After the great flood of 1927, the Federal Government offered to send money to Vermont to help rebuild the infrastructure. Vermont said, “No thanks,” and went it alone. Now we have to replace many of the bridges that were built 80 years ago.

In 1991*, Vermont faced a huge budget deficit. Republican Governor Richard Snelling went to House Speaker Ralph Wright and proposed removing partisan bickering in finding a solution. The result was painful spending cuts and temporary increases in the income tax. No one liked the plan, but it passed, and more importantly, it worked.

This year, Lamoille Senator Susan Bartlett came forward with a plan for the Federal Government drop its requirement that states pay a percentage of transportation projects. This would allow cash-strapped states to immediately put people to work on repairing roads and bridges. The money is budgeted; the projects are ready to be done. It is an elegant solution.

Treasurer Jeb Spaulding came forward with a plan to use a small increase in gasoline taxes to leverage a bond issue to improve our infrastructure, again putting people to work and doing much-needed repairs. Another imaginative solution that bears discussion; if we cannot take advantage of Vermont’s stellar bond rating for sensible projects that will stimulate our economy in tough times, what is the point of having it?

Democrats Bartlett and Spaulding have come forward with plans that will lower unemployment in Vermont, improve our quality of life and make the state more attractive to business. They may not be the right solutions but they bear discussion. The marketplace is hungry for work, so Vermont’s cost of building projects will never be cheaper.

Governor Jim Douglas takes a traditional approach: no tax increases and cut spending. He appears happy to make it easier to spend Federal money, but he is opposed to any Vermont solution that calls for sacrifice from anyone but our poorest citizens. He proposes old solutions and rhetoric in the face of unprecedented challenges.

We rebuilt our bridges during the last great depression without help. We balanced our budget and provided services in the 1980s by asking all Vermonters to pitch in. It is time for us to rise to the challenge again.

If we are to be successful, we will need more fresh thinking and less partisan platitudes. Cooperation between political parties will be necessary and an open mind in all corners essential in the challenges ahead. Bartlett and Spaulding should be applauded for beginning the dialog.

Governor Douglas, won’t you join the conversation?

*CORRECTION: Corrected year to 1991. Was “1981” as originally posted.

Great, now we have to bail out the auto industry. Makes sense, after all, over 2.3 million jobs are tied to these global behemoths and we can’t afford the economic impact of putting these people out of work. I support helping them, but on terms that are ecologically sound.

Even their competitors want to see them stay in business. The parts suppliers would go out of business without the Big Three, hampering or even crippling the ability of Toyota, Honda and others to get the parts they need to build their cars.

It is not that I am a Motor City gear head. Sure, I was raised in Detroit, but I’ve driven VWs since selling my ’67 Dodge Dart GT. OK, full disclosure, I do own a ’93 Chevy Suburban that I adore. I don’t drive it much, but when I need a truck, or to move a group of eight, it is indispensable.

The reason I support bailing out the US auto industry is because I see an opportunity for some old-fashioned American social engineering using tax dollars.

The only reason GM, Ford and Chrysler haven’t gone belly up like fish full of dioxin on a hot, summer day is because of sales in emerging markets. Auto sales in Brazil, Russia, India, and China are increasing at a rapid rate. The Big Three are there with their smaller, more fuel efficient European models as well as with their selection of gas-guzzlers.

I haven’t researched the emissions controls and minimum fuel economy standards in these countries, but I’m willing to bet that they are not as stringent as they are here. The ecologist in me reels at the thought of contributing to the destruction of the planet by supporting stupid companies who build cars and trucks that will pour noxious gasses into the atmosphere.

These are the same people who successfully prevented the federal government from increasing fuel and emission standards for 30 years. Back when California was a leader in progressive thought (what happened there?) it was up to the states to increase standards. Vermont had to go to court to defend the right to dictate more stringent standards than the Feds.

It’s comforting that Republicans are running true to form. They want to redirect $25 Billion the government put up to help the Big Three do what they should have done beginning in the 70s – build energy efficient vehicles. I’m glad we can still count on them to come up with the worst possible solution.

This brings me to my proposal. Bail out the companies with strings attached that force them to sell a higher percentage of fuel-efficient vehicles. Make them build them even for countries that don’t demand fuel efficiency and emission controls.

Let’s incorporate Maryland Democrat Sen. Barbara Mikulski’s proposal to give tax breaks for those buying cars between now and the end of next year. I’ll take it one step further and allow those tax breaks only on vehicles that meet minimum standards.

We could stimulate sales by subsidizing low-income people to dump the Junkers they are forced by economic circumstances to drive in favor of efficient, dependable low maintenance vehicles.

Money could be put towards re-tooling plants that build SUVs to build energy efficient busses. Jobs will be created and more people would have money to spend on the wasteful baubles so dear to Americans because they wouldn’t have to spend it on wasteful transportation.

I don’t give a fig about executive bonuses. Let them have every incentive to be successful at creating 21st century companies that will be of value to society. They have proven they don’t have the foresight to do it. If they did, they would look more like Toyota, which sells everything from the popular hybrid Prius to gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs.

The financial woes of the American auto industry are an opportunity to create an auto industry that does the right thing. Financial gain for their shareholders is the only motivation they can legally use under the capitalist rules of our society. We should take the opportunity to use our leverage.  

Some smart fellas figured out that they could stick a bunch of home mortgages in a box and sell unregulated securities based on them. Big financial institutions backed them so investors, including other big institutions, bought them. The institutions who created the securities got to say how much they were worth and no one checked.

No one cared. It was cash now for future returns on the interest generated by the mortgages. The securities went up and down in value like stocks. It was another fat apple pie and everyone wanted a piece.

They got so popular that investors wanted more, so mortgages became easier to get. Hell, a fellow could get a mortgage on a third house without even proving he had the income to pay for it. Lower income people could buy a piece of the American Dream. Low down payment, low interest, no documentation. Even drug gangs in the inner city could buy burned out shells to launder money. More houses were built, some folks got bigger houses, we scurried like ants building and consuming without regard for fiscal responsibility.

Wasn’t it great?

Everybody was happy, especially the Masters of the Universe. Many of the loans had adjustable interest rates. There was no risk that the owners of the mortgages could lose. If the interest rate went up, so would the interest on the mortgage.

Money was everywhere. Want an SUV? No problem. Need a short-term loan to make payroll? Done. Pay CEOs millions of dollars a year? It’s not fair, but who cares?

Wasn’t it great?

Everything worked great until the gas went out of the balloon. Wages did not keep up with inflation. The limit was reached on people who could trade up. The increased costs of surviving in America buried the dream in a mountain of IOUs. Bankruptcy laws were tightened, real estate values fell and people started losing their homes. The companies heavily invested in Mortgage-based Derivatives could not pay the massive debt they borrowed.

The economic pyramid scheme began to fall in like a house of cards. No one knew what the Derivatives were worth. Companies fell. Other firms consumed bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch. AIG was too big to fail and was rescued by taxpayers. Smaller firms were handed over by the Treasury to other firms with the backing of taxpayer money.

Wasn’t it great?

The remaining financial firms are bigger than AIG. They are all afraid to lend money to each other, so the trickle down has dried up. Be afraid, America, the money you are accustomed to using is not available. No new car, no bridge loan to meet payroll, no money to invest in your ideas and plans for a better life.

You are now asked to mortgage the financial future of your children so the banks will have so much money to use that they will trust each other again. That’s called building confidence in the financial system. Don’t worry; you’ll get some or all of it back. Heck, you might even make money. Sometime.

Isn’t that great?

You must do this or all will be lost. Our President, who we all trust for his good judgment from his faultless reasons for invading a sovereign nation, says it will be a catastrophe if we don’t pony up $700 billion dollars right now. Don’t worry; we have a three-page plan that gives the Secretary of the Treasury unfettered control to do what’s right. Quick, before the market crashes and we have another Great Depression.

Our leaders in Congress fixed that all right, brokering a deal over the weekend to create a 100-page bill that became available to review Sunday night and a vote was held Monday morning. Damn that Pelosi for blaming the Administration for allowing this mess to happen. The bill failed and the market crashed 777 points. It came back almost 500 points the next day.

Wasn’t that great?

I’m no economist, but I can see that there is blood on the floor that needs to be cleaned up and that money moving around the world, market speculation and debt are necessary for our modern world to function.

I can also see that there are no morals in the financial system. Companies are legally bound to bring the maximum return for their shareholders. It used to be that ethics and basic human decency prevailed, but now we have to legislate common sense. I still wonder where the Security ands Exchange Commission has been all these years.

I listen incessantly to reporting on the aptly named Wall Street Bailout discussion and can’t get past wondering if there isn’t a better, cheaper way.

There are 51 million mortgages in America and some 3 percent are in danger of foreclosure or already there. What if we used the might of the taxpayer to guarantee those troubled mortgages? Wouldn’t that insure that the mortgages the derivatives are based on are sound? Wouldn’t that help keep families in their homes? Wouldn’t that help stimulate the economy?

Wouldn’t that be great?

If we are going to use government to invade the holy sanctity of the capitalist system, we should bail out the taxpayer.  

I believe that making high-speed Internet access available to everyone in Vermont is good for education, medicine, business and politics. I trusted friend is a member of the Internet for ALL, NOW! Committee and has organized a way for you to easily get information on the subject and sign a petition in support of the proposal that passed the House last week and is now in the hands of the Senate.
Their letter is below the fold. Please take a look at the information and if you find it worthy, send it on to others you think may be interested. There will be a press conference on the issue in the Statehouse Thursday at 2 p.m.

Dear Fellow Vermonters,

Vermont is a special place – but it is often difficult to make a cell call or get high-speed Internet access here.

This situation is not acceptable. Our businesses need to be able to work online or by cell phone. Our kids need to be educated for the e-future. Our first responders need modern communications. (Rutland Herald agrees: http://www.rutlandhe…)

Private industry has already provided coverage to the easy places. It’s the States responsibility to help industry provide coverage to the rest of us… and soon.

Governor Douglas, in his 2007 Inaugural Speech, called for affordable high-speed Internet access and cell phone coverage for ALL Vermonters by 2010. House Bill 248 was introduced to implement this proposal. Its passage will make Vermont the first e-state and bring us new environmentally-friendly people-power business. The bill establishes a Telecommunications Authority and authorizes the State to sell revenue bonds to finance the construction of the needed infrastructure like wireless towers and fiber optics. Treasurer Jeb Spaulding says that this is a good and responsible way to achieve the State’s goal. The bill has passed the House with an overwhelming majority. It is now before the Senate. More… http://www.e-state-v…

The bill, including the necessary regulatory changes for speedy environmentally responsible construction and bonding authority, must pass this year to start work in time to get us all full access by 2010.

Please join us in telling legislators that we want a meaningful bill passed this year. Sign the e-petition (http://www.e-state-v…) and print out the paper petition (http://www.e-state-v…) for friends who do not yet have good Internet access. Get your un-connected neighbors and co-workers to sign before May 20th and mail or fax it to the address at the bottom of the petition. Your connected friends can sign the e-petition. Forward this email to them today.

We only have a little over a month to let legislators know how important full Internet and cellular access is to Vermont. We need Internet for ALL, NOW!

The Internet for ALL, NOW! Committee
535 Stone Cutters Way
Montpelier, VT  05602
info@e-state-vermont.com

http://www.e-state-v…

( – promoted by JDRyan)

Jeb Spaulding continues to use the power of the purse to advance the best interests of Vermont. First he saves millions by combining the management of the state’s three major investment portfolios, then he sensibly stops investment in companies contributing to the holocaust in Darfur and now he has found a way for Vermonters with money to invest to keep it in Vermont.
All while maintaining the return on investment for the funds.
The man is quietly using the office of the Treasurer to advance a pragmatic approach to advancing progressive causes while maintaining a conservative and sustainable financial base.
Am I the only one who thinks he is the best choice to be governor?

Check out his latest press release below the fold.

Contact:  Jeb Spaulding, State Treasurer, 802-828-1452

Montpelier – Vermont State Treasurer Jeb Spaulding is spreading the word that investors interested in buying State of Vermont tax-free bonds should contact their local broker right away.

The State of Vermont will be issuing $14.5 million in “Citizen” and “Citizen Environmental” Bonds on Wednesday, March 7, and they will available for purchase from local brokers throughout the state.  Spaulding advised that any interested residents should contact a broker without delay, because availability of the bonds may be limited.  He also cautioned that purchasing tax-free bonds is not an appropriate choice for all investors.

“Folks who may need their money before the bonds mature or who are in lower tax brackets may be better off investing elsewhere,” Spaulding explained.

“Citizen Bonds have been popular investments for Vermonters because they are free from state and federal taxes, they are available in smaller denominations than usual, and they are an investment in Vermont.  This year we have also broken out $5 million for Citizen Environmental Bonds which will be used to support efforts such as the Clean and Clear Initiative to clean up Lake Champlain’s waters,” Spaulding explained.

Vermont Citizen Bonds are reserved for Vermont residents and are available in denominations as low as $1,000.  Interest on the bonds will be paid semi-annually and the principal will be paid on the date of maturity. This year’s Citizen Bonds will mature on July 15 in the years 2007-2016.

To purchase Citizen Bonds and for more information, Vermonters should contact brokers such as A.G. Edwards, Citigroup, Edward Jones, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, UBS, and Wachovia Securities.

(We’ll have more on Roper soon, but in the meantime I’m glad someone brought this front and center. In a nutshell, Roper is the hard right idealogue director of Vermont’s branch of former GOP US House Majority Leader Dick Armey’s Freedom Works organization. As John points out below, Roper is a regular on WDEV’s True North program – a program that wallows regularly in many unfortunate extremes, including outright anti-gay bigotry. It’s discouraging from the perspective that we’d like to move beyond such crap in Vermont, but on the other hand, having a self-parodying reactionary at the helm of the GOP will be helpful come election time… – promoted by odum)

If you want to learn about Roper’s opinions, check him out Thursdays from 11-noon on WDEV.

State GOP picks education activist as chairman

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — The state Republican Party has chosen education activist Robert Roper as its new chairman.

Roper, of Stowe, said he used a forum before the Republican State Committee earlier this month to rally the Republican Party, praising the governor’s call for a cap on general fund spending, and Republican lawmakers’ efforts to repeal the statewide property tax that pays for education, pass a property taxpayer’s bill of rights and bring Jessica’s Law, which would restrict where paroled sex offenders could live, to the state.

“There’s a lot of great stuff going on in the Statehouse and coming out of the governor’s office,” Roper said Saturday.

Roper, who competed against former state Rep. Alan Parent of St. Albans for the post, replaces former Chairman James Barnett, who resigned last month to join the budding presidential campaign of Arizona Sen. John McCain. Barnett held the post as a full-time job and fulfilled many of the responsibilities of the executive director.

Roper said he envisioned making both the chairman and executive director full-time jobs. An executive director has not yet been named.

Roper has served as Vermont director of Freedom Works, a national group dedicated to lower taxes and smaller government. He also helped run Republican Jack McMullen’s unsuccessful U.S. Senate campaign against Democrat Patrick Leahy in 2004.

( – promoted by odum)

Property taxes, K-12 education spending, health care costs, transportation spending, higher education grants, lake pollution, disappearing family farms … all these problems face Vermont as front-burner issues that demand attention.
The Democratic Senate Caucus elected returning State Senator Pete Shumlin as the next President Pro Tem of the Senate. The Democrats hold 23 of 30 Senate seats, so his election will be a formality when the Senate reconvenes in January.
Shumlin’s first announcement was that in his opinion, the most pressing issue facing our state is … Global Warming.
Is this guy nuts? Is he out of touch with the needs of Vermonters?
Not by a long shot.

Shumlin realizes that slowing the advance of Global Warming is a lot like stopping a freighter or landing a jet – you have to plan far ahead to get the desired result when you arrive.
Shumlin readily admits that there will be discussion of the bread and butter issues facing the state. Property taxes will be front and center, along with the attendant cost of education. All the usual causes will be looking for more money to spend on their valid and pressing issues. It is a given, much like the sunrise.
What he said loud and clear is that if Vermont does not lead on the issue of Global Warming, much of what we hold dear – skiing, sugaring and foliage will disappear in a haze of warm wet winters and hot dry summers punctuated by torrential rain.
He has a point. Most of Vermont’s pollution does not come from industrial sources that are easy to address. Smokestacks are easy to police and it is relatively easy to monitor them and reduce emissions. We don’t have many.
Over 60 percent of our electricity comes from Hydro-Quebec and Vermont Yankee and does not contribute to Global Warming, yet the contracts come due in less than ten years and we don’t have a plan to replace them.
VELCO is making it easier to import power to Vermont, power that many times is generated by coal and gas plants – major contributors to the problem. There is a 40 mW gas plant proposed for Derby, a 10 mW “peak” plant on the way to approval for Swanton. Vermont is on the way to increasing its contribution to the problem in the name of short-term economic savings.
Our biggest contribution to the problem is the increasing use of the automobile. If this small, rural state can find a way to decrease exhaust pipe gasses, then there will be a model for rural and urban areas to emulate.
If Shumlin can focus the conversation now on how Vermont contributes to Global Warming, we will have a chance to do something about it before Vermont becomes a semi-tropical paradise of ticks, mosquitoes and a year-round growing season.
Some would argue that our social climate is as threatened as the atmospheric climate – a theory we didn’t ascribe to until we saw the movie “Borat.”
Crowds have thronged to see this movie, touted as one of the funniest, most innovative comedies in years.
The plot is a faux-documentary of a Kazakhstani TV talking head named Borat who is sent to New York City to make a documentary about the United States to help Kazakhstan improve as a country. The movie is revolves around his backward understanding of human relations and the racism he encounters as he journeys across the country.
“Borat” is a racist film that vilifies Jews, making it funny to hate them. Is this desensitizing any different than Germany 70 years ago? At what point in America’s history did the repeated denigration of a race of people become funny? There is a reason that blackface comedy is no longer funny. We thought it was in poor taste, but perhaps we are mistaken. Perhaps it is has merely become passé.
“Borat” is also in extremely poor taste not with sexual innuendo, but with blatant, graphic scenes that had us cringing in our seats. Incest, pornography, graphic sex – the only thing missing was bestiality. The relentless sex jokes were not troubling – just gross.
It is a sad indication of morality that a movie so over the top is popular. We may be called prudes for objecting to a movie that allegedly makes fun of bigotry through exaggeration, but if the success of “Borat” is an indication of our social climate, our atmosphere is truly poisoned.

( – promoted by odum)

Stewart Ledbetter will be the host of Vermont Public Television’s weekly
news program, “Vermont This Week,” starting next year.  A regular panelist
on the show for many years, he will assume the host chair with the Jan. 5
program.

Ledbetter has more than 23 years’ experience covering Vermont news, 22 of
them at WPTZ NewsChannel 5.  He has been a news anchor, news director and
is now the senior political reporter for WPTZ.  He will continue in that
position. 
Chris Graff has hosted the program since 1992, beginning when the
program’s founder, Jack Barry, retired.  Graff is leaving at the end of
December to become vice president of communications for the
Montpelier-based National Life Group.

“Vermont This Week is special, and it’s an honor to follow Chris as host
of VPT’s signature public affairs program,” Ledbetter said. “It is a
unique window into our quirky politics and bedrock institutions, seen
through the eyes of some of Vermont’s best journalists.  I’m very happy to
continue the tradition into a second quarter-century of the program.”

Since 1982, “Vermont This Week” has brought journalists together in a
roundtable format to provide analysis of state news.  Now in its 25th
year, the program is seen Fridays at 7:30 p.m. and Sundays at 11:30 a.m.
Recently, it became available as a podcast.

Joe Merone, executive producer of the program, said, “When Jack Barry
started `Vermont This Week,’ he wanted it to be a forum where journalists
could explain not just what happened but why.  The program Jack and Chris
built gives viewers information that helps them participate in the civic
life of our state.  We strive every week to produce a show that would make
Jack proud.”

( – promoted by odum)

There are not a lot of positive things we can say about Wal-mart. The giant retailer is known for building huge stores that sell everything from groceries to garden supplies, from tools to electronics, all under one roof and at low prices. They have now extended their low prices to a select number of generic drugs that insurance companies and the uninsured alike can purchase for just $4 for a 30-day supply.

Those low prices to the consumer come at a cost. Wal-mart buys in such huge quantities that they can pressure suppliers to sell at lower prices. The suppliers in turn pressure manufacturers, who some how must find a way to make products cheaper.
The result is lower wages. Wal-mart offers health insurance to full-time employees yet has a disproportionately high number of part time employees. Their quest for lower wholesale prices force manufacturers to keep wages down and even build factories overseas to meet Wal-mart’s demands.
Their model is so successful that a suburban mega-store has been the death knell for many downtown-shopping areas. Small, traditional retailers find it impossible to compete on price. While some are able to sell service, personality and/or unique items, the demise of average shops next door decrease the amount of foot traffic and turn a thriving collection of shops into a wasteland of empty buildings.
The company is a paragon of capitalism – there is little humanity in their calculations save for the occasional gesture that plays well in the press. We as a nation are grateful for these gestures.
Their mobilization of supplies to relieve the suffering of Hurricane Katrina refugees is a good illustration. They responded with critical supplies much faster than our government agencies; bringing food, water and medical supplies quickly to thousands of suddenly homeless people.
Their $4 prescription program is another necessary, much less altruistic gesture that will help the disadvantaged, the uninsured and the sick.
Wal-Mart last month announced that some company pharmacies would sell 30-day prescriptions of certain generic medications for $4 in 65 Wal-Mart, Sam’s Club and Neighborhood Market pharmacies around Tampa, Fla., with plans to expand statewide in early 2007. They held open the possibility of expanding to other states in the future.
The program must have had a ring of marketing genius because Wal-mart announced Oct. 19 they would expand the generic prescription drug discount program to 14 additional states, including Vermont.
Like the owners of other small businesses crushed by the power of Wal-mart, Vermont pharmacists are apoplectic over the announcement. They can see the writing on the wall, yet another huge competitor is going to cut into their share of customers.
Analysts said the main benefit for Wal-Mart is in drawing more shoppers into its stores who may come for prescriptions and then stay to buy in other departments, a public relations stunt meant to drive foot traffic.
Most people will find their prescriptions do not fall under the $4 plan because only 1 percent of the drugs Wal-mart sells are covered.
That’s not Wal-mart’s fault. When a prescription sells for $250 for a thirty-day supply the pharmacists aren’t going out to buy Rolexes and luxury cars. The pharmaceutical companies are collecting the lion’s share of the money, leaving pharmacies to survive on slim (and shrinking) profit margins.
This again is the capitalist system at work. Pharmaceutical companies are beholden only to their shareholders by law and they must turn a profit to satisfy those investors, in addition to recovering their costs for drug development and an increasing propensity of slick advertising.
All of this supports the fact that Wal-mart is doing exactly as they should in our profit-derived, expansionist society – increasing their market share by taking advantage of the free press that comes from making news.
The fact that they stumbled on to a plan that helps both insurance companies and the uninsured by lowering the cost of some drugs is beside the point.
Our question is why, at a time of increasing health care costs that inflate taxes and allegedly burden business beyond the ability to compete, is the federal government prohibited from negotiating a lower price for these same drugs for veterans and people on Medicare and Medicaid?
For as long as our long memories can recall, people who rail against big government have cried that if only our government were run like a business, then the waste would whither away.
A result of the prescription drug plan passed last year is that we, the people, are prohibited from being like Wal-mart. Instead, we have to wait until Wal-mart finds it in their best interest to throw us a crumb.
At least they have demonstrated what is possible in negotiating  a quantity price for generic drugs.

( – promoted by odum)

The Republicans in charge of our federal government have spent the past six years in their own world. The result has been a twisting of reality that has cost lives and caused suffering in this country and around the world. It is time to demand a change not only in the culture of our federal government, but a change in our spending priorities.

Our President has taken to lying to us. In a recent series of campaign stops, he accused Democrats of not wanting to intercept the conversations of terrorists and accused them of wanting to wait until we are attacked to deal with terrorists.
You would think that Democrats are worse than terrorists.
Perhaps to him, they are.
He is the leader of the party also in charge of the House and Senate. Under their combined leadership the world has become more unstable and its people more fearful.
These leaders have taken a budget surplus and turned it into a record deficit. They have turned the overwhelming support of the world in the aftermath of 9/11 into an almost global derision of our beliefs and policies.
These are the same people who continue to mismanage the war in Iraq.
The same people who deny global warming exists and refuse to increase auto mileage standards.
The same people who promote a system of lobbyists who draft legislation and pay for our bloated election system.
The same people who served huge tax breaks to the wealthiest among us in the face of abject poverty and widening disparities in income
The same people who brought us the absurdity of Bill Clinton’s impeachment and the fight to “save” Terri Schiavo.
The same people who deliver government resources to special interests in the form of no-bid contracts and earmarks to special interest groups.
The same people who have created a culture that supports people like disgraced Rep. Mark Foley, who resigned amid a flurry of emails where he was soliciting Congressional pages.
It is time for a change.
We need to create a sensible government by demanding a higher standard from our elected officials. Ending the lying and criminal behavior is obvious. We have to go farther to address our budget priorities and insist politicians keep their hands out of the cookie jar, even if we have to give up our own pet projects in the bargain.
It is hard to argue against a bridge in Alaska when we happily accept federal dollars for a recreation path.
Everyone from business leaders to government officials to homeowners thinks taxes are too high. We struggle with choosing between several under-funded programs while the least fortunate among us do without.
What we need is lower taxes and more money for social programs.
A group of legislators introduced a bill in the U.S. House in March of 2006 called the Common Sense Budget Act of 2006. The program spearheaded by Business Leaders for Sensible Priorities calls for eliminating $60 billion in defense spending.
It is a drop in the bucket. Half of our annual discretionary spending, $440 billion, goes to the Pentagon, much of it for out-dated, cold war programs that do little more than prop up an incumbent.
That doesn’t include the billions we spend in Iraq and Afghanistan.
By comparison, the federal government spends $40 billion dollars on K to 12 education, $1 billion on world hunger and $50 billion on children’s health care. We spend $2.5 billion on energy independence and renewables. (See www.sensiblepriorities.org)
Imagine if $60 billion a year in useless military spending was used for health care, combating global warming and improving education. The influx in local spending would lower taxes while improving lives. It would stimulate the economy while solving a host of social problems.
A Democratic leadership may remove the worst of the Republican guard from power and given enough time may undo some of the worst that has been committed in the last six years. However, most Democrats are not talking about reordering our spending priorities.
Most of them have not signed on to the Common Sense Budget Act. Not Sen. Leahy, not Jim Jeffords, not Bernie Sanders and certainly not any Republican candidate.
We know of only one Vermont politician who understands that reducing unnecessary Pentagon spending could make all the difference in the world.
Peter Welch.
Welch has spent decades serving Vermont and understands the issues. He supports universal access to health care, actively reducing global warming, improving education and how we fund it and a sense of fiscal responsibility.
Vermont would be well served by electing him serve in Washington.