introduced, but then ruled out of order by Chairman Jake Perkinson, exercising dictatorial ‘discretion’ and refusing any advice from any of several parliamentary knowledgeables, likely on the orders of the Shumlin Administration.
Jake Perkinson’s refusal to consider the resolution should not indict the entire party as not supporting labor. About a quarter of the Committee walked out after that fiasco. Some demonstrated in the parking lot of the party fundraiser later that day. You and others consistently and unfairly lump all Democrats with the ones who are protecting the one percent and the status quo.
BTW, I’m told by a reliable source that the “knock it off” message (regarding the Shumlin Admin trash-talking labor) has also been delivered by several (Democratic) legislators.
Democrats are not monolithic. And what do you do with those Progressives who got elected by running and winning Democratic primaries, with explicit Democratic support: after all, they’re now sporting the D brand. Should they be subjected to the disdain of the Progressives and labor? Was their dual citizenship – without which they could not have been elected – the bridge-building they all claimed at the time, or the blatant opportunism it now appears to be?
NanuqFC
If absolute power corrupts, does absolute powerlessness make you pure? ~ Harry Shearer
Sen. Sanders says/the attack on public workers and teachers by corporate US and the rich is abhorent.
Matthews says/but what about back in your state senator? you have a democratic governor taking public employees to the wood shed. and he is entertaining taking teachers strike rights away? and he is dead set against raising taxes on the rich? what gives senator?
By my count, there were at least 4 members of the current Democratic State Committee and three prior members in attendance at the Progressive meeting as non-voting guests. Like all such events it was too long, but (unlike many such gatherings) was substantive and open to all points of view.
Without hesitation, the eligible voting members endorsed the resolution in support of labor that had been originally adopted by Democratic County Committees in Lamoille and Washington Counties. They heard, and registered approval by applause, about ideas to alter the Vermont tax code to increase the burden on the highest income Vermonters. Nothing of substance was suggested which should not have been embraced by Vermont Democrats. Regrettably, the current Democratic Party leadership is less open to differing views and opposed to many of the sound ideas discussed in Montpelier Saturday.
Whatever happened to the National Prog Party of Henry Wallace back in 1948?
Back in 1996, there was an effort led by labor activist Tony Mazzocchi to reconstitute the Labor Party. In Tony’s memory (he passed away from cancer in 2002), maybe it’s time for national labor organizations to revisit his idea and mobilize working Americans behind it.