Update: Dunne has also released his tax returns. They can be viewed at this link.

---

Update x2: Racine has released his tax returns as well. They can be viewed here.

---

Update x3: And via the comments below, here is a link to Shumlin’s return.

---

Peter Shumlin: Alexandra MacLean is the Senator’s new Campaign Manager. MacLean has been Shumlin’s staffer in the Statehouse for the past two legislative sessions, so presumably, someone else will be taking over those duties and reportedly those Statehouse duties will be taken over by former VT Democratic Party staffer Gretchen Kruesi. MacLean also does not have campaign experience, so this is an unusual move and suggests most of the day-to-day campaign decision-making will rest with campaign advisor Kate O’Connor, who has experience with both the state and national-level campaigns of former Governor Howard Dean, as well as the Senate campaign of Richard Tarrant.

Deb Markowitz released her tax return last week, and Susan Bartlett quickly followed. No word from the other campaigns yet. Markowitz’s can be viewed here and Bartlett’s here and here.

Matt Dunne has seen the opportunity presented by the “Challenges for Change” dynamic to join Markowitz as an outsider and begin running against the Legislature and the Douglas-Dubie administration. From his press release last week, targeting the secretive, fast-tracked budget program:

“I know that to be successful – to make positive change happen – it is essential to engage stakeholders in the process, identify clear goals and then move toward[] solutions together. That is the Vermont way.

Not only have they ignored this basic management approach, this administration has ignored recommendations that could reduce costs without cutting core services.”

Doug Racine has managed to distance himself from the worst of the “Challenges” dynamic, but more significantly has been shoring up much of the left through his health care initiatives and his close association on the issue with the Vermont Workers Center. Rarely an email on the topic does not emerge from the VWC that does not reference Racine. If labor unions do endorse this primary, Racine could well stand to benefit the most.

GMD wonders, though, when Racine’s campaign will hire a campaign manager. Amy Shollenberger’s title is “Field Director,” although at least for now, she’s fulfilling the function of campaign director.

Shay Totten’s primary analysis of which campaign has momentum and which doesn’t seems consistent with most opinions, but at the same time it clearly represents a snapshot of this late-session period. It also echoes the comfortable, conventional wisdom “Dubie’s to lose” mantra, despite the fact that this isn’t backed up by the polls, which suggest a tight race.

Positioning at this stage is important, but it must be noted that in such a small state, all bets could well be off once we move into the post-session timeframe, particularly if there is a special session to review “Challenges” cuts made by the Governor.

The Challenges bill at this point has the potential to be the Vermont economic equivalent of the federal “Authorization for the Use of Military Force” that seemed to give former President Bush a blank check to do as he pleased militarily. A special session, along with providing some necessary counter to the budgetary blank check being offered to Douglas, will prove an extremely political arena that even Brian Dubie will be hard pressed to avoid.

(NOTE: Diaries posted under the GMD user represent collaborative efforts of multiple admins.)

There aren’t many, but Vermont does have a handful of PACS representing traditional liberal constituency groups that make endorsements in elections. Most notably there are PACs associated with labor unions, such as the NEA and VSEA, but there’s also the Vermont League of Conservation Voters and Democracy for America (which does involve itself in Vermont races).

In past years, these endorsements have amounted to little. They’re rarely a surprise, and their impact has only been on the fringe issue of how well Anthony Pollina does against the Democrat on whichever ballot his ballot-line-du-jour is for that cycle.

This year, with a hotly contested Democratic primary, it’s potentially a very different political dynamic for these groups – if, and only if, they choose to endorse in the primary. Whereas such endorsements in the general election amount to little more than electoral background noise, endorsing in the Democratic primary would have an enormous impact. Democratic primary voters listen to these groups; and primary endorsements would certainly impact the outcome.

It would, however, be controversial within the groups themselves, with the potential to create real rifts within them. Still, you don’t make omelets without breaking eggs, and if these groups want to discover that elusive electoral relevance that has escaped them in the past, this is the opportunity.

And staying out of it would not simply reinforce the status quo. Refusing to demonstrate the courage and leadership needed to jump into the primary fray would add to the perception of electoral ineffectuality. On the other hand, successfully flexing institutional muscle in the primary would make them that much more influential in the next election, which would be the general in November.

Will liberal interest groups be moved by the Challenges for Change train-wreck to make a bold move and endorse before the August election, or will they continue to settle for simply being part of the electoral scenery?

What a difference a couple of weeks can make.

Just a couple weeks ago, the Democratic-led Legislature seemed to be riding high. It was one year ago that Speaker Shap Smith engineered two unprecedented veto overrides, with historic connotations, over a Governor who had been thought to be politically omnipotent.  This year, Senate President Pro Tempore Peter Shumlin attained one of the Holy Grails of the Vermont left when the Senate went on record against Vermont Yankee’s relicensing.  This vote followed the amazing feat of transforming opposition to the plant into a mainstream opinion.

The tide has turned: those highly regarded legislative actions took place weeks ago and last year. Now, the Vermont left has been treated to a full-on attack in the form of the Challenges for Change (CfC) agenda. And, today we stand in the wasteland of the attack’s aftermath.

In this aftermath, every non-right interest group, from “centrist” business lobbyists to the traditionally more liberal advocates for labor or social services, is scrambling in the toxic, post-Challenges environment.

From last Tuesday’s open meeting on CfC at the state house (note: both of the programs described in the quote below, which have strong and consistent track records for creating good jobs for Vermonters, are slated for 100% funding cuts):

Mary Johnson of the VT Women’s Business Fund said the fund “uniquely, quietly, powerfully puts women to work. … Many have heard of Bangladesh supporting women w/tiny loans. Why does gender-specific support of business owners work? Because women specifically channel the money to family and community.”

A representative from the Community Action Agencies of Central Vermont, said: “We support the underlying philosophy and intent, but are perplexed that the implementation has called for the elimination of the micro-business development program. It’s the most important tool in moving low income people out of poverty. We have demonstrated outcomes – 120 full time jobs per year. 830 people served per year. All this at the astonishing rate of $2k+ per job created. Why are we targeting this? We hope you reconsider this very valuable program.  90% of jobs created are retained after 5 years. It’s a clear success.

Even the right wing has gotten into the act.

CfC proposals were hidden from view and swept forward on an unprecedented legislative fast track, seemingly on blind faith. Now it appears that panicked Legislative leaders are desperately pointing fingers at the Governor; but to the insiders on the ground, that blame-game falls flat. The Governor doesn’t draw up legislation; nor did the Governor draw up what could be characterized as the “sneaky” legislative calendar. Statehouse intrigue is a function of relationships.  Now all those relationships are off-balance and the fallout has spread to voters.

Education, mental health, you name the issue and its community of advocates is standing in shock and anger, wondering how the Legislative leadership they had seen as allies could have engaged in such a cloak and dagger operation.

For example:

Nicole LeBlanc “The state is rushing to rebuild and restructure without thinking about the long term consequences to the developmentally-disabled services. The proposal is violating federal Medicaid law. The state is losing a lot of federal funds from these proposed cuts.”

[next speaker, speaking about unemployment and other services which will be shifted from real humans in community-accessible offices to a centralized phone service:]

“Why is it happening now? Because there’s a shortage.

“And who’s getting cut? The people on the bottom.

“Where’s the cost savings coming from? If you don’t get through when filing for benefits, it can be a while before you can try again. Maybe it’s if people get frustrated and don’t stay on the phone to get through the long hold process, then the state saves benefits for as many days as it takes for someone finally to get through.”

As far as the respective leaders go, Senator Shumlin always walks a binary line with voters who want to believe the best of him, but find it too easy to believe the worst accusations. What’s seen as complicity has flipped that equation for many.

With Speaker Smith, many progressive leaders find themselves reminded of their concerns about his ideological leanings when he first emerged as the House’s likely successor to Gaye Symington. Is it possible to deny Smith’s central role in the content as well as the strategy of the CfC push? Many throughout the State are questioning the Speaker’s role in the radical deconstruction of government under the guise of questionable spending goals. Who is the real Shap Smith?

It’s so bad, 7 Days’ Shay Totten has invoked the liberal lexicon’s ultimate j’accuse proclamation: “Are Vermont’s Pols Severing the Social Contract with Vermonters?”? To progressive ears, the charge of social-contract-shredding is one reserved only for the most dreadful of Republicans.

And the progressive intelligentsia at the Public Assets Institute have hard numbers to go with their scorn.

Many voters were already asked to swallow the very concept of the CfC agenda – even when it read as the antithesis of government; and an arbitrary, conservative-agenda-driven savings goal was seen as a shrunken financial square hole into which the rain-swollen round peg of real programs would be forced.

In the media coverage, one of the few legislators who spoke up at the time was Senator Racine, but despite his defiant peep, even he stepped into line and voted for the outlined approach when it was presented early in the session.  Of course he – and others – are speaking up now, but only after the whole enterprise has crashed and burned.

Unfortunately, there is no turning back, and the burned-out, pockmarked landscape is indeed different from the left’s previously green pastures. Many progressive advocates may no longer be willing to trust Smith. And, while Shumlin will step up and work to mitigate much of the worst excesses of CfC in the Senate, he may be viewed by many as doing it for politics rather than principle.

The impact on the Democratic gubernatorial primary is already underway, as we see the two of the three candidate legislators racing to differentiate themselves from the CfC agenda. The exception is Senator Bartlett, who as chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee likely had the best view of the process all along, and continued to embrace the Douglas-Dubie Administration line, notably at a VDP State Committee meeting. And even faced with major backlash, Bartlett’s pronouncement is an incredibly patronizing admonition not to panic just because “change is scary.” More disturbing is the fact that she will likely be party to the rest of the program slaughter that will be accepted by the Joint Fiscal Committee after the Legislature goes home.

Outside the Legislature, political reality has caught up with Secretary of State Markowitz’s rhetoric. Since launching her campaign, Markowitz has seemingly been running against the Democratic Legislature as well as the current Douglas Republican administration.  Criticizing and campaigning against an active Legislature so popular with the Democratic base seemed foolhardy and politically backward. Now, such actions appear prescient. Former Senator Matt Dunne too may be well-positioned to run against the recent Montpelier political carnage as one who has been there, understands it, and does not want business as usual.

The CfC travesty may be only the beginning; for even if the worst aspects of this conservative-driven overreach, these damaging proposals, are somehow mitigated, that sense of unease and betrayal underscore a new Post Traumatic Stress Disorder that may shadow Democratic voters for months.  Such a stain upon the Democratic mantle may well position the Progressive Party for renewal and reinvigoration  just as it seemed to enter the twilight of its statewide relevance.

Many of us can hear the popping of celebratory champagne corks throughout GOP offices as the meltdown from Challenges for Change represents an act of explosive self-sabotage of historic proportions to Democrats throughout the State.

It’s sad that the Democrats decided to toe this particular frayed and timeworn Republican party line – since recent polling shows people are sick of the tired old “tax cuts are the only way” mantra, and they actually WANT tax increases. Two of those who testified last Tuesday called directly for tax increases. One taxpayer won the greatest applause of the night with one simple sentence:

A 2 cent tax on potato chips and sweetened drinks = 100 million dollars.

While one psychologist asked to be taxed more:

Give those of us with more resources the opportunity to help fill the budget hole, and do what Vermonters do best: help each other out. Many hands make light work.

And finally, we were reminded of the other “unmentionable” source of revenue by one speaker as his 2 minutes to testify came to an end:

Please include safeguards to prevent the administration from further cutting positions. Don’t walk out the door expecting the joint fiscal committee to [do the right thing].

…

I’m wearing this bright yellow “rainy day” coat as a not so subtle hint as to an alternative.

(NOTE: Diaries posted under the GMD user represent collaborative efforts of multiple admins.)

(NOTE: all quotes from the Tuesday, April 6 meeting at the State House are paraphrased, but as close to the intended meaning as possible. I still can’t type that fast… – M.)

Of the many object lessons the trainwreck that constitutes the “Challenges for Change” rollout provides (most of which one would have hoped would be self-evident), the most telling is its crystal clear illustration of the very anatomy of political cynicism.

Cynicism happens when negative political stereotypes become default political archetypes in voters’ minds, and it grows when they see their elected officials play to those archetypal forms. Much of the rhetoric of “Challenges for Change” sounds great, and in principle, it has been hard to argue with the essence of Tom Evslin’s cheerleading on the topic.

The problem is, voters simply don’t believe him, and that lack of faith proves well-founded when these “Challenges” proposals include the relentless ideological goals of this Governor that do nothing to save money. Voters see such a devil in the details and they know they were right not to trust the rhetoric, however appealing it may have sounded. Cynicism grows.

On the other side, one Democratic political archetype is that Dems are shifty and don’t stand for anything. That they’re not really on your side when they claim they are. This is why openness, inclusion and transparency are so critical for Democrats, whose party functions more as a coalition. When it turns out that Democratic leaders have been sitting on proposals representing the most radical deconstruction of government in memory (in apparent contradiction to their own stated principles); when Dem leaders attempt to release these proposals into a fast track approval process designed, from all appearences, to catch allies unaware and minimize public involvement – well, this too plays into those negative archetypes. That sense that these lawmakers are shifty or untrustworthy seems vindicated. Again, cynicism grows.

What are the implications? Electorally it’s pretty obvious. Some of the goodwill Senator Shumlin has recently accumulated will take a hit. How much is hard to tell at this point, but if there’s one axiom that escapes politicians time and again, it’s the fact that it is far easier to destroy than to create. The trust and good vibes built up by Shap Smith over last year’s historic veto overrides, and by Shumlin over the Vermont Yankee vote can be erased in far less time and with far more ease than it took to build up.

But in general, of course, it will be the political left that takes the bigger hit from this episode. These days, Republican rank and file expectations in Vermont seem to add up to little more than the aggravation of Democrats, and that will always be a very low bar. On the left, however, we expect to see progress – or at least a genuine attempt at progress – and in recent years when the grassroots becomes frustrated and cynical with its lack, it has been the “grasstop” leadership in Montpelier that has helped to mollify criticism of legislators by adjusting expectations.

This time, however, it is those very grasstop voices that have felt slimed by the process; and with these progressive leaders from virtually every imaginable liberal cause feeling dissed by Democratic leaders, they may well be feeling less enthusiastic about smoothing the ruffled feathers of the rank-and-file base that will be so needed in the election season.  

Sound self-destructive? Maybe, but that’s just human nature, and smart politics works with the flow of human nature, rather than against it (and yes, that would be another one of those should-be-self-evident lessons).

Tonight’s legislative hearing on the CfC mess may help somewhat by giving room for diverse voices. But what will help more is if legislative committees either clearly and publicly reject the ideologically-based flaws built into the proposal (and for which there is little or no evidence of the vaunted savings), or change the timetable to allow full examination of every clause and comma.

Redesigning government for effectiveness (not the same as “efficiency”) is one thing; redesigning it fast and and on the cheap based upon the idea that government is the problem, is something else entirely. Subjecting Vermont to a discredited and bankrupt “philosophy” is the very lack of standard that has created the mess we face today.  Vermont deserves better.

(NOTE: Diaries posted under the GMD user represent collaborative efforts of multiple admins.)

After more than a year of debates and votes and town hall meetings and demonstrations, on the very day of the final House vote on the health care reform bill, Auditor Tom Salmon decided to weigh in on the issue with his Congressman. He wrote a letter that has been circulating in some circles since, and it constitutes one of the more bizarre, nonsensical – and sometimes disturbing – rants one will ever see from a major elected official. Here are some highlights: 

As we know, in addition to fundamental flaws in oversight, the flaws in Medicare (spot-addressed by 208 billion Dr Fix) and continued problems with Medicaid spell a boondoggle. Please don’t buy into the promise of fraud savings. They don’t exist in this current delivery system (bowl of spaghetti) and the bill doesn’t foster a structure to facilitate that oversight model.

Why has the number of uninsured gone up a million a year in California? Senator Feinstein said 8 million plus? Because of cost? I was once a California uninsured preparing to pay cash for the birth of our son. $1600 to the Chinese born doctor and $1000 to Children’s hospital. If you wish to address this by pushing millions into Medicaid, where doctors are getting a 66% payment of the private marketplace, do you think this is going to work? I say no.

"Spaghetti" rambling notwithstanding, its hard to come up with a positive spin on his need to identify his doctor as "Chinese born," as it reads for all the world that he is pronouncing his resentment of payments to someone not quite American enough for him.

It's a hard letter to excerpt, replete as it is with vacillations between high praise of Welch and tea-party-esque doomsaying, along with Salmon's personal opinion of what Bobby Kennedy would say if he were alive (Huh? Did he mean Ted?). There is also the odd matter of Salmon's challenges with his own recent history, or perhaps simply a lack of thought or proofreading:

My September 2008 letter informed all -explaining why I left the Democratic Party and references my view on Healthcare reform.

Salmon did not switch parties until September of 2009.

Since even before his party switch, it seems virtually every time Tom Salmon draws attention to himself, he raises further concerns over his fundamental competence. Yet, there is still no sign whatsoever of any Democrat considering a run against him.

The 2010 Primary election filing deadline is July 19. If the Democrats do not run a challenger, it would constitute a monumental point of shame for the party's rank and file. GMD is absolutely committed to insuring that doesn't happen out of principle – even if it means one of us filling the ballot line ourselves. If the VDP knows what's good for it, it won't let it come to that.

Salmon's complete letter is reprinted in the extended entry in its original, eclectic formatting. It simply cannot be fully appreciated for the train wreck it is without reading it in full.

(NOTE: Diaries posted under the GMD user represent collaborative efforts of multiple admins.)

Compiling latest press releases, rumors, information and reactions:

• RUMOR: Democratic Senator and gubernatorial candidate Susan Bartlett may have as many as 14 votes for delaying any Senate vote on relicensing VY,although one insider puts the count at 10-12.
  
  • If she forces a tie, Republican Lt. Governor and anointed Douglas successor Brian Dubie will get tie breaker vote. No points for guessing correctly which way he’d vote.
    

  • Dubie would then get a huge headline for his vote, and likely Bartlett will lose the Democratic base and the primary (unless many R’s jump party lines to vote in the D primary).
    

• PRESS RELEASE: Senate Majority Leader John Campbell, considered one of the more conservative Democrats in the legislature, accused “Entergy officials and lobbyists” of “distorting the truth” regarding a forthcoming report characterized as “commissioned by the Joint Fiscal Office.” It is one of the reports that proponents of delaying the vote suggest is “imperative” to review before voting. Campbell says the report was “commissioned and paid for by Vermont’s two largest utilities.”
  
  • The JFC agreed to let its economist and its economic consultant work with the utilities’ report writers.
    

  • “This is not a legislative initiative and the legislature did not pay for this report.”
    

  • The legislature’s report was on “electricity price forecasts” and “was delivered to the legislature on January 7, 2010.”
    

  More on the flip

INFORMATION:

• Of the VY workers, fewer than half (40%) are Vermont residents.
  

• The rate being offered by Entergy for VY power from 2012- 2032 is a 50% increase over the current rate.
  

• The amount of electricity Vermont will see from the plant (assuming it continues to operate) amounts to half of the amount Vermont currently receives from the plant. The majority of the plant’s output is sold out of state, while Vermonters face the majority if not the entirety of the risk of a catastrophic event or slow degradation.
  

PRESS REPORT: An AP report in the Brattleboro Reformer says that Entergy is sweetening the pot by offering 25 mgw of electricity at current rates ($.04 per kwh) for three years to new job projects.

PRESS RELEASE: NH Congressman Paul Hodes is calling for the shutdown of the plant immediately to find and fix the tritium leak.

• “Reckless behavior, deliberate cover-ups, and unfruitful internal investigations from officials at Vermont Yankee have rocked the trust of New Hampshire families living just a stone’s throw away from this plant,” said Hodes. “If we are going to get serious about public safety, the reactors at  Vermont Yankee should be shuttered until this leak is resolved.”
  

• “While the plant is closed, Entergy must continue to pay the full salaries of workers who were not involved in the leak.  … I will fight to make sure middle class plant workers are not punished for wrong decisions made by others.”
  

• NH owns to the high water mark on the VT side of the Connecticut river. Hinsdale, Chesterfield, and Winchester, NH are also in the evacuation zone.
  

Wednesday’s vote will be one hell of a piece of political theater — although theater usually doesn’t have such a serious impact on the future. In any case, it won’t be the last scene in this play, either, it’s just the opening act.

UPDATE:  The following post is from last month. Since this posted on the 14th of January, the Brain-Trust in  the Douglas/Dubie administration has revisited their brilliant approach to privatizing state security.  The Administration’s Brain-Trust, which originally tried to outsource assault, battery & unlawful restraint (for starters), and then have Vermont’s taxpayers foot the bill, has at least attempted to solve this latest act of unthinking incompetence.

The solution? (you’ll love this) the Brain-Trust decided to redefine the word “confrontation” in the Request For Proposal for Security contract (“RFP”) and just hope the whole thing will go away.  

(See the original post below the fold for the background detail).

This is what happened after this post originally ran. During the question period for companies seeking to bid on the security contract, a savvy potential contractor sent an inquiry to the Department of Buildings and General Services. The question to B&GS was what does “the term confront” mean relative to “confronting persons” seeking to access a building without authorization or what does confront mean in the context of dealing with “physical confrontations.” (See Question # 4 of question list to B&GS).  



It’s All So Simple –

So what does “confront” or “confrontation” mean? Well we are still not sure, but guess what it does NOT mean? According to the Brain-Trust in the Douglas/Dubie administration the answer is: “confront simply (simply?) refers to investigating . . . “Physical engagement is prohibited.” In other words, imagine crime-stopping (“simply imagine?”)as a game of touch football. Now, leave (“simply leave?”) out the touching part. — Don’t you just love the use of “simply” when someone says  something so confusing that it makes no sense whatsoever?

How does this all work now? Basically, it looks like the administration is giving a wink & a nod to all bidders by saying “Tell us your training and procedures for applying necessary force in relation to crimes on State property and explain your security personnel’s methods and training for making a citizen’s arrest.”  However, when you engage in “necessary force” or make a “citizen’s arrest” as part of your crime-fighting duties just remember: Physical Engagement Is Prohibited.  OK, everyone clear on that!

What ever happened to “sorry we screwed up and this is what we meant to say?” Is that so hard? Is it really all that difficult to just say “forget about that ‘necessary force’ and “citizen’s arrest” bullshit because we just screwed up”?  

Tell me again, how many months until we can return a level of competence to the Governor’s office? After almost 8 years of Douglas/Dubie, it is truly time to put a few grown-ups back in charge.

NOTE: The following is the original January 14 post.  Some of the links may no longer be operable since the Administration pulled or stopped linking some of the reference.

In a notice posted by the administration’s Department of Building and General Services, the Douglas/Dubie administration announced its intention to skirt reason, abandon common-sense, accountability, jettison its oath to uphold the law and did we mention tossing “common sense?” They continue to  operate in an alternative universe.

This latest administration stunt involves publishing a Request-for-Proposal (RFP) seeking bids from private security firms. The RFP claims that it will be awarded based, in large measure, on the private company’s:

ability to train its guards to make “citizen arrests” (see RFP section 3.6.4.1 @ page 7)

corporate protocols for “citizen arrests”

corporate procedures training its security guards to handle “the force necessary” to handle suspected crimes on public property.

There’s more – there always is .  .  .

Before considering what the Do-Less & DooBE-inCompetent Administration is asking private guards to do (while wearing official “looking” uniforms and while employed by the State and on State property), consider the issue of “citizen arrest.”

First, in Vermont, “citizen arrest” has a more precise term. Several precise terms in fact.

Under Vermont law, a typical term for citizen arrest is “Assault.”

Another one of those legal-eagle words that judges, juries, cops and prosecutors use when describing a citizen arrest” is “Unlawful Restraint.” (Substantially restraining the movement of another person without the person’s consent).

Now, for those of you joining us late, or for those of you who are but mere distracted and highly paid members of a GOP administration sworn to uphold Vermont law, assault and unlawful restraint are crimes that can carry big fines and nasty prison terms.

Aside from the criminal penalties, in a tort case for civil damages, a “citizen arrest” is what a judge more commonly refers to as “assault and battery” and “false imprisonment.”

If the administration wants police officers on State property arresting people, then hire sworn and trained law enforcement officers certified to do the job.  However, if arresting citizens is not critical to the job of locking doors and inspecting parking lots at state buildings or Interstate-91 rest areas, then perhaps the State should just issue pagers and cell phones to the private guards and tell them what constitutes a 911 call.

The “Statewide Security Services” RFP link, as of today’s date, is HERE.

Page 7 of the RFP, with the highlighted language, is HERE.

(Click here for the GMD gubernatorial primary candidate questionnaire part 1)

(Click here for the GMD gubernatorial primary candidate questionnaire part 2)

This is the third diary of responses from the five Democratic candidates for Governor to the questionnaire sent to them by GMD – and yes, we said there would only be three, but there will be a fourth, likely posted on Sunday.

Once again, the questions had their genesis in this diary from last summer, as well as emails from readers (the questions did undergo a certain amount of “processing” to clean up and consolidate them a bit).

The topics addressed in part 3 are SOCIAL SERVICES, and our catch-all category RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT (generally).

A reminder of how to read the responses. The questions were presented under general categories. Some candidates’ responded question by question. Other times candidates would take all the questions under a given category and write a collective response encompassing all the questions. In some categories, candidates would respond by combining some questions and not others.

As such, the questionnaires are presented as follows: under each category, all the questions we asked are listed as bullets. At the end of each category, the candidates’ complete answers are presented (in alphabetical order by candidate). If the candidate answered each specific question, their answers are numbered accordingly. If their answers are not numbered, that indicates a generalized response to all the questions collectively.

So follow us below the flip for the candidates’ responses to this third of four rounds. Then come back soon for the truly final questions concerning the 2010 ELECTION PROCESS.

SOCIAL SERVICES:

• Given the poor economy you will be inheriting, how do you see the role of social services in the state over the next decade?
• How must social services be structured to address the economic hardships brought by a generation of failed conservative economic policies and neglect?

BARTLETT:

This budget year we are in the process of dealing with Challenges for Change; the first step in the restructuring of how we provide government services.  I have believed for a long time that we spend lots of money in government on structure that could be spent on direct services.  

We have failed to make adequate investments in technology, so we spend a lot of time and money on doing paperwork, that is literally still “paperwork.”  Moving to electronic records in human services can not only save money, but let a consumer know right away what they are eligible for and get the application entered for them.

There are many “cliffs” in the services we provide. A family may earn $40 over the limit and then lose all of the service.  We need to create slopes so that as an individual or family earn more, they can transition from state services to independence.  

We need to support services that are delivered in each community so individuals can remain in their homes.

One of my goals, and one I feel is very important, is to have free lunch and breakfast at every school.  We also need to expand lunch programs into the summer for those children that really depend on their school meals for nutrition.  We also need to expand access to good meals to more of our seniors.  

Hunger is a very real issue and it is not acceptable to have hungry Vermonters.

DUNNE:

Over the next several years, social services will be stretched thin and yet must be stronger than ever before.  From my experience leading 6000 people in the fight against poverty, I have learned how critical it is to connect the dots between various agencies that are assisting people who are struggling and help them become self sufficient.  

My administration will break down traditional barriers between different aspects of social services and proactively partner with the nonprofit sector to achieve the goal of moving people permanently off of public assistance.  This does not mean skimping on any particular aspect, but rather identifying barriers to success and addressing those challenges in a systematic way rather than passing an individual from one organization to another.  Areas included in this continuum of support and empowerment start with basic needs of food, shelter, healthcare and substance abuse treatment, move to job training, transportation, and communication infrastructure, and finish with peer mentoring, financial asset development, and micro-enterprise to ensure longer-term sustainability.  My administration will judge success based on the number of people successfully moved from low-income to sustainable, self-sufficient lives.

MARKOWITZ:

1. I have served on the board of the Central Vermont Community Action Agency for over ten years, and have seen first hand that Vermont’s social service agencies have been successful in reducing generational poverty.  As Governor I will fund the social safety net so families won’t go hungry or cold and I will invest in innovative programs like tangible assets, workforce development and head start that help Vermonters rise out of poverty.

2. As governor, I will focus on creating jobs.  By getting Vermonters back to work we will relieve some of the burden on our social service agencies.  At the same time we must continue to ensure that those who need it have access to help.   As governor, I will create a social service network that is community based. Our community action programs are models for service delivery. I would appoint cabinet members that are willing to listen to voices outside of government to develop a better way to provide services for those most vulnerable.  In addition, as in the rest of state government, I believe we need to have performance measures so that our programs can be held accountable for results.  In this way we can demonstrate the success of our investments of tax dollars, and we can eliminate programs that do not work.

RACINE:

Vermont is facing a historic budget deficit. Families, businesses, and individual Vermonters are struggling to make ends meet. At a time when government services and investments are needed more than ever, the decisions being made in Montpelier are making needed services less available. This is the wrong path for our state.

Vermont’s economy must be strengthened and diversified for the long term. And we must not forget that Vermonters are not just taxpayers – they also depend on the state for a wide range of services. An economy like this means difficult choices and shared sacrifices. We must have an honest and open conversation about our budgetary choices and their implications.

During my years in the State House, I have seen many examples of creative ways to balance the need to support services and cut spending. Faced with a similar budget crisis in 1991, Governor Snelling, myself (as leader of the Senate), and then Speaker Ralph Wright, developed a plan to spread the pain of the recession evenly through a roughly equal balance of temporary tax increases and budget reductions. In contrast to the slash-and-burn approach exercised by Governor Douglas, we acknowledged that balancing the budget through spending cuts alone places the entire burden of the crisis on those receiving government services. Under our approach that year, Vermonters faced temporarily higher taxes. Our neediest neighbors were protected, state services we all depended on were maintained, and the state continued to invest in our economic future. Everyone contributed to the solution.

The promise of the tax increase being temporary was kept. Vermonters facing the temporary increase did not leave the state. In time, our economy recovered and expanded. The situation today calls for the same combination of realism and optimism, and for leaders who champion the principle of shared sacrifice producing shared rewards. I am willing to be one of these champions, and as Governor, I will ask all Vermonters to pitch in and move us toward a brighter future. At the same time, we must be innovative in the management of state government to achieve greater efficiencies.  Priorities must be set and prudent cuts can be made.  The state must also be a partner with schools, non profits and other organizations to help them find their own efficiencies.

I am confident that, if we take this balanced approach, Vermont will emerge from this recession with an economy that is ready to expand. We must not let the politically-motivated, anti-government agenda of Reagan, Bush, and Douglas control us – especially when all the facts tell us that their fear-based message is not true. Seeking to increase revenues in times of recession makes sense, especially when you consider the impact on Vermonters of cuts that go beyond the fat to the muscle and bone. Relying on budget cuts alone will leave us weaker in the years to come as the nation emerges from this recession.

If we are honest and straightforward about the challenges we face, and if we are creative and forward thinking in our solutions, Vermont’s economy can survive this budget crisis and thrive in the new century. I am ready to provide the leadership we need to find realistic, optimistic solutions to lead our state forward.  

SHUMLIN:

As long as I have been in public service I have been loyal to my belief that it is the job of government to level the playing field between those who have and those who don’t.  Like the rest of the country, Vermont is experiencing some tough economic times which puts even more pressure on our most vulnerable neighbors.  There are lessons to be learned from this economic crisis.  As a business person and a manager I believe we need to take a look at the social services we provide to determine where we are failing and begin to build a more solid foundation for those who need it.

---

RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT (generally):

• Question 1: Over the past two centuries, politicians ranging from Winston Churchill to John F. Kennedy have repeated or closely paraphrased the following:
  
  “The true test of society is how well it treats its prisoners and old people.  The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons and the test of a society’s quality and durability is measured by the respect and care given its elderly citizens.”  
  
  As Governor, will the following dictum.–
  
  The test of civilization in Vermont government is best judged by entering its prisons, and the test of Vermont’s durability is measured by the respect and care of our elderly citizens
  
  — be
  
  1.  Something you say to yourself everyday;
  
  2.  A guiding principal for your administration;
  
  3.  A primary challenge to be addressed by your leadership as you serve as Governor; and hopefully, the measure of your legacy as Governor when you leave office; or
  
  4.  Nos. 1, 2 and 3.
  
  5.  Other
• Question 2: The overcrowding of Vermont prisons has led to the irresponsible and immoral transfer of  inmates in Vermont’s custody to out-of-state corporations or State prisons. What will you do to correct this bad public policy and, more importantly, what will you do to lower Vermont’s over-population of prisoners?  What must Vermont do under your leadership to continue to keep our prison population down in the most responsible manner possible?
• Question 3: Women in prison are a unique population that is growing at an alarming rate.  Women in prison is overwhelming driven by substance abuse, lack of educational and economic opportunity and a disproportionate number of female inmates are primary caretakers of children.  What will your administration do to find alternatives, such as reparation, treatment, job training or community service, as opposed to incarceration for non-violent offenders, particularly primary caregivers?
• Question 4: What reforms must Vermont make to avoid more tragedies such as the recent negligent death of Ashley Ellis, which was caused by a private prison contractor, or the similarly unnecessary death of Robert Nichols in the custody of the State, which was also caused by a private corporation’s negligence and lack of oversight by the Department of Corrections.
• Question 5: What is the State doing correctly to make government responsive, accessible and transparent to Vermonters and which needs to fostered and what is the State doing incorrectly, which makes government less accountable, that must be changed?
• Question 6: Under the Douglas/Dubie administrations of the past eight years, the Dep’t of Public Service and Public Service Commission effectively became an advocate for large utilities such as Verizon while taking an adversarial position rate payers and Vermont’s economic growth.  How quickly will you remake the PSB to reflect the utility needs and essential economic priorities of the citizens of Vermont rather than those of the companies it supposedly regulates? Will you appoint new members who will be responsible to their sworn duties to protect consumers and uphold state law?
• Question 7: What can Vermont do to protect or enhance the integrity of its voting system?
• Question 8: How will you fund retirement obligations for state employees and teachers? (this questionnaire was written and sent to candidates before the recent deal between legislative leaders, the Treasurer and the Vermont NEA was announced)
• Question 9: How many millions of dollars of State of Vermont resources should we spend investigating, arresting and incarcerating people for smoking, possessing or growing marijuana?

BARTLETT:

1. All of them, so #4, except I would change “care of our elderly citizens” to “care of our vulnerable citizens.”

2. & 3. I am committed to dramatically reducing our prison population by instituting a diversion system for offenders with substance abuse problems. It makes no sense to lock people up for relatively minor offenses and deprive them of family and community support only to release them after they serve their time. This is especially important to women.

I believe the way to reduce crime is by reducing substance abuse. The best way to treat substance abuse is through a system of wrap around services that allow people to stay with their support system of family and community.

By keeping men and women out of prison and in treatment, we will reduce state spending because Medicaid covers part of the cost of care.

A robust diversion program will save money and open up space in in-state facilities, which should eliminate the need to send prisoners out of state. I believe it will also reduce the number of people who re-offend.

4. We need our mental health community and health care community to be the ones responsible for the contracts with our Vermont Correctional System.  If Vermonters were taking care of Vermonters, there would be fewer issues.

5. I will present to the legislature a bill for enactment within my first 100 days of office to:

Mandate ethics training for all government workers.

Require state regulators to wait two years before going to work for industries they had regulated.

Require industry employees to wait two years before going to work for the Vermont government in a position in which they regulate the industry they just left.

Prohibit free meals and gifts to all elected officials, the sole exception being from family members.

Require a two-thirds vote by the legislature to reject the independent commission’s proposal for redistricting of state House and Senate districts.

Implement a 1-800 number for Vermonters to call any division of state government toll-free.

Gather all information on state spending and other activities on one, easy-to-use and searchable website.

6. A governor can appoint the commissioner of the department; you have to wait for the terms to expire for the members of the public service board.   As soon as the appointments can be made, Vermonters who represent our common needs will be appointed.

All of my appointments will be based on the skills and knowledge of the individual for that specific job and not political appointments.

7. The system we have works well. We have a paper trail, effective absentee balloting and accommodations for voters with special needs.

8. Jeb Spaulding formed a commission to study this issue.  The teachers have just reached an agreement that will deal with their fund issues.  The state employees are still working out their issues.  As the cost of health care has grown, the unfunded obligation of the funds has grown.  We have to make some changes to make sure we can pay the bills in the future.

9. I am not interested in changing our current drug laws. I do believe that we have people with substance abuse problems who need help. When it comes to drugs, both legal and illegal, I want to use state resources to help those who have problems.  Currently we spend very little on the issue of small amounts of marijuana.

DUNNE:

Corrections

My approach to the issues faced in prison comes from a very personal place.  At the age of 20, my father was sentenced to two years in prison for nonviolent protesting of segregation in the South.  He was beaten, forced to work on chain gangs, and assigned to solitary confinement on trumped-up charges.  Prisons are not intended to be country clubs and the people incarcerated have committed crimes worthy of prosecution, but my most devastating moments as a State Senator were when we were required to pass in statute a minimum temperature for a prison cell, address horrendous sexual abuses by guards, prevent forced injections, and have the Bush administration describe our state hospital in terms better fit for a gulag. This is not Vermont.

On a financial front, the cost of corrections now exceeds all of higher education combined.  A large number of those incarcerated (and a majority of the women in prison) committed non-violent crimes related to addiction. Ironically the drug and alcohol recovery center in Burlington receives an annual appropriation from the state equal to the cost of one person in prison for one year. With a vast majority of our prison population in for a limited sentence, we must do everything we can to make sure that the transition out of prison is successful and reduce the likelihood of returning.  

The next administration must take every step to ensure we are not doing ourselves longer-term damage through the treatment and sentencing of convicted felons.  A core outcome measure in my administration will be reduced recidivism rates and avoided incarceration by nonviolent first offenders.  Having served on the board of Windsor County Court Diversion, I know the power of alternative sentencing to save money and turn lives around,  particularly at a young age. We have the opportunity to resolve the embarrassment of the state hospital through a partnership with the VA and Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical center that should not be stalled by parochial concerns.  We can have a corrections system that embodies a culture of rehabilitation and service, not retribution and abuse.

In regards to sentencing, it disturbs me that in many cases punishment for nonviolent crimes clearly related to addiction is harsher and results in longer prison terms than punishment for child sex offenders and violent abuse. We have opportunities to hold people accountable to the law without increasingly filling our prisons with non-violent offenders who committed crimes related to marijuana, mental health, and substance abuse.

Transparency

Vermont ranks 49th out of 50 states in transparency in general, 50th in using the internet to serve citizens and most recently 48th in transparency of the use of stimulus money — just below Alaska.  Unfortunately, by those measures, the current administration is doing very little right.  

49th in the Integrity Index (2008):

http://www.bettergov.org/Integ…

Tied for last (with Idaho and Michigan) and receive an “F” in its financial disclosure requirements for legislators, according a study by the Center for Public Integrity (June ’09)

http://www.publicintegrity.org…

Worst legislative website:

http://www.congress.org/news/2…

48th in Stimulus transparency:

http://www.goodjobsfirst.org/n…

The good news is that the cost of providing access to budget information, video of public proceedings`and public documents has dropped significantly over the last several years.  With a shift in culture and use of readily available technology, we can make state government searchable, accessible and interactive. In this day and age, there is no reason why state government can’t approximate the openness and accessibility Vermonters expect of their local government.

Department Public Service and Public Service Board

Under my administration, we will bring the “Public” back as the rightful focus of these enterprises.  The reason these entities exist is to protect the public from natural monopolies.  The work is complex and the landscape changes quickly. As we have seen, however, the decisions and recommendations made by these entities can have dramatic impacts on consumers and even public safety.

This does not mean that DPS and PSB can’t engage the business community in a positive, clear and predictable way.  A functioning Department will set clear objectives for advancing telecommunication and energy goals for the state, and can work to achieve those ends. These strategies in the past have lead to the creation of Efficiency Vermont and can further lead to templates for cooperative community energy development, fiber to the home, smart grid utilization, net metering and even an electric car network. However, when it appears to be simply favoring incumbents or corporate entities without consideration for the public or fiduciary liabilities or even alternative structures for delivering basic utilities, the program is failing its core mission. The importance of these entities is clearer after the last 8 years than ever before. We missed opportunities to purchase the dams on the Connecticut River, allowed poor transaction of our landline carriers, prevented important wind projects and clearly did not go far enough in investigating Entergy’s planned activities and the liabilities associated with the spin-off proposal.

The Department would certainly be restructured.  As to the Board, in all of my judicial or quasi-judicial appointments, I would not appoint based on the politics or ideology of the individual.  I would look for the best possible people to understand the complex issues and appropriately weigh the law within the clear charge of adjudicating in the public’s best interest.

Teacher Retirement

The teacher retirement problem, like most fiscal problems in our state, comes from the escalating rise in healthcare costs.  Twenty years ago, a vast majority of the resources coming out of the teacher retirement went to cash benefits for retirees and a small percentage went towards healthcare.  The cost of healthcare has continued to increase over time and a couple of years ago the lines crossed and now healthcare costs are a majority of the outflows year after year.  As long as the cost of healthcare in the state continues to rise in double-digit rates, the problem in the retirement fund will not go away.  While short-term fixes will be difficult in this environment, what I do know is that increasing the amount teachers pay for their healthcare coverage is a short term solution and shoving the problem onto the property tax will make minimal difference except change the burden to the most regressive tax possible.

Regaining Confidence in the Election Process

Confidence that your vote will be counted is fundamental in a democracy. Unfortunately, for reasons that have little to do with Vermont election practices, this confidence has waned among Vermonters and around the country.  As a result, we need to take steps to reassure voters even when to some it may feel like overkill.  

I’ve spent most of my career in the IT industry and unfortunately it has caused me more concern about the possibility of systems failing.

My hometown still uses paper ballots, a process that gives me the highest level of confidence, even when recounts are required. I am not an expert in election law, but in towns that use optical scanners I believe it is reasonable to request confirmation on the screen or on paper to validate that the vote has been recorded accurately.

Perhaps more importantly, we need to pass legislation now to establish clear campaign finance laws, push back on the recent Supreme Court decision, and ensure we have financial disclosure for all statewide candidates.  

Since the Supreme Court threw out our campaign finance laws four years ago, we have had nothing official on the books.  While I have confidence that the Democratic candidates will abide by the agreed upon rules, the focus this race will receive from outside of the state will generate a temptation for others to challenge the fact that we have no statute on finance limits, and then to fight over the law after the election is over.  We must pass clarifying legislation this year so there is no doubt.

The recent Supreme Court decision to destroy years of precedent over spending limits and how corporations are treated, also requires us to act now.  We should immediately pass legislation to limit expenditures by any corporation that does business with the state, directly or indirectly. In addition, we should require disclosure of the source of funding for any advertisement or promotion including the list of corporate contributors to a PAC. While not a solution to the problem, it would prevent certain corporations with a direct vested interest in the political outcome from attempting to buy an election.

Finally, we have seen in recent years that Vermonters do want to know the financial profile and interests of their candidates.  Unfortunately, the lack of rules has led to uncertainty about when and what kind of disclosure is expected, giving advantages to some candidates over others.  We now need to pass legislation in this important election year to require personal financial disclosure for all candidates, as well as clear rules for disclosure in order to bring us in line with most states and the requirements for federal candidates.

MARKOWITZ:

1. I have served on the board of the Central Vermont Community Action Agency for over ten years, and have seen first hand that Vermont’s social service agencies have been successful in reducing generational poverty.  As Governor I will support innovative programs like tangible assets, workforce development and head start that help Vermonters rise out of poverty.

As governor I will lead the effort to plan ahead so that we are prepared to serve aging Vermonters.  According to the United State Census Bureau, the number of Americans who are fifty-five and older will nearly double between 2010 and 2030, from 20% of the population) to 31% of the population. We don’t even have to wait that long to see the effect of the “aging of America;” between 2010 and 2015, the number of Americans ages 85 and older is expected to increase by 40 percent.  We need to be ready.  As Vermont’s population ages, the demand for accessible housing, quality medical services and first-rate long-term care will grow. As Governor, I will support services that help seniors stay active, healthy and engaged.  I will support efforts that keep seniors in their homes.  This is not just important for a good quality of life, but it is less costly than long-term care.  I will support senior centers and adult day cares and will encourage innovative

projects that bring the young and old together to enrich each other’s lives.  Many of our seniors remain active and healthy and I know what a great resource seniors can be as volunteers in our schools, in our communities and as volunteers with our political campaigns.

I believe that societies are judged, in part, by the way they treat their young – and their old, and by the way they respond to those individuals who violate the social compact. As governor I will stand up to those who wish to dismantle our social safety net and I will lead efforts to rethink our criminal justice system.

2. First, as Governor I will be sure that our state police have the resources they need to protect Vermonters from violence and crime.  I will continue to support violence prevention programs that have successfully reduced incidents of domestic violence and child abuse in Vermont.  As for those citizens who have broken laws, I will support efforts to direct appropriate offenders to restorative justice options that will keep them out of jail while requiring them to take personal responsibility for their actions and to make amends by paying back the victim and the community.  

The majority of our nonviolent offenders are in jail because of a drug related offense. As governor, I will support efforts to get nonviolent offenders out of jail and into treatment programs.  By requiring treatment, job training, and help with literacy skills we will have greater success in preventing recidivism and transitioning offenders back into the community.  By getting these offenders out of jail we will save money and open up beds so that prisoners will not have to be shipped out of state.

3. The vast majority of women in prison are there because of drug related crimes.  Please see my answer above.  Note also that it costs the state more to keep a person in prison for a year than it would take to send a person to Harvard University.  At a show of art created by women in our prison, one of the offenders told about her experience trying to find housing in order to get out of jail on early release.  Because she had very limited access to a telephone and because the transitional housing was already full it took her nearly a year longer to be released.   This shows investments in transitional housing alone can end up saving tax dollars by making it possible for offenders who are eligible for release to find housing

4. We must hold our health care providers accountable even when they work in our prisons. I was shocked by the death of Ashley Ellis and angry that there were no repercussions for the people involved in events leading up to her unnecessary  death. We need a realistic conversation throughout state government about the use of private contractors, but it is especially important when lives, both prisoners and officers, are at stake. Accountability is lost in these cases too easily.

5. I’m proud that the Secretary of State’s website is one of the most surfed sites in state government. Over 60,000 hits a day and over 1.3 million per month. I wish that transparency and interaction happened everywhere in state government. When I came into office, the tools businesses needed to grow and create jobs were only available by driving to Montpelier. We grew our web presence and now our office is open 24 hours a day 7 days a week. Vermont should be open for business 24 hours a day too. Growing the number of services and interactions Vermonters can have with its government will create effective and efficient services. I did it in my office and I know we can do it in many of places where it may be lacking.  For example, our budget should be on line so that Vermonters can know how their tax dollars are being spent.

6. The Department of Public Services and the Public Service Commission should create a  level playing field for consumers and be a watchdog for egregious abuses. It has not been. My appointees would understand how important their role is and live up to that role. Fairpoint is a major example of why industry regulation must be fair and unbiased.

7. In Vermont we have one of the very best election systems in the nation.  Everybody votes on paper ballots and we make it easy to vote and hard to cheat.  We must do a better job, however, getting our ballots to military and overseas voters.  To that end, we must change the date of our primary so that we will have 45 days to transmit the ballots as required by Federal law.

8. I want to begin by applauding the Vermont NEA, the state Treasurer and the administration for coming together to agree on a sustainable approach to maintaining a healthy teacher pension fund. The agreement provides significant savings in the short and long term, while, at the same time, provides stability and improvements to the teacher retirement plan.  Under the existing system, teachers may retire at any age once they have 30 years of service. The new plan changes this to the “rule of 90.” That is, teachers could retire at age 65 or when a teacher’s years of service added to their age equals 90, whichever comes first. Teachers could choose to retire at 55 but they would face penalties, as they do now. Notably, this rule would not apply to anyone now 62 or with 30 years’ service at any age.

The new plan also requires teachers to pay five percent of their annual salary into the pension fund.  This is an increase of about one percent and under the new agreement teachers who work 15 years would get a retiree health benefit of 60 percent, at 20 years 70 percent and after 25 years, 80 percent of a two-person policy that gives a spousal benefit for the first time.

9. We need to make sure drugs are kept out of the hands of children. That is important to me as a parent of teenagers. Children are easily influenced and cannot make sound judgements about activities that adults understand the consequences with more depth and age. I think our current enforcement policy should be revisited and a sound balance developed.

RACINE:

As Governor, one of the top three priorities I have identified, along with creating jobs and reforming health care, is to return to efficient, effective, and responsive government.  I want to take a hard look at our executive branch: how it functions, who it responds to, and how it works with our other branches of government.  Over the last eight years, we have seen the consistent erosion of the executive branch such that it is no longer responsive to its citizens nor operating with their best interests in mind.  That will change under my administration.  We must discard what is not working, keep what is, and come up with new ideas to create new opportunities. We must examine every aspect of our government and ensure that we are not wasteful, and that we are compassionate. We must insist on competency, service, and fairness. Our government must work for us – for all of us.

With regard to the integrity of Vermont’s voting system, I have to say that touch screen machines make me very nervous. I do not see a need or a reason to have these machines in Vermont. I believe that we should vote with paper ballots – we should make our mark on paper and that paper ballot should be the paper trail. I believe that touch screens leave too much opportunity for meddling with our votes and also that they may actually dissuade some voters who are not comfortable with computers from voting.

Our Corrections policies have received a great deal of attention from the legislature in recent years in an attempt to reduce the prison population and costs.  We need to do more.  I will seek to reduce the number of non-violent offenders who are incarcerated.  Much more needs to be done to create a more extensive system of community based substance abuse treatment programs around the state.  This would help those whose offenses are related to addictions get the help and treatment they need to turn their lives around.  Simply locking them up is no solution.

I have grave concerns about inmates who are not being treated with human dignity in our prisons.  I will focus needed attention on making certain that the physical and mental health needs of our inmate population are properly met.

SHUMLIN:

1. Two and three

2. Vermont has the distinction of locking up more non-violent offenders than any state in the nation. As a result, the second fastest growing area of our state budget (after our broken health care system) is corrections.

What do we know about our non-violent offenders?  Ninety-seven percent of them had difficulty learning to read and most still have difficulty reading.  Ninety-four percent have substance abuse problems.  How much does it cost per year to house non-violent offenders in one of our jails? Between $40,000 and $60,000 per inmate.  This doesn’t make sense.

Instead of putting non-violent offenders in jail we need to help them deal with their problems.  As governor, I will implement a reorganization that includes enhanced community based mental health and substance abuse counseling along with education and job training to help this population become productive members of our society.  Second, we need to catch the problems before they begin.  Kids who get a good start early in life are less likely to end up in jail when they get older.  Therefore, I will invest in early childhood programs especially those that target kids between the ages of 0 and 6 years old.  We can fund these programs with the savings we reap by keeping our non-violent offenders out of jail.

3. As governor, nothing will be more important to me as keeping Vermonters safe – including those in our corrections system.  These tragedies are completely unacceptable and I will strive to ensure that nothing like this ever happens on my watch.

4. We must remember that state government is here to serve Vermonters.  Our state employees are dedicated and hardworking.  They should be applauded for the work they do, especially during these tough economic times when they are being asked to do more with less.  As governor, I want to help our dedicated workforce make government more responsive and accessible – after all, good government starts at the top.  To that end, I will appoint agency and department heads who will partner with our state employees to carry out the mission.   In my administration experience will be valued over politics and that will lead to a better functioning state government.

5. There are few people currently serving in the Legislature who have been more critical of the Department of Public Service – which behaves like a wholly owned subsidiary of Entergy Louisiana – than I.  One of my first priorities will be to appoint a commissioner whose primary responsibility is to protect the public interest. This will be essential after Vermont Yankee is closed as scheduled, which I intend to accomplish, and we move toward a renewable energy portfolio.  As governor, I will move quickly to put our entire regulatory process in the hands of consumer advocates that we can believe in.

6. Stick with paper ballots that have served Vermont well for more than 200 plus years and implement same day voter registration.  Most importantly, I have sponsored a bill to do what we can to mitigate the extraordinary horrendous decision recently handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court which will allow corporations even more opportunities to buy our democracy and our politicians.

7. The Speaker and I have worked together over the past few months with the NEA to fashion a collaborative plan to put the retirement system on a sustainable foundation so that it will be able to meet the promises that we have made. This collaborative effort, which we announced recently, is an example of the kind of leadership that you can expect from my administration as we end the war of words against our teachers, school children and school boards.

8. I am a sponsor of the current decriminalization bill and I feel that our resources should be devoted to substance abuse prevention.  

---

(Click here for the GMD gubernatorial primary candidate questionnaire part 1)

This is the second diary of responses from the five Democratic candidates for Governor to the questionnaire sent to them by GMD. Once again, the questions had their genesis in this diary from last summer, as well as emails from readers (the questions did undergo a certain amount of “processing” to clean up and consolidate them a bit).

The topics addressed in part 2 are PERMITTING, AGRICULTURE, HEALTH CARE, and EDUCATION.

A reminder of how to read the responses. The questions were presented under general categories. Some candidates’ responded question by question. Other times candidates would take all the questions under a given category and write a collective response encompassing all the questions. In some categories, candidates would respond by combining some questions and not others.

As such, the questionnaires are presented as follows: under each category, all the questions we asked are listed as bullets. At the end of each category, the candidates’ complete answers are presented (in alphabetical order by candidate). If the candidate answered each specific question, their answers are numbered accordingly. If their answers are not numbered, that indicates a generalized response to all the questions collectively.

So follow us below the flip for the candidates’ responses to this second of three rounds. Then come back on Friday for the final questions covering SOCIAL SERVICES, the 2010 ELECTION PROCESS, and a broad range of other questions collectively bannered as RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT (generally).

PERMITTING:

• Vermont was spared some of the worst effects of the real estate bubble as a result of its progressively cautious regulations requiring “look before you leap” development.  Despite a proven track record of economic stability that comes with protecting the value of our environment, many Republicans continue to allege that regulations such as Act 250 discourage “quality” businesses from locating in Vermont.  How do you respond to this argument and how strongly will you defend the ability to access the Act 250 system — by affected Vermonters, local citizen groups and small businesses that depend on Vermont value-added products tied to a healthy environment — in order to challenge and protect themselves from projects having potentially significant environmental and economic impacts for their communities?
• Do you support Senate Natural Resources Committee Chair Ginny Lyons’ proposal to streamline the permitting process?

---

SUSAN BARTLETT:

1. Act 250 is a major reason why Vermont is such a great place to live. It has helped preserve our landscape by protecting us from rampant strip development. It keeps Vermont from fluctuating during times of economic boom and bust.

It was originally designed to work with a statewide planning bill that never passed and that is what has caused many of the problems with Act 250. Vermont needs development and that development must be orderly, well planned and in the interest of the majority of Vermonters.

2. The bill in Senate Natural Resources is the work of many groups over the summer and fall.  I believe that it has many great ideas and that an overhaul of the permitting system can and should lead to better citizen access; a speedy delivery of many permits and cost effectiveness for applicants.

MATT DUNNE:

1. Vermont’s focus on environmental protection has served the state well over the last forty years.  That does not mean there is not room for improvement, particularly in creating additional predictability for developers and environmentalists alike.  

During my 11 years in the Vermont legislature, I sponsored the Downtown Bill and brownfields legislation, and focused on supporting economic development in suitable locations.

My administration would take the following immediate steps:

• Create mechanisms for citizens to keep better track of permit applications as they wend their way through the system.  Such technology should allow for cross-agency, team approaches to permitting.  This would ensure speedy responses and opportunities to collaborate with applicants using on-line forms. Applicants could make adjustments without having to repeatedly resubmit.
• Pre-permit abandoned industrial sites and prioritized locations in designated downtowns to ensure these properties can be redeveloped quickly within preset parameters and to make them the priority for redevelopment.
• Strengthen and accelerate our brownfields law to ensure new owners can quickly understand the steps necessary to eliminate liability and move forward with clean-up and development of these priority properties.
• Revisit Act 250 schedules and timelines to ensure complex applications have predictable timelines for review without interruptions.

Citizen participation is the Vermont way and should be absolutely defended.  A predictable process for that review and engagement should not damage that engagement opportunity.

2. I applaud Senator Lyon’s willingness to jump into this issue and look for ways to make significant improvements.  While I have some specific issues with some elements of the legislation, I know the bill as introduced is intended to be a jumping off point. I look forward to seeing how it progresses this session.

DEB MARKOWITZ:

1. I’m running for governor to create jobs and protect our quality of life. This means protecting our village centers, our working landscape, and our natural resources.  I know those two goals are intertwined and not opposed. The Republicans have given us a false choice over the last eight years– that we cannot create jobs, while protecting our environment.  I disagree. I know we will succeed economically precisely because of our environmental ethic. Businesses like Burton Snowboard could choose to locate anywhere in the world. Burton chose Vermont because of our commitment to preserving our natural environment. Act 250 works; and while I believe there are ways we could improve the process, I am a strong supporter of the law.

2. When I talk to businesses I hear that they don’t have a problem with the regulations in Vermont, but the process is too arbitrary. I would ensure our permitting process continues to follow the letter and the spirit of the law, while giving support to our businesses so they can better understand permitting and get through the process in a practical manner without sacrificing any of the common sense regulations we have put in place for a reason. The idea of a one-stop permitting shop at the state level is interesting and I would consider any good ideas that will make government more efficient and job creation a priority while protecting our environment.

DOUG RACINE:

Since the beginning of my political career here in Vermont I have been a consistent supporter of Act 250 and our environmental protection laws. Although the law is not perfect and can increase the costs of development, it is my belief that Act 250 has served its purpose of ensuring that the social and environmental impacts of large-scale development are considered and mitigated before development begins. That fundamentally different feeling you get when you cross into Vermont from New York, New Hampshire, or our other neighbors is a direct result of the policies embodied in Act 250.  That is why I have consistently fought attempts to weaken the central provisions of Act 250 and will continue to do so as Governor. Too many so-called reforms of Act 250 have involved both weakening environmental protections or limiting citizen involvement. I have strongly opposed and will continue to oppose those kinds of changes.

While I fundamentally support Act 250 and believe it operates effectively in most cases, I am aware that the permitting process, which is much more than just Act 250, can sometimes become a significant barrier to the development and growth of small businesses in the state. I know that small businesses are the backbone of Vermont’s economy, and I do not want to discourage their growth through an overly burdensome regulatory process that these businesses may not have the resources or expertise to navigate on their own.  

That is why, as Governor, I will work to make the ANR and other permit processes more efficient. This is largely a management issue. I will also support efforts to provide assistance to small businesses navigating the permitting process. The idea is that instead of removing regulations, the state should take an active role in helping provide the expertise and resources that small businesses need to comply with those regulations. In this way we could avoid discouraging small business growth by our development laws while continuing to protect the natural and social environments that are being developed.

PETER SHUMLIN:

1. As the 40th anniversary of Act 250 approaches, we need to be cognizant of how much that law has helped keep Vermont vibrant.  Act 250 has done more to preserve our quality of life and promote economic development than perhaps any other law in Vermont’s history.  Our state’s unique natural environment is one of our most precious assets.  It’s imperative that we uphold the standards set by past leaders – and that we stand up to those who would weaken those standards for the sake of ideology, big box development or short-term economic gain.

2. In my view it is not ready for prime time and I do not intend to have the senate take action on it this year.

---

AGRICULTURE:

• What can and will you do to help Vermont’s capability of producing most of the food it eats?
• As opposed to competing with massive agri-businesses in commodity markets such as non-organic raw milk or corn, Vermont’s economy has substantial growth opportunity related to the sale, production and export of value-added agricultural products. What will your administration’s coordinated agenda be to help Vermont farmers/growers/producers develop and promote sustainable, niche and value added agricultural products.

---

SUSAN BARTLETT:

Currently the Sustainable Jobs Fund is doing excellent work in developing a 5-year plan for a transition in our farming community to sustainable agriculture. I will make sure that they have the money to complete their plan and then will support the implementation of the plan.

An important part of this transition will be to make low cost loans available to folks who want to become farmers.  I believe that dairy will always be important to Vermont, but we can and should become a major producer to all kinds of food products for New England.  We used to be the breadbasket of New England; I think that would be an excellent goal once again.

We need to develop better slaughter facilities around the state.  We need food processing centers to get produce ready for market and to act as central marketing and shipping points for producers.

MATT DUNNE:

Vermont needs to rethink how we do agriculture. Farming is critical to our economic diversity and, more importantly, the ongoing use of our prime agriculture soils, some of the best in the world, is critical to ensure that we keep these lands open for farming. When water runs out in other parts of the country, as I believe it will, we can once again become the breadbasket of the country.  While dairy can and should be a part of our agriculture mix, there will continue to be enormous challenges to compete in the commodity milk market against larger and larger factory farms in the west, and against overproduction in general. In order to be sustainable, we must proactively diversify our agricultural base.

The Council on Rural Development has done excellent work in outlining a roadmap for our agricultural future.  I encourage everyone to read its two reports on Regional Food Centers and Moving Vermont Agriculture Forward: http://www.vtrural.org/

The key to such change is to leverage our brand for quality and create opportunities for value-added agriculture, including organic vegetables, artisan cheese and specialty meats.

We have a real potential to have a robust, profitable agricultural economy focusing our export efforts and even selling CSA shares to urban areas of Boston and New York City. To do this, my administration will:

• Facilitate the siting of slaughtering facilities throughout the state
• Strengthen the Vermont Agriculture Development Corporation
• Coordinate ag-related event promotion to leverage the state-wide ag community and build a vehicle to allow people to actually purchase products as a follow-on to the events
• Proactively support and strengthen efforts by organizations like Vermont Fresh Network to develop markets for agricultural products in Vermont and identify opportunities to provide fresh products to neighboring cities through coordinated shipping and virtual CSA share sales
• Reduce barriers to diversified farming
• Encourage replication of the Intervale structure to allow value-added farmers to get started without significant debt
• Further develop export support to aid value-added farmers and the Vermont Innovation Kitchens take value-added products to the world
• Develop mechanisms for philanthropic entities and state capital to assist in reducing initial debt as farms transfer to young farmers.

In addition, we must maintain current use and significant state investment in the Housing Conservation Fund. My father, who was one of the co-founders of the Land Trust, always said that a community that cannot feed itself will not survive. Those of us most passionate about these critical programs for sustaining agriculture and open land also have the greatest responsibility to be sure they are maintaining a public purpose, creating good will across the state and ensuring the highest return on investment.  My administration would increase enforcement of current use compliance and propose some level of recreational access to lands in current use.  I would also place an emphasis on protecting the soils with the highest agricultural value.

DEB MARKOWITZ:

1. As Secretary of State, I have seen Vermont farmers struggling to make ends meet, and I have been impressed by the many innovative approaches farm families are taking to modernize their operations and bring their products to new markets.  When I am governor agriculture will be part of Vermont’s economic development plan.  I will take leadership to revitalize and refocus our agricultural policy to balance support for large farms with support for local small-scale agriculture.   I will promote policies that encourage diversification of farm products so that Vermont is less reliant on the fluid milk market and so that we can produce more of the food we eat and have a greater diversity of products to export.  I will support local food processing efforts including safe and ethical slaughterhouse capacity and meat inspection programs.  

As an early supporter of Vermont Foodworks, I know that local food systems are important for our communities and families. As governor, I will support farm to table programs that get Vermont products into our kitchens and into our schools.  I will support the expansion and creation of new farmers markets – and year round markets and I will support the programs that enable seniors and low income Vermonters to eat healthy local foods.

2. When I was visiting my sister in Arizona, we went to the supermarket to get some food for dinner. I was so happy, and a little surprised, to see Grafton, Cabot and of course Green Mountain coffee on their shelves. We have a unique and powerful brand in Vermont and we need to do a better job of marketing. As governor my economic development strategy will include helping to connect growers with food processors.  And we will make sure that our farmers and food processors have the financial, marketing and distribution support they need to succeed.

DOUG RACINE:

Vermont’s dairy sector is facing the worst crisis in decades. With dairy prices as low as they were 30 years ago, we are losing dozens of farms. Dairy pricing is a complicated issue and one that is controlled at the federal level. As governor, I will work with our dairy farmers to advocate on their behalf with our federal delegation to push for a fair pricing structure as well as a supply management system.

At the same time, we must recognize as a state that there are still opportunities for farmers to thrive. Although some state policies still stand in the way, we can and should work with farmers to encourage diversification, year-round production, value-added processing, and direct sales. These types of agricultural ventures are more likely to provide farmers with a fair price for their products, and they will also provide Vermonters with access to fresh, locally produced food. We are leading the nation in access to local food, but we can and must do even better in this area – for our families, our farmers, and also for our economy.

As governor, I will give the agricultural sector the attention it deserves. Agriculture will not be an afterthought in my administration – I will appoint a Secretary of Agriculture who knows the dairy sector well, and who also has an interest in and commitment to the many other types of agriculture that are in Vermont. We have over 6000 farmers in Vermont, and they are contributing every day to our local economy, as well as to our family dinners.

I will focus on finding the opportunities for our agricultural sector that will allow farmers to get a fair price, create jobs, and provide Vermonters with more local food options. My administration will review current policies around direct sales between farmers and customers and will work to reduce barriers between them. I will also focus efforts in rebuilding our value-added processing infrastructure, such as dairy processing, slaughter facilities, and community kitchens. As a state, we must invest in this infrastructure and collaborate with other investors to ensure that our products do not have to leave the state for processing.

I look forward to the recommendations of the Farm to Plate initiative, and that will be my starting point as governor for developing a real economic development plan for the agriculture sector, and integrating that plan with all aspects of the administration, including workforce development, tourism, and job creation initiatives

PETER SHUMLIN:

A sustainable, local agricultural economy where our farmers get the full value for their product is a critical part of my vision for Vermont.  As oil prices rise and the effects of climate change become more apparent, eating local foods will become an economic necessity, not just an upper income trend.  Like other challenges, we need to see this as an opportunity to grow our economy, create jobs and nurture our core values. Succeeding at this will make local foods more affordable and practical for all.  Furthermore, Vermont is perfectly situated to capitalize on the large markets that are within our reach – New York, Boston and Montreal – to help give our farmers the value added price that will make our farms profitable.  As long as we are hostages to Dean Foods and other multinational conglomerates our farmers will continue to work for nothing.  

We need to build upon the local activity that is already happening by bringing together communities, state resources and programs.  We have many such programs in place that I will continue to support and work to expand as governor, such as Current Use, VHCB, the farm to plate program that was passed under my leadership last year and the farm to school program.  

As governor, I will direct all of my agencies to develop a statewide food policy – we need to identify our current farmers, produce, available agricultural land, and infrastructure so we can determine what barriers exist and begin to break them down. I will establish regional food centers where people can preserve and process their food and become better educated on how to feed themselves and their communities.

In addition, I will work to better support our local farmers.  The future of Vermont’s agriculture lies in both traditional dairy, if we can get the value added price, and diversified farming.  I will continue to work with our federal delegation to establish an over order milk premium that would help ensure our dairy farmers are getting paid what they deserve for their milk.  I will also expand programs that help traditional farmers transition to diversified farming, including increasing farmer technical training for processing as well as expanding our network of much-needed processing and distribution facilities. I will build upon the Intervale’s model of farm incubator programs so that retiring farmers across Vermont can see their land being utilized and young aspiring farmers can learn the trade without taking out hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of loans.

I own a small seventh generation dairy farm (Jerseys) and I care about this issue deeply.

---

HEALTH CARE:

• What will you do to improve the efficiency of Vermont’s health care system and what will you administration do to help control health care costs?
• How do you plan to improve the Catamount Health plan to make it more accessible, affordable and responsive to Vermonters’ health care needs?

---

SUSAN BARTLETT:

If we were starting from scratch we would create a single-payer system that covers everyone. We are not starting from scratch and need to fix the system we have without disrupting the services Vermonters already rely on. The system is broken because costs are rising out of control.

• 40% of health care spending in Vermont is on hospitals. I have introduced a bill where every hospital in the state would be part of a “global budget.” It would create a quasi-single-payer health-care system, where the state acts as a conduit between insurance companies and hospitals. Instead of paying hospitals, insurance companies would pay that money to the state government, which would pay hospitals. A public board would negotiate rates with hospitals. This should create some administrative savings.
• The next step would be to create the same system for doctors.
• Once we control how much we pay, we can determine what we pay for, which will allow us to shift to paying for success and outcomes rather than for the number of visits and procedures. This will save money getting Vermonters the care they need and keeping them healthier.
• Catamount Health is under-subscribed. There is no incentive for people struggling to pay for food and heat to spend even $1-200 a month for subsidized health insurance. No one is turned away from the hospital, so why pay for a doctor visit of insurance when you have a safety net? This is a complicated issue that could be solved with bigger subsidies that we can’t afford, but I am determined to look for solutions
• We need to have our system of FQHC’s (Federally Qualified Health Centers) work as part of our entire health care system.  Senator Sanders has been the champion of these and they will remain an important part of health care for all Vermonters.

MATT DUNNE:

Healthcare costs are driving most of our economic problems in our state.

A majority of bankruptcies, school budget increases, teacher pension fund shortfalls, small business cost increases, and much of the state budget deficit are all driven by the rising cost of healthcare.  

Over the last two decades, Vermont has tried a variety of small changes to solve the looming healthcare crisis. It is now clear that they have failed, and in some cases have made things worse, as we have subsidized more people’s care without effectively addressing the core cost drivers.

The Vermont legislature now faces the challenging decision of whether to cut people from our public programs, slash low-income children off the rolls, cut back on reimbursement to providers thus putting our hospitals in financial jeopardy … all terrible choices.

And yet, if we raise taxes today to cover the deficit caused by ever-spiraling healthcare costs, and do nothing to fix the system, we will find ourselves in exactly the same situation next year.

Here’s what we can do.  First, we can do what large businesses do and self-insure all Vermonters under one system to increase the state’s buying power, reduce administrative costs, and guarantee that everyone pays and everyone is covered.  The fact is that some large companies employ and cover nearly as many people as we have living in Vermont. When I was the head of AmeriCorps*VISTA, we self-insured all 6,000 people working for me and realized a significant cost savings as a result. With a waiver from the federal government, we can achieve the first demonstration project of this kind in the country.

With one large pool, the state will then have the buying power to change the way we reimburse for medical care — rewarding doctors, hospitals, and citizens for prioritizing healthcare activities that lead to health outcomes, rather than paying per procedure. Healthcare innovators like Elliott Fisher and Jack Wennberg have highlighted how spending does not equal healthier people. Hospitals like the Cleveland Clinic and the Mayo Clinic have demonstrated that better care can come at dramatically lower cost. We can bring these demonstration projects to scale and implement them at our own hospitals.

But to do this kind of outcomes-based reimbursement and efficient delivery of care, we need to have better information. When I was in the Senate, I proposed adopting an electronic healthcare record system similar to what VA hospitals have been using for years. We successfully created the VITL organization, but unfortunately four years later, and despite financial support from Senator Leahy, the administration has not finished the job. This system would allow hospitals to share information with each other and which would allow us to measure the effectiveness of our healthcare providers, reduce medical errors, and help prevent expensive and unnecessary mistakes.

Now is the time for Vermont to use our scale, our sense of community and our in-state expertise to lead the nation in healthcare reform. However, change will not happen overnight. The legislature must take steps now, like initiating a statewide hospital budget, so we can start to achieve real cost-containment in the near future.

DEB MARKOWITZ:

1. As Governor I will fight for quality, affordable health care for all.  Vermont has been a national leader of health reform, starting with our commitment to making sure that every child has access to health care.  Our Blueprint for Health is a model for other states looking to prevention and management of chronic conditions such as diabetes, and our Catamount health program is a first step in making sure that every Vermonter has access to health coverage.  But despite these efforts, health care costs for Vermont families keep rising.  The most frequent cause of individual bankruptcy is the cost of paying for hospitalization and medical costs associated with an accident, illness or disability. I know that unless we can stem the rising cost of health care, it will stand in the way of economic prosperity for Vermont’s working families and our small businesses.

Vermont has a unique opportunity to be a national leader in health care reform once again.  I have asked our congressional delegation to include language in the federal bill to permit Vermont to engage in a pilot project that would allow Vermont to ensure that all of its citizens have access to the doctors, medicines and care they need.  I support a single payer system in which Vermont will self-insure.  This will allow us to control health care costs by changing some of the incentives in our health care system.  If we can ensure doctors are fairly reimbursed for making patients healthy, instead of for how many patients they can see in an hour or how many procedures they can order, costs would go down and quality would go up. We must ensure that our health care dollars are spent on providing every person with access to quality, affordable health care.

2. As Governor, I would take a close look at Catamount Health to see whether there are better ways to provide coverage to uninsured Vermonters while cutting costs.  The way Catamount is currently operating is unsustainable, and the increase in premium is making it unaffordable for many Vermonters.  

DOUG RACINE:

Our national health care system is broken. Costs are escalating at unsustainable rates and more and more people are uninsured or underinsured, particularly in this economy. Families are faced with deciding which bills to pay and how much their loved ones’ health is worth. Employers are faced with skyrocketing premiums for employee plans, and new businesses are unable to provide insurance for their employees. I am not encouraged by the efforts at the federal level because most of what is happening there will not help Vermonters.

Here in Vermont, we can and should do better. We don’t have to wait; we can start reforming our system now. We’ve done a lot, but we’re not where we need to be. Kids have access to health care and Catamount is an improvement for those who qualify for it. I have fought over the years for these improvements, but we must do better – we must demand universal access to quality, affordable health care for all Vermonters. As Governor I will continue working on this issue until we reach that goal. We can design a system here at home to make sure all Vermonters get access to affordable care, and I want to work with the federal government to make that a reality.

As chairman of the Senate Health and Welfare Committee, I have started a real conversation about what universal care would look like here in Vermont. This year, my commitment to Vermonters is that we will use the legislative committee process, and we will use the bills that are out there to move this process forward. The public has been welcome to participate every step of the way. It’s not going to be easy, but I know it can be done. Vermont has shown a better way to accomplish a lot of things in public policy over the years. I would like to see us show a better way on health care. I think a better system in this country can start with one state. I think Vermont can be and should be that state.

PETER SHUMLIN:

1. Vermont must lead the country in implementing a health care system that provides universal access that follows the individual instead of being provided by the employer.  The current system that we have in America is going to bankrupt us.  As long as I have been in public service I have supported and sponsored the most aggressive bills that would bring about true health care reform (including S. 88) and as governor, I will work to make it finally happen.  

2. The Catamount Health Care plan is a Band-Aid on a gaping wound.  I have learned the hard way that piecemeal health care reform will not work and is not sustainable.  Right now we are struggling to pay for the Catamount customers that we have enrolled.  Comprehensive health care reform will create jobs and give Vermonters a system that they can afford and that they can believe in.

---

EDUCATION:

• Where do you stand on the 2-vote school budgets?
• Tuition, debt and affordability create an insurmountable obstacle to higher education for many Vermonters and an inexcusable hardship for most Vermonters.  What can and will your administration do to lower the financial barriers to higher education and increase Vermonters access to quality higher education?

---

SUSAN BARTLETT:

1. If the state had a comprehensive plan for cost containment, we wouldn’t need things like the 2-vote.  Until we have a plan for cost containment we will continue to have things like 2 votes.

2. Here is the truth and folks don’t like it: All states someplace along the line made decisions to fund either K-12 or higher education.   There is no state that funds both well.  

Obviously the Vermont decision was to fund K-12 and we spend at the highest rate in the country; higher education is funded at the lowest rate.  No state can afford to properly fund education K-college.  

I have felt for many years that the Federal government should be the major source of funding for higher education.  Each state should be responsible for getting students ready for what they want to do when they get out of high school.  Then students should have the choice of affordable education no matter what they want, or where they want to go.  That would be in the best interest of our country, not just our Vermont students.

MATT DUNNE:

1. A strong education system is critical to the future of Vermont. As a product of Hartland schools and with my eldest about to enter Kindergarten in the same community, I have a strong commitment to public education in this state. We must not use the problems of healthcare costs and diminishing numbers of students as excuses to undermine our commitment to a world-class education for all Vermonters.  

I adamantly oppose the “2-vote rule” for school budgets.  This legislation does little to address spending, increases spending on elections, and punishes communities that choose to make sacrifices to support their children’s education.

My administration would recommend reducing education costs by doing the following:

· Reducing supervisory unions from 61 to at least 20 and bulk purchasing —  With only 92,000 children in our state, we no longer need this kind of administrative overhead.  Furthermore, the larger districts would allow for better economies of scale that would allow for bulk purchasing of commodity products like heating oil and supplies, shared teachers, enhanced in-school and after-school curriculum delivered via video conference and on-line.

· Increase teacher-assisted distance learning – The cost of video conferencing has gone down significantly and we have the potential to provide a broader diversity of curriculum than ever before, including options that have teachers spending different days in different schools to balance the video instruction.

· Invest in early education to reduce special education costs – With only 15,000 two, three  and four year olds in Vermont, private foundations would be excited to work with us to support a state-wide, multi-year demonstration project to show the effectiveness of early childhood education.  

· Cloud computing and electronic student records – Technology today can provide better tools and lower costs. Outsourced server capacity and basic software is now offered for free, allowing for a reduction in hardware costs and greater capacity to collaborate on documents and calendars among parents, students and teachers. Such connectivity also allows for a statewide student record system to help track actual student performance over time, provide valuable feedback to teachers and school leaders and ensure that students required to switch schools are not set back by a poor transfer of historical information.  

2. Vermont spends the least amount per capita on higher education in the country and has the highest per capital debt.  Beyond generally increasing the state investment in our state colleges and university, my administration will create the Vermont Service Scholarship program that will guarantee that any student who graduates from high school as a Vermonter, attends one of our colleges and universities, and commits to two years of national service will be able to graduate debt free.  Leveraging both the federal education award for individuals who complete national service and the spirit of service in Vermont, this would provide the opportunity to launch a generation of Vermonters to graduate with the benefit of our superb higher education, the experience of service and the freedom from debt. Imagine what a generation free to pursue entrepreneurial dreams would do for our state.

There was an excellent forum on education hosted at UVM.  I encourage everyone to watch the presentations: http://www.mattdunne.com/news/…  Many thanks to VTDigger.org for covering.

DEB MARKOWITZ:

1. Everywhere I go in Vermont I hear concerns about the cost of education and the rising property tax burden.  At the same, time we have seen in the last few years that the vast majority of our communities are passing their school budgets – even with the two vote requirement.  As governor, I will work with our school boards and superintendents to get serious about collaboration, consolidation, where appropriate and cost cutting so that our teachers can focus on making sure that every child receives a quality education.

2. As the mom of three teenagers, I know how expensive a college education can be. It is out of the reach of many working families without debt burdens that make it difficult for our students to succeed after graduation. I would work with our federal delegation to make sure every institution in Vermont has greater resources to participate in Direct Loans. I would also want to look into a process for taking education lending out of the hands of Wall St. It is too important to be a business. Let’s develop a way to leverage government to help families pay for college. It is an investment in our economy and I would be committed to finding the resources to be more innovative about lending and grant options.

I also think government hasn’t collaborated well with academia. We should support efforts to increase research dollars for our universities and we need to do a better job linking our universities with our businesses.  

DOUG RACINE:

I believe that every child in Vermont deserves a quality education. A strong educational system is a fundamental element of any prosperous society. Today, our public schools are strong and we have some of the most creative, forward-thinking programs and educators in the country. While our educators and administrators pour their hearts and talent into our schools for our children, all they hear from the current administration is that they are overstaffed, inefficient, and even wasteful. Even in the midst of the current recession, and facing the budget crisis we do, it is my belief that we cannot scapegoat the education system as the source of our economic woes, and that we must make it a priority to continue to fund the future of our children. For all these reasons, I oppose the two-vote requirement for school budgets.

Improving Vermont’s higher education system starts with increasing the numbers of young Vermonters with a high school diploma and the skills needed to succeed. As Governor, I will continue my focus on helping all families get their children off to a good start with good nutrition, nurturing and an opportunity for a high quality pre-K experience either at home or in another setting.

From there we need to be certain that all children have opportunities to succeed in school.  Just as many students need access to courses that challenge them to excel at very high levels, many other children need help to overcome the challenges of poverty. My goal will to work as a partner with our educators to be sure that all children graduate and that we do this in the most cost effective way possible.

As Governor I will seek to increase the chances that low-income Vermonters have for a higher education. Private institutions, the state college system and the University of Vermont provide a diverse range of higher education in Vermont. At the same time, too few Vermonters have access to this system, and it is far too costly for those who do, saddling our graduates with an unmanageable level of debt.  

I will work with our state colleges and the University of Vermont to increase their scholarship programs for Vermont high-school students to provide an incentive for those students to excel. By providing students with the prospect of an affordable higher education, we will see our graduation rates rise.  

Our state college system, and particularly the growing emphasis on training for the “green” economy, must be supported and expanded. Vermont Technical College has been particularly successful in beginning to train our young people for the wide range of jobs in the emerging green economy, from green design to manufacturing to renewable energy delivery. As Governor I will support and expand that approach through the development of satellite campuses throughout the state to make attendance at our state colleges easier for all Vermonters. Vermont should seek to lead the nation in the per capita number of graduates from its states colleges going to work in the emerging green sector.  If at the same time our economic development efforts continue to attract these industries, we can employ these graduates here at home and make Vermont the silicon valley of the green economy. There is a significant opportunity here, and it begins with a coordinated effort with our higher education institutions.  

PETER SHUMLIN:

1. I supported the 2-vote during the 2007 session and that was a mistake. I have made thousands of judgments during my 17 years in the legislature, and this is one that I regret.

2. Every politician from every party always promises to lower the cost of higher education in a state where we all know our students and their families struggle to pay the bill.  Jim Douglas made paying lip service to this problem one of the signature issues of his administration and Brian Dubie will likely do the same.  While I join the bipartisan goal of wishing to solve this problem, in tough fiscal times, politicians need to be honest and stop making promises they can’t keep.  Vermont is in a fiscal crisis and promising tens of millions of dollars for higher education paid for by our taxpayers when our most vulnerable citizens are at risk seems disingenuous at best.  

Way back in July of last year, we posted a diary entitled Primary voters: What would you ask the candidates?. There were a lot of great suggestions in the comments, as well as a few that came over email.

If you all thought that the whole idea had fallen victim to GMD short attention spans, I’m happy to say that once it became clear who the candidates in the Democratic primary were going to be, we got to work. We took the questions we did receive, reviewed them (massaging or combining them when appropriate) and sent them off to Senators Bartlett, Racine & Shumlin, Secretary of State Markowitz and former Senator Dunne. Last night, we received their responses.

There is a lot of material covered in these (returned questionnaires are from 7-14 pages long), so we’re going to trickle out the responses over the course of the week. The first set of responses are contained in the diary below.

A note on formatting before clicking on the extended entry. The questions were presented under general categories. Some candidates’ responded question by question. Other times candidates would take all the questions under a given category and write a collective response encompassing all the questions. In some categories, candidates would respond by combining some questions and not others.

As such, the questionnaires are presented as follows: under each category, all the questions we asked are listed as bullets. At the end of each category, the candidates’ complete answers are presented (in alphabetical order by candidate). If the candidate answered each specific question, their answers are numbered accordingly. If their answers are not numbered, that indicates a generalized response to all the questions collectively.

So please follow us below the flip for the candidates’ responses to the GMD questionnaire categories ENERGY and JOBS & ECONOMY. Then come back on Wednesday and again on Friday for questions on a wide variety of other topics. (On deck for Wednesday, responses to questions on permitting, agriculture, health care and education)

ENERGY

• What are the long and short term priorities that Vermont’s next Governor must take to protect Vermont’s energy future and to protecting Vermont’s rate payers relative to sourcing the State’s energy?  What steps will you take to move Vermont toward an efficient grid system that encourages innovative energy use by consumers and facilitates innovative energy production by both small and large renewable sources?
• What will you do help make Vermont capable of producing most of the energy it needs?
• What is your stand on closing the aging and deteriorating Entergy nuclear power plant?
  
  Under what conditions would you consider keeping it open?
  
  If you would consider keeping it open, what is the longest period you can envision this deteriorating liability to continue its operation?
• With the Douglas/Dubie administration’s assistance, Entergy has irresponsibly been allowed to dismiss a clean-up liability, estimated to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Currently, the clean up liability is on the backs of Vermont rate-payers.  Clean up liability for Entergy is a goal, but in the meantime, Vermont rate payers own that problem.  What can and will you do to require Entergy to assume its clean up responsibility, fully fund its neglected decommissioning fund and protect Vermonters from the financial consequences of Entergy’s inability to clean up its Vernon site and store/dispose of its nuclear waste?

---

SUSAN BARTLETT:

1. & 2. In the short term:

• We must renew our contract with Hydro Quebec.
• Efficiency Vermont is very successful and must be expanded through public/private partnership.
• The biomass cogeneration projects in Montpelier and Bennington are exciting projects that move in the right direction
• Many of our schools use local wood to generate heat. We should look to use those plants to make electricity as well.
• Require that new commercial and residential building, as well as major renovations, be energy efficient and develop on-site energy where possible.

In the long term:

• We have funding from the federal government to build a smart grid that will help Vermonters to know when power is cheaper during off-peak times as well as how much power they are using.
• I would like to investigate getting power from the dams on the Connecticut River.
• We have renewable power projects in the works like the solar farm in Pownal and wind generation that will come one line in the next few years.
• Some estimates say that we can get 16% of our electricity from upgrading our existing dams and this should be explored.
• We have to continue to improve efficiency; the least expensive power is the power we never need to generate.   Electricity is only 18% of our carbon footprint. Most of our energy use is from burning fossil fuel for heating and transportation. As we find renewable ways to generate electricity, we have to use more of it to warm our buildings and run our transportation system.
• The cost of generating renewable power will go down with time. We need to continue to invest in the technology to generate power close to where it will be used.

3. With the developments of the last few weeks, I think it is impossible to see a path in which Vermont Yankee will be allowed to remain open.

4. The legislature has twice passed a bill making it clear that in the original sales deal with Entergy, they were responsible for the clean up.  I voted for the bill twice,  and as Governor would sign that bill if sent to my desk.

MATT DUNNE:

Vermont’s energy future is a critical challenge for the next Governor in both the short and long term.

Since I ran statewide in 2006, I have been calling for the organized decommissioning of Vermont Yankee in 2012 as planned. Today, with evidence that Entergy officials misled regulators and that the facility is leaking radioactive waste into our groundwater, the debate should end.  We now need to move quickly to transition workers to new jobs, hold Entergy fully accountable, and begin to replace the electricity created at VY with in-state renewable sources and improved energy efficiency. We owe it to all ratepayers to take action now in order to avoid disruptions and price volatility.

My administration will do everything possible to hold Entergy, as a corporation, accountable for the complete and total cleanup of the Vernon site. Now that there appears to be radioactive contamination, my understanding is that the EPA will get involved and Entergy will be fully liable, especially when it is clear that they misled regulators. I look forward to working with the Attorney General and the federal government to protect the health of Vermonters and our environment.

As Governor I will initiate the following for a strong energy future:

• Facilitate the development of at least two 75-megawatt biomass facilities in Vermont, located in Windham County and the Northeast Kingdom.
• Encourage wind power development, solar development and micro-hydro by having ANR proactively assist with such projects, increasing the cap on the feed-in-tariff and expanding incentives for residential solar, wind and efficiency.
• Expand the PACE program to potentially allow individuals who invest in near-zero-energy buildings to be paid for the reduction in demand.
• Invest in further efficiency measures to reduce overall demand.
• Make it a right for all Vermonters to know their electrical use in real time through smart meter deployment, encouraging the reduction of energy use through knowledge and a sense of competition with buildings of similar size.
• Encourage co-generation opportunities and district heating/cooling using biomass and geo thermal.
• Pilot the first electric car grid to reduce cost and carbon emission of car-dependent Vermont commuters.
• Walk the walk by using bonded dollars to install renewable energy systems in all of our state buildings.
• Invest in rail to encourage the more efficient transportation of goods, business travelers and, potentially, commuters with a specific emphasis on reconnecting passenger rail service to Burlington by connecting through Essex and on the western side of the state.

DEB MARKOWITZ:

1. & 2. Vermont is at an energy crossroads: contracts for two-thirds of Vermont’s electricity are expiring within five years; we have an aging nuclear plant within our borders; because of our rural communities Vermonters use more gas for driving than average Americans. In addition, Vermont has some of the oldest and least energy efficient housing stock in the country with long heating seasons. We send over $2 billion out of state despite these high energy needs because we only support 10 percent of our energy from local production.

As Governor I will provide the strong leadership we need to ensure that we have access to clean, safe, secure, and affordable energy today into the future.

I will create a long-term plan to generate clean energy in Vermont to fuel the state far into the future. For the short-term, I will invest in energy efficiency, removing barriers for Vermonters to retrofit their homes and businesses.  This is a win-win approach as investments in efficiency create jobs, save Vermont families and businesses money on heat and electric bills and reduce Vermont’s contribution to global warming. New recovery act investments in a smart grid will allow Vermont families and businesses to monitor their own energy use.  This will be a great way to save money and reduce our need for new energy investments.

I will harness the efforts of our Federal delegation to ensure that Vermont leads the nation in the manufacture and use of new energy technologies.  Vermont already has some of the fastest growing renewable energy businesses in the country.  I am a strong supporter of community wind projects, hydropower, solar, biomass and geothermal energy production.  As Governor I will review our regulatory process to ensure that renewable energy projects get a fair hearing and fast results.

We also have a great opportunity to bring low cost power to Vermont from Hydro-Quebec.  Hydro-Quebec wants to bring its power to the rest of New England and we already have transmission lines in place that could be upgraded to serve this purpose in exchange for a long term low cost power contract.

As Governor I will find creative solutions to meet public transportation needs of Vermonters and I will support investments in rail to help our businesses get their goods to market more efficiently and to provide more transportation options for Vermonters.  We must make it a priority to get trains running to Burlington once again.

New energy investments in Vermont cannot happen overnight. But they will not happen at all without a governor who commits to the strategy we will know is essential to a cleaner planet, a growing economy and a more secure world. Tackling Vermont’s energy future will require creative collaborations among public officials, businesses, citizen groups, environmentalists and others. I will bring the stakeholders to the table and generate a plan that will succeed.

3. Vermont Yankee should not be relicensed.  Last week’s news of radioactive leaks from Vermont Yankee brings into clear focus the safety risks we cannot afford to take with our aging nuclear plant. Job creation and retention is critical for Vermont, but safety must be our first concern.

It seems like every few months there is a news story about a mishap at the plant – collapsing cooling towers, failure to monitor high level radioactive waste, leaks of radioactive steam. Entergy officials even gave inaccurate information under oath to the Vermont Public Service Board about underground pipes now leaking the radioactive isotope tritium into groundwater flowing into the Connecticut River. This raises serious questions about trust in Entergy’s representations about the plant’s safety and its ability to operate for an additional twenty years.

We should all urge the legislature to vote no and vote now!  

4. In addition to having grave concerns about the safety of Vermont Yankee I am opposed to the proposed spin off company – Enexus.  While I could see how it might be attractive to Entergy to create an under-resourced holding company for its aging nuclear power plants I do not see how this could benefit Vermont ratepayers.  We must keep in mind that the decommissioning fund has a current shortfall of almost $600 million (and this is without taking into account the increased costs of clean up that will result from the most recent tritium leaks) so we must take appropriate steps to protect Vermont ratepayers.

As governor I will ensure that there is proper Federal oversight and that clean up and decommissioning of Vermont Yankee does not cost Vermonters a dime. The Agency of Natural Resources and the Health Department will also be involved to ensure that cool down and clean up are conducted in ways that protect the health and safety of Vermonters and our environment.

DOUG RACINE:

How Vermont will meet its future energy demands will be one of the most critical questions facing Vermonters in the coming years. I am opposed to the continued operation of Vermont Yankee after 2012. This plant should be shut down as planned in 2012 – for financial and moral reasons. Financially, Entergy has given no guarantees that they will pay the costs of either decommissioning the plant or storing the nuclear waste materials, and I have no confidence we won’t get stuck with those bills. Morally, I simply do not think it is right to saddle our grandchildren, their grandchildren and generations of Vermonters to come with the costs of decommissioning and storing our nuclear waste. We don’t have a solution for it, and we must stop producing more.

It would be irresponsible to call for the closing of Vermont Yankee without acknowledging the void it will leave behind. Yankee supplies approximately 1/3 of the state’s power. We can fill that gap through a combination of conservation, improved efficiency and new, renewable sources of power. First, we need to reduce our energy demand by promoting efficiency in all aspects of our lives. We need stronger incentives for the construction of more efficient homes and businesses. As a state, we should be investing in smart grid and smart metering technology, so that we can all be better informed and wiser about our energy use.

At the same time we focus on our efficiency, as Governor I will be a strong supporter of programs to encourage the development and use of renewable energy sources. I support both wind and solar power development, as well as biomass. Local communities that choose to host these sources of power should benefit first. Solar and wind power are safe, clean, and increasingly reliable sources of power, and I believe Vermont should lead the rest of the nation in the percentage of its power supply coming from these renewable sources.

PETER SHUMLIN:

1. The next governor must find a way to replace Vermont Yankee’s power with affordable, clean energy.  How do we do it?  The answer is clear when you consider what our region has to offer.  The New England ISO’s 2008 forecast demonstrates that the region will have nearly twice the capacity necessary to meet the demand of the six New England states now and in the years to come.  There is a diverse menu of options available, including natural gas, hydro, wind, solar, biomass and accelerated energy efficiency.

Vermont Yankee delivers just 2 percent of New England’s power.  Natural gas, hydroelectric power and other renewable energy sources offer reliable, well-priced options. Vermont must take full advantage of these regional options in the short term, while aggressively developing local sources of renewable power that will ensure a stable and sustainable energy supply into the future.

In the long term, we need leadership that will help Vermont become a leader in energy efficiency and renewable energy development – something we are uniquely positioned to do.  We are home to some of the leading clean energy entrepreneurs. We have Vermonters who are hungry for a new direction, including more than 90 community energy groups across the state that are undertaking creative energy-saving and renewable generating projects. We have a congressional delegation that is helping our communities access the funds they need.  Combine this with more smart grid technology and Vermont is well on its way to showing the world that the United States can wean itself from dirty, dwindling and expensive fossil fuels and realize an energy future based on clean, local, renewable energy supplies.

2. As governor, I will promote a strong, renewable energy economy in Vermont that takes into account the values and priorities of our communities and doesn’t compromise our natural resources.  Responsibly developing our own renewable energy generation is a critical component to Vermont’s successful economic development.  It will grow businesses, create well paying jobs, save Vermonters money and get us off our addiction to oil.  

As governor, I will ensure that our utilities and municipalities have the means to develop our local energy future.  One of the biggest hurdles renewable energy faces is the upfront cost.  We should not rely on Wall Street to finance our clean energy future when we have the local will and resources to create the future we want to leave for the next generation of Vermonters.

3. Vermont Yankee should not be relicensed to operate beyond 2012.  First, the corporate spin-off from our current well-financed owner, Entergy, to the debt-ridden shell corporation, Enexus, is fiscally irresponsible and extremely unwise.  Second, the decommissioning fund shortfall of almost $600 million leaves Vermont taxpayers on the hook to clean up the plant and its nuclear waste.  Third, the price offered by Enexus (6.1 cents) for only 115MV, is a nearly 50 percent increase over our current price (4.2 cents), and would force Vermonters to pay more for less power.

4. Entergy must not be allowed to spin Vermont Yankee off to Enexus.  If approved, the spin-off will leave the plant and the decommissioning fund in the hands of a debt ridden, highly leveraged, out of state company.

The recent news that Vermont Yankee is leaking radioactive material makes the decommissioning question even more concerning.  While we do not know the extent of the radioactive contamination, it could potentially double the costs of decommissioning.  While Governor Douglas and Lt. Governor Dubie have asked the Department of Public Service to postpone its support for the spin-off, Speaker Shap Smith and I have made it clear that postponing support is not enough – the department should oppose the spin-off proposal.  

---

JOBS & ECONOMY:

• How do you propose to further enhance and support existing and start up companies and the small businesses?
• What is your top priority to improve the work & employment conditions for Vermont workers and how would you strengthen the job market and job opportunities for Vermonters as well as the job creation opportunities of Vermont businesses.
• What changes would you make, if any, to the current system of economic incentives and tax breaks in our state for businesses and individuals?

---

SUSAN BARTLETT:

Business creates jobs. State government can only create the environment to make it easier. I would fund all of the regional development corporations so they could do their job – creating jobs in their region of the state.  

The next most important issue for small businesses is access to capitol.  While our Vermont banks have money to lend and their commercial lending is growing, the increased regulation from DC is making it harder and harder for them to lend to small, new businesses.  

We need to fund the Seed Capital program that we began last year and we need to make sure that VEDA (Vermont Economic Development Authority) is well-funded.   They currently can lend to small businesses and they can make agricultural loans that I believe will become more and more important as we “grow” our agricultural economy.

We have in place a very good job-training program that is always over-subscribed by the business community.   It is important to make sure that working Vermonters have access to the job training they need to move up the jobs skills ladder.  

I believe that the performance-based tax credits like the Vermont Employment Growth Incentive works.  I understand that many folks don’t believe in tax credits, I happen to believe that we have developed a transparent and accountable credit that can work well.

I believe that encouraging the model of having employees own their business is well worth pursuing, we know that those jobs will stay in Vermont.

I have written several articles that relate to fostering an environment where Vermonters create, attain and keep good jobs. It is my number one focus.

http://www.bartlettforgovernor…

http://www.bartlettforgovernor…

http://www.bartlettforgovernor…

http://www.bartlettforgovernor…

http://www.bartlettforgovernor…

MATT DUNNE:

Jobs and economic development must be the top priority of the next administration. Vermont has always been at its best as an innovation state, whether it was machine tool in Springfield, scales in St. Johnsbury, or JogBras and ice cream in Burlington. My ancestors started one of the first kit-home manufacturing businesses in the Northeast Kingdom and a veneer manufacturing plant that sold wood products to the world.  I’ve had the experiences of helping to grow an $18.5 million software company, Logic Associates in Wilder, Vermont. I’ve helped create jobs through the AmeriCorps*VISTA microenterprise initiatives. More recently, in my work for Google, I have seen the power of innovation on job creation in many communities.  My priorities for job creation would be the following:

• Broadband – We must bring high-speed, fiber-optic broadband to the last mile of every community in Vermont. Logic Associates was founded in a barn and Google was started in a garage. Broadband is the electricity of our time and if we do not have broadband to the barn and the garage, we will not have start-ups. Current employers are having difficulty recruiting young engineers because the home the potential employee could afford only has dial-up.
• Invest in higher education tech transfer – We need to dramatically increase support to bring ideas from the classroom to the global marketplace.
• Access to early stage capital – In 2004, as a Windsor County senator, I worked with business leaders across the state to put together a package of incentives to increase access to capital, including the Seed Capital Fund (recently renamed and finally deployed) and a capital gains tax deferral for individuals who took returns on early angel investments and immediately plowed that capital directly into new angel fund investments (the administration never publicized this opportunity and the legislature unfortunately chose to eliminate this incentive last year).  We can further expand incentives and direct investment to ensure entrepreneurs have additional access to capital throughout the state.
• Micro-Enterprise – I would significantly increase the amount of economic development bonded authority to increase micro-enterprise loans, allowing low income Vermonters to achieve self-sufficiency by starting small businesses.
• Seed entrepreneurs in high unemployment areas – My administration would look for creative ways to seed entrepreneurs in areas that are struggling economically. One proposal is to secure a downtown building that could be mixed loft space and incubator space, offer 20 two-year fellowships awarded on the basis of a national business start-up competition, with a percentage of any successful venture coming back to support the operation of the entrepreneurship center.  Such an initiative would attract private sector partners, be relatively inexpensive, and have a high potential to spin off new growth oriented businesses in depressed areas.
• Evangelism – Once this infrastructure is in place, members of my administration will be evangelists to the world, attracting and retaining entrepreneurs who love Vermont’s environmental and community values.

Economic activities and investments in my administration will be held to a strong return on investment measurement. All incentives currently in place will be reviewed from scratch to ensure we are effectively using our resources in job creation.

In the workforce, my administration’s Department of Labor will be empowered to undertake enforcement of workers comp and employment rules.  We currently do not have a robust process for enforcing laws preventing abuses on either the worker or employer side.  The state should be sure that state contracts go to contractors who provide insurance and do not abuse contractor laws.

DEB MARKOWITZ:

1. It has been too long since Vermont’s leaders were as positive about our state’s future as our people always have been. As governor I will be the chief marketing officer for our state. Vermont is a great place to do business and no one in state government, especially the governor should say any differently.

Vermont has spent a lot of economic development effort and money trying to find large, out-of-state companies willing to relocate and create jobs in Vermont. This strategy was largely unsuccessful. To create jobs and rebuild our economy, we need to concentrate on Vermont businesses already here and ready to expand in the right environment. Many small businesses I talk to need capital to get them through these tough times or to allow them to make the strategic investments they need to expand.

Good roads and safe bridges remain important infrastructure but small businesses of today also need access to high speed internet. Even a small bed and breakfast needs a website and on line reservations in order to successfully compete in today’s economy.  The private sector has not gotten the job done, despite our current governor’s promise to get high speed internet to every home by 2007.  As governor I will forge the necessary public-private partnerships to get this job done.

2. As governor I will take a tough stand against misclassification of workers.  State government needs to consider this issue when it contracts with businesses and our labor department must take a tough stand when it comes to enforcement.

As a young mom, it was hard to find an employer that understood what working moms and dads need to succeed. I was lucky to go to work at the Vermont League of Cities and Towns that not only let me work part time, but I was allowed to bring my babies to work with me. Now, throughout Vermont, companies are changing their policies to make sure 21st century jobs include 21st century working conditions. Today’s work environments are increasingly more dynamic and that is a positive thing for productivity in our state. We know our employees are more productive and much more efficient when they are able to have flexible time to deal with a no-show babysitter or a visit to the pediatrician, or even to take a day on the slopes after a big snow. While I do not believe it is appropriate for government to mandate flexible work rules for private employers we do need to be sure we are enforcing existing laws like our Family and Medical Leave Act which guarantees parental leave and leave to take care of a sick family member.  

As governor I will not only be the chief marketing officer for Vermont products but I will also promote Vermont as a great place to live and work.  I have heard from some of our start-up to midsize technology companies that while great entry level employees are graduating from our colleges and universities,  more seasoned workers are hard to find. In fact, I spoke with one CEO that said she advertises on the California section of Monster.com because many job seekers do not think of Vermont as a technology hub. It is, and our economic development strategy should make sure technology jobs seekers are connected with innovative tech companies growing here everyday.

3. From day one my administration will ensure that our incentive programs focus first on Vermont businesses and that every one of those incentives will be measured for positive results. A cohesive and sound economic development plan needs to be created that coordinates federal, state, regional and local economic development efforts. Let’s agree on an economic development track and communicate with our businesses and new entrepreneurs so that every official from the Governor’s office to local selectboards and planning commissions understand creating jobs is our mission.

On the issue of taxation more generally, I am waiting with interest to see the results of Vermont Tax Structure Commission which will be presenting a structural analysis of the state’s tax system, and will be making recommendations for modernizing our current system.  As governor I will provide a long-term vision for the tax structure.  I believe in progressive taxes but also recognize that Vermont faces a unique challenge in that we are paying for the infrastructure of a state with the population of a small city.  Consequently, taxes like the gas tax make sense because they reach people who live beyond our borders but who are using our roads.

DOUG RACINE:

Vermont families are struggling, and I want every Vermonter to have the opportunity for a good-paying job with decent benefits. Job growth and retention will be the top priority of my administration. In this time of severe economic turmoil, it is essential for Vermont and Vermont leaders to focus on strengthening our business base to ensure job growth and creation. This can be accomplished, even in these difficult times, through strong leadership, wide participation and a focus on what is important for Vermonters and Vermont businesses.

Throughout this process I will focus on what Vermonters, including businesses both large and small have told me is critical to their success:

• Quality of Life in Vermont
• Quality of our State Infrastructure
• Quality of our Workforce

From there, I will focus on our strengths: the green economy, renewable, high tech, and value-added agriculture. My administration will look for ways to help new businesses start up, and small businesses be successful – from working to offer funding to small businesses to working with these businesses to create job training programs targeted to their needs.

As governor, I will be directly involved in every phase of this economic development strategy. Selecting the right Secretary of Commerce and Community Development will be a top priority. I will be very hands-on with both current and prospective employers ensuring that we do everything possible to retain the jobs we have and create new jobs. This direct, continual, hands-on involvement will reinforce that every job is important.

Vermont needs a unified, coordinated and comprehensive workforce education and training system that includes development and delivery of a plan for both Vermonters and Vermont employers. This can be accomplished within the overall current funding levels if we structure the system properly and assign responsibility appropriately. Our current efforts are fragmented and do not focus on identifying direct need and then delivering solutions. My administration’s efforts will be focused on asking key employers what they need and focusing efforts there, in order to make sure Vermonters are ready to work in the green economy, agriculture, manufacturing, health care, travel and tourism and construction.

A statewide, universal and easily accessible broadband system is essential for Vermont. This will be an immediate and top priority of my administration. Vermont must invest in this infrastructure. As a rural state, we cannot rely on the private sector to provide this service – it is just not profitable given our small population. Instead, we must undertake an effort akin to the rural electrification project and ensure that all Vermonters have access to broadband that is reliable and affordable.

We also need to upgrade our rail system. Many Vermont businesses would benefit if we invested in the needed upgrades to make sure our rail system can carry the 286,000 pound railcars that are the standard now. Logging, agriculture, and manufacturing all depend on rail, and it is an important part of our economic infrastructure. An added benefit of upgrading our rail system is that it will take pressure off of our roads and bridges by reducing the number of trucks needed to haul goods to and from the state.

Tax policies and economic incentives can help Vermont retain, expand and attract jobs.  As governor, I will start my administration by subjecting our existing policies to rigorous analyses to determine which are working well and which are not, and to see where Vermonters are getting the greatest return on their tax dollar investments.

PETER SHUMLIN:

1. As a small business owner who has been meeting a payroll since I was 23 years old, I know that small businesses are the backbone of Vermont’s economy.  As I’ve traveled the state I have heard from employers who want to grown, but don’t have the capital to invest in new growth.  I’ve heard from employers who want to grow, but don’t have access to a workforce with the skills needed to produce their product.  We need to work with these business owners to remove these obstacles, so they can hire more Vermonters, expand their businesses in creative and innovative ways, and contribute to building a new economy.

Recently, Speaker Smith and I hosted a jobs forum at the State House where we heard from employers directly about the challenges and opportunities they face as they do business in Vermont.  Using what we learned from the forum we will craft an economic development bill – a jobs bill – that will make better partners of Vermont’s state government, its employers, and its job trainers.  I’m optimistic that this process will result in expanded opportunities for all Vermonters.

2. Creating jobs will be a top priority of my administration and as I discussed above state government needs to work with and support our small business owners to help them expand their businesses.

But we must also be ready to take advantage of the opportunities that will come as we move from our addiction to fossil fuels to renewable technology.  We are going to see an economic expansion in this country that will make the industrial revolution and recent technology boom yesterday’s story.

The transition will affect everything that we do; how we move around, where our food is grown and produced, how our electricity is generated, how we build our houses and schools; indeed every facet of our lives. Vermont is already on the forefront of much of this.  Our energy expertise, our food systems knowledge, our educated workforce, our land based entrepreneurial ventures, our colleges and universities; we already have a national reputation for innovation and we are well positioned to achieve more.  The question is will we have a governor who has the vision, courage and imagination to seize this opportunity?  I will be that governor and I will work 24/7 to ensure that Vermont leads in this new economy.

3. Tax incentives are used to attract and retain businesses that create jobs. As I’ve said, job creation will be a top priority of my administration.  Currently, we have a governor who travels the country announcing that Vermont is a bad place to do business.  Well, I disagree and as governor I will be a cheerleader for our state and all it has to offer.  The small business owners who call Vermont home and the companies looking to relocate here want to grow their businesses in our state because of our superior quality of life.  Our clean environment, our low crime rate, the ability to hike and swim in the summer and ski in the winter and our welcoming spirit are just a few of the many reasons people desire to live to here.  When we talk about job creation and retention our best selling point is Vermont’s quality of life.