I just received a copy of this pdf file which documents some changes with respect to Vermont’s Child Care Subsidy program.

I know a lot of you aren’t familiar with the ins and outs of the Vermont Child Care Subsidy program, so I’ll explain the basics:

When a family is found eligible for support in paying for child care, there is a bit of a complex formula that will determine exactly what dollar amount of coverage is going to be paid by the state.  This may or may not cover the actual cost of care, even if the subsidy rate is determined at 100% (it’s 100% of state rates, not what the provider charges, so if the state rate is $100/week for a given category of care and the provider’s is $125, the payment is 100% of state rates, even if that only comes out to 80% of the provider’s rate).

Not everyone can pay that amount over and above (the “copay”) and there are a lot of reasons that parents will request variances for the state to cover those extra costs, some of which are granted, some of which aren’t.

In many cases, the parent needs child care in order to seek employment or start a new job.  Parents who can’t find care may have to curtail their work search or work shorter hours in order to provide care of their own.  Even a short-term (3-4 week) variance to cover a single mom who’s just getting back into the work force can make a huge difference.

What’s worse is that a lot of child care providers who are registered home providers (see a prior piece I wrote for details on the different types of providers) will just let those co-pays go when the parents can’t find variances, because they know that the families can’t afford it, so they suck it up and lose the extra income themselves.

This has the effect of encouraging providers to not be interested in taking kids who receive subsidy because they can make more money off of the ones who don’t.  It’s not that they want to do this, as much as that they are often living hand to mouth themselves and need to cover their own expenses for care as well as take care of their own families as well.  Being a child care provider is a pretty difficult life as it is, and we don’t need to make things worse for them.

One more note: the pdf I’ve linked here has a couple phone numbers and contact people whom you can call with questions.  Please don’t call them to complain about this.  This isn’t a decision that was made by them, and they can’t control it.  If you want to change this, talk to your legislators and ask them if it’s a better allocation of our tax dollars to increase the subsidy budget or to make sure that Governor Douglas has a high-paid replacement for Jason Gibbs.

We’ve got sources telling us that Larson’s about to drop out.  Looks as though it’s down to just one candidate, Shap Smith.  Will update more when we get more details.

Okay, first update is Mark Larson’s e-mail:

Good morning,

Later this morning, I will be announcing that I am withdrawing from the Speakers race and supporting Shap as our next Speaker.  Before doing that, I wanted to say thank you for supporting me in this campaign.

I entered this race because I know what we can accomplish as a state. Vermont has always been on the forefront of change and I believe we are at a crossroads that challenges us to lead once again.

As you know, elections are filled with ups and downs.  What has sustained me during this race was the support of people like you who share my sense that we need to stand up for our values and stand with our neighbors who need our leadership now.  I am immensely grateful that you were willing to put your faith in me.

Thank you.

I look forward to seeing you tomorrow.

Mark

Also, per a fellow GMD front-pager:

Floyd Nease seems to have the Majority Leader position wrapped up, and its likely he may be the only candidate by tomorrow.

Another update: Mark Larson e-mailed me with a longer version of his e-mail that I’ll post after the fold.

And another update. Rep. Nease posts in the comments below: “This morning I received a call from Rep. Ancel in which she said she is withdrawing from the race prior to caucus tomorrow.”  -odum

The first e-mail was the one he sent to his supporters.  This is the one he sent to the entire caucus:

Dear friends,

For the past several weeks, I have had the pleasure of talking with members of our caucus about the challenges we face as a state.  We have talked about how we as Democrats can be the leaders that help our state not merely survive difficult economic times, but build a stronger future for our communities.

To address our economic and political challenges, I believe that we need to lay out a clear vision for our state, demonstrate our support for working families more consistently and take advantage of the talented leaders within our caucus.   Our agenda must respond to the challenges families and communities are facing and show that we can deliver results for the diverse interests represented in our caucus.

As we prepare for our work ahead, our most immediate task is the election of a leadership team that can unite us as a caucus and empower us to produce the work we are capable of.  I have stated from the start the importance of a unified caucus.  Our ability to be the responsible leaders that our state desperately needs is compromised if we break into factions unable to work together.  

With this in mind, I am writing today to let you know that I am ending my campaign to become Speaker and urge all caucus members to work with me to elect Shap Smith the next Speaker of the House.  My friend Shap has demonstrated that he is ready and able to be an excellent Speaker. He is prepared to help us define our priorities, defend our values and set a clear path to finding real solutions for our state.   He is the leader to help us accomplish the work that Vermont depends on us to get done.

I also ask that you join me in electing Floyd Nease as Majority Leader, Lucy Leriche as Assistant Majority Leader, and Kathy Pellett as Caucus Clerk.  Together, these outstanding people will form a great leadership team, one that we can be proud of.   It is time for us to unite in support of them.

When I began my campaign for Speaker, I stated that I was excited to stand shoulder to shoulder with our caucus – a strong mix of experienced members and talented newcomers, prepared to take action on the critical issues facing our state.  Today more that ever, I remain excited to be a part of our caucus.  With the dawning of a new day in the White House, we stand ready to rise to the challenges faced by our state and nation.  In such times, Vermont has always proven that we are leaders.  Our state and nation look to us once again to do just this.

I look forward to seeing you tomorrow and to working together in the upcoming session.

Sincerely,

Mark Larson

Sometimes I read something, and say, I just can’t believe we got this guy elected.  How awesome is that?

Be sure to read the whole thing, (I got it over at Daily Kos), but I’ll just quote a little from the press pool report from this afternoon:

The First Family-to-be were positioned at the start of the food line; their job was to hand out white plastic bags filled with fresh chicken. Recipients then moved down the line to receive bags of potatoes, apples, loaves of bread and large boxes of staples including macaroni and cheese, tomato sauce, peanut butter, canned corn, oatmeal, Miracle Whip, mixed fruit and other items.

Obama called out: “We’re ready, let’s go, bring ’em on in,” and the distribution began.

Clearly, those lining up for food hadn’t been told they had an importangt guest helping out. this day. Many of them lit up; some shrieked with delight and hugged one or more of the Obamas. One elderly woman bowed; all seemed very appreciative. One and all were greeted with handshakes, hugs, and hearty “Happy Thanksgivings.”

The daughters behaved like troopers for a half hour or so before the cold caught up with them, and they retired for a few minutes to warm up.

One sixty-something neighborhood resident named Daryel Namdan was asked how it felt to have Obama there. “It makes me feel very special,” he said, before choking up.

[…]

After shaking hands with the food bank volunteers, he [Obama] came over to the pool and had this to say:

“The number of people who are getting food this year is up 33%. It gives a sense times are tough – and I think that on Thanksgiving it’s importat [sic] for us tpo [sic] remember there’s a need for support.

“These folks were already oftentimes having a tough time, and it gets tougher now.” He encouraged all Americans of means to help out however they could. “This is part of what Thanksgiving should be all about,” he said.

Asked why he’d brought his daughters along, he replied: “I want them to learn the importance of how fortunate they are and to make sure they’re giving back.”

I mean, think about it.  Can you even imagine any of our Republican presidents (or the nominees) from the last two decades doing this?

Wow.

I’m going to do something here I don’t usually care to do, which is simplify a complex issue into two basic camps.  Those camps are “hold his feet to the fire” and “relax and let him do what works for him.”

For short, I’ll all those two camps “firebugs” and “hibernators.”  If this insults either or both camps, I’m okay with that.

So let me say right now I am of both camps.  Really.  I’m not trying to play nice with everybody.  I’m just feeling both things.  I cried at Obama’s acceptance speech, but whenever he mentions “clean coal” I cringe or shout obscenities at the TV (literally; it’s happened more than once that I’ve shouted something out loud).  

Some of his appointees thrill me.  Others don’t.  I’m okay with that.  I’ve said before that I’d rather have competent people who don’t share my ideology than incompetent people who do.  A big take home from the Bush “administration” should be that you pick good people to do the necessary work of government, even if their politics don’t share yours.

I’ll take one specific example: David Iglesias was a Republican appointee to the Justice Department whom Gonzales fired because he refused to play ball and use his office for political retribution.  I don’t care that he’s a Republican.  Obama should offer him a good position in the AG’s office because he clearly cares more about justice than he does about politics.  

But that’s beside the point.  I want to talk about the anger I’m seeing from both camps: people who feel like they’re being told to STFU and not criticize Obama or Democrats, and people who feel as though those who are criticizing Obama or Democrats are betraying the party.

But before I get to that, I will mention something with a little bit of perspective on the history of this.

In ’92, I worked on the Clinton campaign.  When he won I was thrilled.  A lot of us were.  I didn’t have high expectations of Clinton, but I knew he was better than Bush.  I had also been part of ACT/UP, which was an important AIDS activist group which actively challenged the Bush administration during his time in office.

A lot of activism died when Clinton took office.  ACT/UP lost focus.  Anti war groups weren’t sure what to do with themselves.

Even though Clinton would have made a much better President than Bush, I greatly regretted the failure of activists to keep Clinton’s feet to the fire.  I understand the need to think that things are getting better, and the need to relax after 12 years of pro-war presidents.

But, as activists, I think we failed during the Clinton years. We didn’t do our jobs.  We didn’t protest when Clinton engaged in inappropriate overseas military action.  We didn’t challenge him when he put forth “anti-terrorism” legislation which invaded privacy.

Don’t get me wrong.  I am extremely happy that Obama is president.  But I can be extremely happy about it and still be angry about his FISA vote.  I can be looking forward to his inauguration while questioning whether or not his inner circle will include progressive voices.  I can think that he’s our best hope out of this economic mess while still wondering if Larry Summers is the best person to be at his side during this.  

So I guess what I want to say is that I don’t think we should STFU, nor do I think we should be attacking Obama for everything he does that doesn’t perfectly suit a progressive agenda.  But we do need to pressure him and find ways to promote our own agendas without being so far over the top that we find our way into irrelevancy.

And as I write this, I admit that there’s a part of me which is just tired.  I feel like I’ve been fighting these battles for decades now and I don’t know how many more I want to be fighting.  So there’s a real and honest temptation to say “you know, I can sit this one out and not complain when I hear references to clean coal.”  

But I know what that voice is; it’s just the part of me that wants a fairy tale ending.  It’s not honest.  It’s not real.

So yeah, I’m in both camps, and I understand both camps.  But we need one another to work this through, and we need to accept that criticism is not an attack, that pushing our agendas is part of how politics works, and that this was a really long election and it took a lot out of all of us, and it’s okay to just say “I need a break” and let things go for a little.

So that’s my thought on the topic.

What’s yours?

Per today’s Rutland Herald:

The private information of thousands of state employees is potentially at risk in a computer hacking and extortion incident.

The target was Express Scripts Inc., which is the pharmacy benefit company for Vermont state workers, as well as the employees of many institutions and companies around the country. The company was threatened by still unidentified people in October that private information of members of its clients’ health plans would be released if demands were not met.

[…]

“What we do know is that the criminal or criminals in this situation … in early October sent Express Scripts a letter demanding money in exchange for their not publicly releasing the names and personal information of millions of patients,” said Steve Littlejohn, vice president of public affairs for the company.

Some questions:

1. Why are just discovering this now?


2. What the hell kind of security protocols is Express Scripts using?


3. Why are we outsourcing the job of tracking pharmacy benefits when we’d have much greater control over the security protocols in question if we were to do it in house?

Grr.  Argh.

As some of you know, I’ve been into birding for some time, and photography for a bit longer.  Now that the election is (mostly) over, I’m going to do another one of those diaries where I share some of my favorite bird photos and talk a little bit about the photos themselves.  There will probably be some overlap here, as some of my favorites I’ve probably discussed before.

I’m going to start with the one showed: a Ruby-Throated Hummingbird feeding off of a bleeding heart.

This is a different version of this photo than I’ve shown before: it’s a wider shot, as I’ve found a nice way to present it as a gallery work (10″x15″), but I think it works nicely.

This shot was a combination of preparation and dumb luck.  I had been mowing the lawn all morning and was exhausted.  I sat down on the porch, really unable to do much of any damned thing, but I did have my camera with me (when I mow, I set it up on a tripod, near the feeders so if I spot something interesting, I can take a break and check it out).

So suddenly I see this flicker of motion and realize what it is.  One of the hummingbirds has swung over to the front yard.  They love the bee balm plants, but I’d never seen one go after the bleeding heart.  I grabbed the camera, took as many shots as I could, and… well, wow.

This next photo I haven’t shared here before, I don’t think, though it’s one of my favorites.  Snow geese sometimes populate the Dead Creek Wildlife Management Area in Western Vermont.  I had often tried to get photos of them, but it was always from a great distance.  This particular day, I’d had a morning meeting in Burlington and had the rest of the day to myself.  I decided to go the long way home and swing by Dead Creek (it takes me an extra two hours or so).  When I got there, there were no Snow Geese to be found, and suddenly I spotted these ones on a nearby field.  I pulled over, grabbed the camera and started to take pictures.  They were all on the ground at that point.  Sometimes I will take a photo, edge a little closer, take a few more, etc., which is what I did in this particular case.  Eventually, I made the mistake of getting a little two close.  The entire flock started to take off and then started flying in circles, more or less surrounding me.  It ended up with me getting this photo:

While I love this shot (and when you see it blown up, you get some incredible textures), I think I like it even better like this:

It seems to come down to 1/3rd preferring the b&w to the color and 2/3rds preferring the color.

This hummingbird shot, though, is one of my favorites as well:

It’s a very lucky shot.  I had the camera pointed at the feeders to see if any cool looking hummingbirds showed up, but I’d rarely seen two at once.  Once I realized there were two of them the trick wasn’t getting close enough.  It was zooming out quickly enough that I’d get them both in the same shot.  I managed to pull it off, just as they hit the dive bombing position.

This Rufous Hummingbird:

was a real joy to photograph.  I’d never seen one of these before (we really only get the ruby-throated hummingbirds in New England), but in November of 2007, we got word that one was hanging out at a feeder in Westmoreland, NH.  Westmoreland isn’t that far from where I live (and we’ve traveled a lot further to find rare birds) so we figured we’d check it out.  It was on someone’s property, which is always dicey, but this woman had given permission for people to stop by her porch and hang out to look at it.  She was really into it, too, it turned out. She came out to say hello and asked us to make sure we sign her guestbook.  

But the best part was that it took minutes before we saw the bird.  She had hummingbird feeders all over the area, and the porch looked out on several of them, so we figured, well, we’ll get a decent look and maybe I can get a nice photo from here.

But no, the rufous was interested in the feeder on the porch.  The one that was only about eight feet away.  So we sat there for about half an hour watching it come and go while I photographed it, figuring out just how close I could get where it would use the feeders without being so close I’d scare it off (turns out about 6’6″ is about the magic distance) and voila, instant life bird.

Speaking of traveling to find birds… this January was our first big birding trip.  We went to Bosque Del Apache Wildlife Refuge in New Mexico, and had a real trip finding all sorts of new birds.  But the real treat was the Sandhill Cranes.  This shot in particular:

is one of my favorites from the trip.  There’s something wonderful about that moment just before flight; all that energy built up and ready to go, at that moment where the bird transfers from awkward and gangly to magnificent in flight.  

I will also say something else about snow geese here.  I mentioned before getting to see Snow Geese at Dead Creek.  Seeing them at Bosque is a whole different ball game.  If you get to the viewing platform before dawn, you can be part of probably the most amazing thing I’ve ever experienced as a birder.

There is this large body of water where many of the birds roost all night (roosting in water makes them much less vulnerable to predators, such as coyotes, which will try to get their paws on the geese and the cranes).  If you get there at the right time, you will see the ones gathered in the water, plus all the other geese gathering in to join them.  It’s thousands of snow geese, coming together in the middle of this pond, making all sorts of racket.  This can go on for an hour; sometimes more; sometimes less.

But then there is this point where all of a sudden (and there is no time to prepare for this) it gets silent.  This lasts about as much time as you have to breathe in and then out again and everything else is just dead quiet.

And then…

…the geese take off.  For about five seconds, all you hear is wings.  It’s loud enough to sound like a tornado going directly over your head.  The first time you experience it, it’s like nothing you’ve ever been through before.  The second time you think you’ve already seen it once so you’re prepared for it.  You’re wrong.  It’s every bit as intense.

There’s something about being surrounded by birds that just makes my heart leap.  I hope writing this up has been nice for some of you as well.

For those of you who enjoyed these photos, you can see tons more at juliewaters.com

As usual, feel free to use this as an open birds and birding thread and post your own photos.

Many of you have heard reports about the coming Republican Civil War, which I will henceforth be referred to as THE WAR TO END ALL REPUBLICANS (“WEAR,” for short)

But most of this has been discussed merely as a split between the camps of John Sidney McCain and Sarah Louise Heath Palin, specifically focusing on matters of the approach to the campaign.

But, in reality, there are several factions competing for the “soul” of the Republican Party, or at least the closest thing to a soul the party could dig out of a deep, dark, recess that’s best not described in polite company.

So I’ve written up this handy little guide to help us all better understand who the various factions in the Republican party are, and what sides we can expect them to be taking in the upcoming WEAR.

First, let’s start with the obvious broad categories:

BIG BUSINESS

Their likes are deregulation, tax breaks for the wealthy, making a lot of money no matter who or what it hurts, complete lack of accountability and offshore accounts to hide certain kinds of profits from the IRS.

Their dislikes are corporate responsibility, people who write them letters and anyone who attempts to regulate any aspect of their business.

They favor Republicans because Republicans are eager and willing to take large donations and, in turn, just sort of look the other way when they, I dunno, don’t bother paying taxes on public property for forty years.

RELIGIOUS/”FAMILY VALUES” NUTCASES

Their likes are smug superiority, people like them, amendments banning same-sex marriage, the death penalty, gays who attack other gays and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Their dislikes are gays, Muslims, people who look like Muslims, people who aren’t like them, people who dare to criticize them, elitists, vegetarians, Wiccans, abortion, people who are sane Christians, people who act too Jewish, gay or catholic.

They favor Republicans because they think Republicans will eventually overturn Roe v Wade and because Republicans pretend to like them in exchange for their support.

WARMONGERS/NEOCONS

Their likes are war, violence, and anything which makes them think America is superior.

Their dislikes are France, Europe, France, any country that’s not the United States, France, Canada, and peacenicks.

Their likes are anyone who likes war as much as they do, especially if they’re dark-skinned enough and crazy-sounding enough to justify us going to war with them.  This means you, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.  

They like Republicans because Republicans are consistently thrilled to talk up war and violence, even when it’s not in their best interest to do so.

LIBERTARIANS/ANTI-TAX NUTCASES

Libertarians like very small government and freedom.  They hate excessive spending, big government and waste.

It is often unclear as to why they like Republicans.

RACISTS

Their likes are people who look like them and anyone who helps them justify their bigotry.  Their dislikes are everyone else.

They like republicans because Republicans make them think they’re not really racist.

USEFUL IDIOTS

Their likes are people who say the right kind of thing, regardless of their actions.  Their dislikes are anyone who tries to correct their understanding of the world.

They like Republicans because they use catchy buzzwords and because they are idiots.

There are, of course, other categories we could discuss, but these will serve as basic categories for the discussion.  There are plenty of people who overlap in this group.  John McCain, for example, would fall into the Warmonger category, but he’d also fit directly in with Big Business.  Many of his supporters fall into those categories as well as the Useful Idiot category because he can talk a good game about veterans issues, but actually does very poorly with them.

Sarah Palin, on the other hand, fits in easily with Religious Nutcases, Racists and Useful Idiots.  In fact, assume that everyone I mention here includes that last group in some capacity from this point on.  I’ll focus instead on the other two: she’s loved by religious nutcases because she is one and she’s loved by racists because she gave them so much great rhetoric during the campaign so as to make them think that their racism and xenophobia was, on some level, acceptable.

Mitt Romney, on the other hand, is all Big Business and Family Values.  My suspicion about Romney is that he is less someone with convictions then someone who was so sure that he needed to say certain things to get elected that he’s actually convinced himself that he believes them.  But he’s got a strong base of support, just not strong enough that he didn’t need to fund his own campaign with a whole lot of his own money.

But how about Mike Huckabee?  He’s clearly loved by the Religious Nutcases but seems to be anti-racism, at least in his rhetoric.  He’s hated by big business but somewhat in the libertarian category, except he believes in universal education.  In other words, one of the popular Republican candidates has some campaign issues more in favor with Democrats than Republicans.

Which brings us to Ron Paul, who represents an entirely different aspect of the Republican party, with the vast majority of his support coming from Libertarians and Racists, and definitely not the religious nutcases nor the warmongers.

With the exception of John McCain, there is a good possibility that all these individuals will be running for President in 2012 and this is where the WEAR comes in.  

There are lots of rumors spreading about what happened behind the scenes in the McCain/Palin campaign, which helps set the stage for the upcoming battle.  I.e., Romney camp spreading Palin stories?, Palin aide strikes back at McCain camp, etc.  Most of you have seen much of this, so I won’t bother reiterating.

But this is the basic dynamic: people from the Romney, McCain and Palin factions seem to really have it in for one another.  Romney’s appeal to the Family Values nutcases is damaged by the fact that he’s a Mormon and most Family Values nutcases don’t like anyone who’s not a Christian (or, at the very least, an acceptably conservative Jew) and most assuredly do not think of Mormonism as “Christian.”  McCain’s people pretty much hate Romney and now they seem to really hate Palin.  They blame her for having hurt McCain’s chances and being an all around crappy candidate and for “going rogue” from time to time.  And then there’s the whole Palin/underwear thing (which has nothing to do with Romney).

But the real gold here is that this scatters those categories I listed above.  Libertarians are already finding problems with the Republican party, which has largely increased spending during their tenure and made government a lot bigger (and a lot more anti-freedom).  Big Business will support anyone who helps them out, and turning the economy into a great big sinkhole really doesn’t help big business all that much.

The religious nutcases are now split, with some going to Obama and most still preferring Republicans but willing to sit the election out if someone who’s not sufficiently evangelical gets nominated.  Granted, there are still plenty of racists, and they probably (if possible) like the Republicans a little more than they used to, but probably think of them as weak little sissies if they cooperate on Obama with anything.  

So most of what’s left for Republicans are useful idiots.  And the great thing about useful idiots is that they’re stupid enough to start chasing each other around with baseball bats rather than us.  So when big business starts blaming religious nutcases and religious nutcases start blaming warmongers and warmongers start blaming libertarians who, in turn, blame everybody, well, hijinx ensue.

To me, this is going to be sort of like “Glengarry Glen Ross” crossed with a Keystone Cops movie.

Grab your popcorn, folks.  This is going to be fun.

One of my favorite books is Terry Pratchett’s “Hogfather.”

The quick summary: the Hogfather has disappeared on Hogswatch Eve.  As Death (yes, that Death) explains, if the children do not receive their Hogswatch gifts, they will cease to believe in the Hogfather and “The sun will not rise tomorrow.”

So Death takes over for the Hogfather, delivering gifts to all the children, while his granddaughter tries her best to track down the Hogfather and return him to his post.

At one point, she asks Death if it’s true that the sun wouldn’t rise the next day.  He says yes, it’s true.  When she asks what would happen instead, he explains that merely a flaming ball of gas would illuminate the sky.

This is kind of how I feel about Obama’s victory, and I know this is oddly sentimental, especially for me, but there’s something about what happened that was, to me, magical.  I know that logically there was strategy, planning, and an immense amount of hard work, and I don’t mean to discount that.  

But when we went to bed Tuesday night, I turned to Cyndi and said “it’s a whole new world.”  I didn’t mean that literally, but I meant it in the sense that suddenly everything seems really different.  

Racism isn’t over, not by a long shot, and we’re still in a hell of a mess as far as this country goes, and I mean one hell of a mess.  Nothing’s changed, really, except we’ve decided to put someone smart in the white house.

But if things had gone differently, and we’d nominated Edwards (and he hadn’t turned out to be a bit of a horndog) and ended up with a President Edwards, I would have been happy.  I would have been very pleased.  

But I wouldn’t have felt like it was a whole new world.  I would have just seen the next day as another day with a gaseous ball of fire illuminating the sky.  

Now the sun’s rising on a whole new world and I’m looking to the future with real optimism for the first time in quite some time.

I’m updating this to include a video I tracked down today:

It’s the opening monologue from the Daily Show from the first episode after September 11, 2001.  There’s something about this which has been incredibly profound for me ever since I saw it, and it actually touches on a lot of what I’ve been feeling about this.  It’s well worth watching, but it will make you cry.

I had started to write this up as a comment, but I think it deserves its own entry.  As far as Democrats “vs” Progressives go, we have a lot of work to do, but it doesn’t need to be statewide on every level.

On the local race level, we’re fine.  I.e., State Senators, State Representatives; I don’t see any reason to change the way of doing business.  Both parties are doing well in that regard.  

Even on some of the statewide races, having both progressives and democrats involved in the races have not been a bad thing.  I think Jerry Levy, for example, brought some good issues to the debate about the auditor’s race in 2006 and added some interest in it that Salmon didn’t.  Martha Abbot, if she could get traction, would probably make a very good state treasurer and she brings good ideas into the race.

I think the big problem is the two top tickets: Gov and Lte Gov.  I think the problem is twofold: Democrats running terrible candidates (not terrible people, but good people who make lousy candidates) and Progressives running candidates that have no realistic chance of running to the point where they sometimes help Republicans.  I think that some form of compromise needs to be arranged between the parties, and I don’t think it has to be something that makes everyone happy as long as it’s something that everyone can respect as fair and reasonable.  

If, for example, both Democrats and Progressives agreed to run a single candidate as an independent and have both parties back that candidate with their own resources, I think that would be a fair and reasonable approach.  It would take some real coalition work to do so and it wouldn’t be easy, but I could get behind a member of either party who was willing to wage a serious challenge to Douglass from the left, provided that candidate did the real work of spending some time courting both Democrats and Progressives.

Alternately, the parties themselves could meet together and put resources into recruiting a candidate acceptable to both.  

We talk about finding some way to create a coalition party (i.e., Progressive Democrat party or some such thing) and while that’s plausible, that sounds like a decade-long process.  If we truly want to go that way, we can, but I’d like to see us focus on finding some way to deal with the Governor’s race in 2010 and finding a serious challenger to Douglas that we can all agree is a decent choice.

In the meantime, I have one suggestion about IRV: let’s bundle it with something Douglass really wants: try to get a bill passed which mandates IRV but also one that provides for a 4-year Governor’s term to begin with 2012.  I know a lot of people aren’t fond of 4-year terms, but I think they actually allow a governor to get something done.  If we have IRV, it might be an opportunity for the gov to get things we want done.  There could even be a clause that triggers a special election in two years if the governor fails to get 50% of the vote.  I.e., 4 year terms with a full majority, two year terms with a plurality.

Thoughts?  Comments?  The throwing of rotten fruits and vegetables?

We still don’t know the full makeup of the US Senate for 2008, but it’s never too early to start looking at what we can expect for 2010.  

As with 2008, there are more Republicans up for election than Democrats, though the ratio isn’t quite as stark.  There are 19 Republicans up for re-election and 15 Democrats.  There are some clear safe seats on both sides, but there are also some serious vulnerabilities that we can exploit in 2010.  

This post is intended to be a primer for those races and what our best avenues are for increasing Democratic majorities to a filibuster-proof margin.  

Republican likely safe seats:

Johnny Isakson  (R-GA)

He did extremely well last time around and has no lingering scandals

Mike Crapo  (R-ID)

No one even bothered running against him last time around

Sam Brownback  (R-KS)

Brownback will probably be retiring in 2010, but even in this election, Kansas went 57% for McCain.  It’s likely to remain in Republican hands

Richard Shelby  (R-AL)

Very well loved in a very red state (it went 61% for McCain this time around).  Even if he retires (he’s in his mid 70’s), it’s likely to go to a Republican.

Tom Coburn  (R-OK)

Homophobic anti-spending crusader Coburn won by a decent margin last tine around, in a state Obama just lost by double-digits.  I don’t think he’s going to face much of a challenge.

Robert Bennett  (R-UT)

Won with 69% of the vote last time around.  I’m not going to spend much time thinking about this one

Jim DeMint  (R-SC)

Solid Republican in a solid red state.  Might be vulnerable, but probably not

Democrat likely safe seats:

Chris Dodd  (D-CT)

If Dodd chooses to remain in the Senate, he’s likely to keep his seat.  Currently, there’s little taste for Republicans in the Northeast.

Patrick Leahy  (D-VT)

Leahy will get reelected to his Senate seat in Vermont as long as he wants it.

Blanche Lincoln  (D-AR)

Has won handily in both her Senate elections.

Barbara Boxer  (D-CA)

Boxer is likely to keep her Senate seat for as long as she wants it

Daniel Inouye  (D-HI)

Inouye is in his mid-80’s, so it’s hard to say if he’ll keep running for Senate, but HI is a fairly blue state.  Even if he’s not running in two years, the seat will probably stay in the “D” column

Byron Dorgan  (D-ND)

Has won by extremely large margins every time he’s run for Senate.  No opponent of his has reached 40%.

Barack Obama, (D-IL)

He’s clearly not going to be keeping his Senate seat, but any Democrat appointed in his place will probably keep the seat.

Evan Bayh  (D-IN), Barbara Mikulski  (D-MD), Harry Reid  (D-NV), Chuck Schumer  (D-NY), Ron Wyden  (D-OR), Patty Murray  (D-WA) & Russ Feingold  (D-WI) all did very well in 2004.  They’re likely to retain their seats if they run again.  

Pick-up opportunities for Democrats:

John McCain  (R-AZ)

McCain’s senate seat, if he chooses to run for Senate again, is in jeopardy.  Recent polls indicate that people would prefer Janet Napolitano to McCain.  He may, however, choose not to run for public office again.  Furthermore, he will be in his mid-70s by the time that election is underway and it may just be more than he wants to deal with.  A strong Democrat has a really great chance to take this seat.

Lisa Murkowski  (R-AK)

She won by a very small margin in 2004, and has been part of a land deal scandal since that election.  Then again, Alaskans seem to like that sort of thing, so it’s a tough call.

Mel Martinez  (R-FL)

Martinez won in 2004 by slim margins, during a presidential election in which Florida went for Bush.  Without Bush’s coattails, and after the state having just gone Blue, he may not survive 2010.

George Voinovich  (R-OH)

Voinovich is a Republican in his mid-70’s who would be facing reelection in a state which is trending solidly blue.  He may not have the fight in him, and even if he does, he might not be up for the challenge.

Jim Bunning  (R-KY)

Bunning is in his late 70’s and just barely won in 2004.  During a debate in 2004 he was extremely incoherent to the point where even his friends were concerned for his health.  I’ll be surprised if he runs again, but KY is a very red state which ran 58% for McCain.  It’s an uphill battle

David Vitter  (R-LA)

Diaper boy.  I’ll say no more.

Chuck Grassley  (R-IA)

Grassley is in his 70’s and though he’s well liked in Iowa, may just not be up for running again.  There’s a decent chance at replacing him with a Democrat

Kit Bond  (R-MO)

Kit Bond did well in 2004, but Missouri is a swing state and he may be vulnerable if he has a strong challenger

Judd Gregg  (R-NH)

Gregg slaughtered his opponent in 2004, but she was a grassroots candidate with no strong support from the party.  NH has been trending strongly blue and no Republican has won a congressional House or Senate seat in NH since 2006.  I think we’re going to take him down and I think it will be fun.

Richard Burr  (R-NC)

Had a close race in 2004 in a state that just went for Obama.  We’ve got a decent shot at him

Arlen Specter  (R-PA)

Specter is a cancer survivor who will be 80 years old if he chooses to run in 2010.  I don’t think he’s going to run again, which leaves the seat wide open.  Word is that Chris Matthews is considering running for that seat, which should be surreal.

John Thune  (R-SD)

Very close (and ugly) race in 2004.  Might be vulnerable in 2010.

Pick up opportunities for Republicans:

Ken Salazar  (D-CO)

Salazar won by a slim 4-point margin in 2004, but Colorado seems to be trending blue.  While it’s a possible pick-up for Republicans, it’s not a likely one

Obviously, anything can happen between now and 2010 and there’s probably stuff happening at local levels that I haven’t found out about yet, but I think this presents some real opportunities for us to improve on current gains and achieve the supermajority we didn’t quite get this time around.