I’m talking about, of course, a negative campaign to help Vermonters understand what type of political “leader” Jim Douglas really is.

Here’s a quick clip I put together from last Friday’s (05/09/08) Mark Johnson Show: clip here.

Note that nothing has been taken out of context. The podcast can be heard in almost full at the above link to Johnson’s website.

Throw in some clever graphics for video and voice over for audio … and all of a sudden Douglas is shown in an honest light … bringing well heeled land speculators from China to buy Vermont … literally!

when you can do for a huge, out of state corporation?

Predictably Douglas has vetoed a bill that would have told the owners du jour of Vermont Yankee to be fiscally prudent. Apparently the guv is quite happy putting Vermonters at risk while Entergy plays fast and loose with corporate spinoffs that will insulate that huge corporate entity from any future responsibility.

Once upon a time I believed in a fairy tale. In the mid nineties I had a number of conversations with Douglas in the form of interviews for a local radio show I hosted. I found Douglas to be witty, intelligent and honest.

Boy, Douglas sure destroyed those notions over the years since.

This year must be the year that Vermonters like you and I get the message out that Douglas is not that affable next door neighbor he wants us to believe he is; instead Douglas is the anti-Vermonter, pro-huge corporate, radical using political opportunism to advance a failed fiscal policy.

I write this letter with some pangs of guilt. After all it was us Vermonters as a group who introduced you to Doug Jimless, and apparently that was not to your benefit.

Droppings, remember when Jimless told you there were no jobs up here in Vermont? Well, as it turns out he was the worst possible candidate for a jobs coach we could have set you up with.

This morning in the Barre/Montpelier Times Argus I read the following (I added my own hiliting):

A St. Johnsbury company has closed, putting 80 people out of work.

W.T. Solutions, a sewing contractor, closed Wednesday afternoon and plans to move to Newark, N.J.

Owner Marie Bouchard of Conway, N.H., says she has been losing money every year for five years.

She says the problem is there are not enough qualified people to hire in St. Johnsbury, so she did not have enough workers to fill large contracts.

The company makes garments for the military and other outlets.

(St. Johnsbury company closes; 80 lose jobs, Times Argus, 05/03/08)

My dear, dear Droppings … I am so sorry I told you to take a left towards Montpelier that day instead of a right towards St. J. You never would have been taken in by that shyster jobs coach Doug Jimless, you would have had a decent job in St. Johnsbury, and you would still be near your family and friends.

My mom, Venis, wants to say hi too.

With a heavy heart,

Venis’ Son.

Despite all the slime and irradiated crap being thrown at him, Obama has stayed strong and true to his public statements regarding how we should be treating each other.

My starting point regards Obama and his presidential bid has always been one of general support even though I’ve always known he would insist on doing some things that would make my head explode. But this whole Rev. Wright episode is changing me from a “leaning towards” to a “leaning away from”.

I’m not upset that Obama is trying to distance himself from Wright. Obama is not, cannot be and has never pretended to be the candidate of one Chicago church. His meme/theme has always been that of uniter, one America, etc; and when a fiery preacher steps forward with statements that cause public consternation it is Obama’s duty in many respects to calm angst that may be created regarding Obama’s agenda.

It’s not about pandering. It’s about being a national level politician and the responsibilities that entails.

I am upset, however, that in his quest to be the great uniter of all things Republican and Democratic Obama is losing touch with reality.

I’ve heard Wright mimic some well know white politicians manner of speech (Kennedy specifically) as illustration of the gross unfairness of criticizing black colloquial manner of talking. I’ve heard Wright address the possibility that our federal government would purposely introduce horrible, debilitating diseases into different populations (think Tuskagee, think marching unprepared military through radioactive fields for testing purposes).

And Obama seems so intent on his own message of coming together that he rejects the reality of Wright’s statements along with Wright himself. It appears to me Obama is losing touch with reality, and that cannot bode well for his future actions or decision making.

In South Africa when apartheid ended, the new government instituted a commission that was meant to put the past to rest and open up the future. They didn’t do this by pretending nothing bad had happened (ala Ford with Nixon, Clinton with H.W. Bush, W. Bush with everybody), but instead they insisted on a full accounting for individual actions before anybody, black or white, could carry on without worry of formal retribution.

In other words forgiveness only came with public confession and acknowledgment.

Obama seems to be trying to skip the accountability part of moving ahead. He seems to want to pretend that nothing bad was done by anybody. He wants to walk away from acknowledging unpleasant truths such as our government’s propensity for abusing various segments of the US population.

And that is why I’m starting to lean away from Obama.

Yes, I don’t like his stance vis-a-vis Iraq and other things, but I was willing to overlook a lot of negatives. I thought he might represent real change once in office. I am beginning to doubt that very much.

(Fair? Unfair? Oh don’t worry… have a lot of diaries planned regarding the Vermont Telecommunications Authority… might as well get started with this. – promoted by odum)

How did that song go? “VTA … what is it good for? Absolutely nuttin'” Something like that anyway; maybe I’m paraphrasin’.

Anyway, I guess I shouldn’t say the VTA is good for absolutely nothing, and in all fairness the VTA’s reaction to the ECFiberNet project could just as easily be about growing pains as anything else.

None the less here’s an oped from the Valley News:

One of the many attractive things about the proposed East Central Vermont Community Fiber Network is how neatly it seems to fit in with Gov. Jim Douglas’ celebrated “E-state” initiative, announced with much fanfare in January 2007.

In his inaugural address that year, the governor said that he wanted to guarantee all residents access to broadband Internet and cell phone service, which he called “a fundamental part of modern life for all Vermonters, as essential as electricity and good roads.”

To help achieve this cutting-edge vision, Douglas proposed creating the Vermont Telecommunications Authority (VTA). The Legislature concurred, and the new 11-member board was born last August with $40 million in bonding authority to provide seed money. So far, so good.

Along comes ECFiber, a fledgling joint enterprise comprising 25 towns (including 16 in the Upper Valley) that proposes to bring high-speed Internet, telephone and television service to every household and business in its service area via fiber-optic cable. The $80 million network would be built through a private financing mechanism called a capital lease.

On the face of it, this would seem to be just the sort of effort the VTA was created to promote. Apparently not, or at least not yet. The authority recently turned down ECFiber’s request for $4 million in state revenue bonds, with a like amount to be held in escrow as a contingency fund. The reason cited by the VTA was that ECFiber’s business plan needed to be more fully documented; for its part, ECFiber says that no start-up could meet the standard set by the VTA, which demanded “a high degree of certainty” that the venture was financially sound.

(Creating The ‘E-State’, What Role for Telecom Authority?, Valley News, 04/29/08)

For the record the VTA wasn’t looking for “a high degree of certainty”, they were looking for AAA bond rating for a start up venture … but that’s a different story.

Anyway ECFiberNet continues to move ahead. It’s currently operating with 20 confirmed towns and 3 more looking at a May 8th do or die deadline to sign on. The managing team consists of some high powered entrepreneurs with long track records of success (for some info on the Nultys see here).

Best part is ECFiberNet isn’t looking to the state for any amounts of money beyond a token “we like this project” number.

The United States by itself far outspends the entire rest of the world in military spending, and we are the world’s largest military weapons exporter to boot!

In a well written article for Axis of Logic, columnist Chalmers Johnson writes in part

There are three broad aspects to the U.S. debt crisis. First, in the current fiscal year (2008) we are spending insane amounts of money on “defense” projects that bear no relation to the national security of the U.S. We are also keeping the income tax burdens on the richest segment of the population at strikingly low levels.

Second, we continue to believe that we can compensate for the accelerating erosion of our base and our loss of jobs to foreign countries through massive military expenditures — “military Keynesianism” (which I discuss in detail in my book Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic). By that, I mean the mistaken belief that public policies focused on frequent wars, huge expenditures on weapons and munitions, and large standing armies can indefinitely sustain a wealthy capitalist economy. The opposite is actually true.

Third, in our devotion to militarism (despite our limited resources), we are failing to invest in our social infrastructure and other requirements for the long-term health of the U.S. These are what economists call opportunity costs, things not done because we spent our money on something else. Our public education system has deteriorated alarmingly. We have failed to provide health care to all our citizens and neglected our responsibilities as the world’s number one polluter. Most important, we have lost our competitiveness as a manufacturer for civilian needs, an infinitely more efficient use of scarce resources than arms manufacturing.

(The Pentagon Strangles Our Economy: Why the U.S. Has Gone Broke, Axis of Logic, 04/26/08)

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the combined efforts of the Democratic and Republican parties for their part in bringing us the above. And I would like to point out that none of Clinton, McCain or Obama are looking to do anything different about this.

Go ahead … hit the play button …

(Press release from the ECFiber.Net governing board.)

EC FIBER IS ALIVE AND WELL!

The headline and article in Saturday’s Valley News about ECFiber (“VT Telecom Panel Snubs ECFiber”) left a seriously misleading impression that the fate of a grass roots effort that won near unanimous community support on town meeting day depended on the VTA. It does not. Instead, it is, as it always has been the case, up to private sector financiers and the growing numbers of Vermont citizens who have eagerly indicated a readiness to subscribe to world class fiber-based services.

At VTA’s request, and after the Chairman’s public statement that VTA could only bond for a minimum of $10 million, ECF submitted a proposal for discussion for two-tier financial support, of which only $4 million (not $8 million as reported), was direct lending, with the balance in escrow as a contingency fund.  Further, ECF continually expressed willingness to accept any sum, no matter how small, since the purpose was only to attach some financial gesture to the letter of moral support VTA had already provided. Once VTA took the position that it could only fund a project with near-AAA credit rating, ECF withdrew its request, since no start-up venture can meet that standard.  Private financiers understand this.

By its decision, the VTA refused an invitation to contribute toward creating a more favorable investment climate for ECFiber. In so doing, its actions – unwittingly or not –have had exactly the opposite consequence.  This is evidenced by a wide spread impression created by VTA’s actions and subsequent press coverage in the Valley News and other regional media that VTA had not just snubbed but “killed” the project.

Reports of ECFiber’s demise” are dead wrong.  On Monday, April 21, 20 towns presented their signatures to the Interlocal Contract that establishes the venture as a legal entity.  An Executive Committee of delegates was elected, by-laws adopted, and a committee structure for carrying the project forward in association with ValleyNet, the non-profit operating partner, was established.  

Concurrently, ECF has also concluded an agreement with Atlantic Engineering Group (AEG), one of the foremost design/build telecommunications engineering firms in the country, for a fixed price construction contract covering 75% of the projected capital expenditure. AEG has successfully built 65 Fiber-to-the-Premises networks including 16 municipally-owned ones.  The balance of the capital expenditures includes the “pole make-ready” which work must be done by the utilities that own the poles, and is governed by Vermont law and regulation, and the design and construction of the network hub, which ValleyNet prefers to do on its own. AEG reviewed the same data presented by ECF to VTA, and found: “AEG considers the ECFiber network design to be sound and has tested the ValleyNet cost figures using its own proprietary pricing models … and has concluded that ValleyNet’s figures … are reasonable and achievable. AEG believes that the execution schedule…is reasonable and will commit to meet that schedule.”

Providing future economic opportunity and security for the towns of our region is not an exercise for the faint of heart or for those fearful of failure.  Inaction will condemn communities and businesses in our region to a far more ominous set of social and economic risks.

ECF now has all the elements in place to go out to the private capital markets with a prospectus, and has already received encouragement from a number of interested investors.  Nonetheless, given the turmoil in the capital markets, this is expected to be a much longer process than would have been the case a year ago.

However, ECF is confident that it will secure the municipal capital lease financing upon which its business model is based, with the continued and growing grassroots support  that has made this project possible.

One of the funniest lines I’ve read (and continue to read) in articles discussing economic affairs has to do with inflation:

Core inflation, which excludes energy and food, was better behaved last month, rising by just 0.2 percent, down from a worrisome 0.5 percent rise in February.

(Inflation jumps, surprising analysts, Times Argus, 04/16/08)

Think about this for a moment. Just what group of people view home heating, gasoline, bread and milk as something other than “core”?

The answer is simple. It’s those for whom purchasing basic subsidence items is no chore, and this group in general does not include the folks who actually are producing these necessary goods.

Oh … and “core” inflation does not include medical cost or your insurance premiums or the various wars our government has involved us in or many other things that affect the great majority of us on a day to day basis.

Why doesn’t our government just define “core” inflation as the price of laptop computers and be done with it?

We’ve had a lot of medical insurance programs put in place over the years around our United States.

I remember when the non-profit medical care system was being dismantled by the feds back in the eighties, and “they” offered us HMOs. Remember? The “H” stood for “Health” and the “M” for “Maintenance”?

These organizations offered low premiums under the guise they’d work with us to keep us out of the emergency rooms and hospitals. The sales line was about prevention and how much less expensive that could be … until they had millions signed up.

And in the end HMO became just another acronym in the insurance business belt.

The newest medical care scam comes to us under the paradigm of mandated health insurance. Both Clinton and Obama have some variation of this. States are diving into this mandated medical insurance cesspool under the guise of experimentation.

The idea is to force all of us into purchasing insurance of one sort or another from private companies who’s primary objective is to show profit. As a matter of fact it’s a legal fiduciary responsibility of these investment corporations that they put the welfare of those who earn money off them ahead of those they insure!

Here’s a great example:

Health insurance companies are rapidly adopting a new pricing system for very expensive drugs, asking patients to pay hundreds and even thousands of dollars for prescriptions for medications that may save their lives or slow the progress of serious diseases.

With the new pricing system, insurers abandoned the traditional arrangement that has patients pay a fixed amount, like $10, $20 or $30 for a prescription, no matter what the drug’s actual cost. Instead, they are charging patients a percentage of the cost of certain high-priced drugs, usually 20 to 33 percent, which can amount to thousands of dollars a month.

. . .

Insurers say the new system keeps everyone’s premiums down at a time when some of the most innovative and promising new treatments for conditions like cancer and rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis can cost $100,000 and more a year.

(Co-Payments Soar for Drugs With High Prices, NY Times, 04/14/08)

Once upon a time insurance was about shared risk, but apparently now they’re about keeping costs down … for some. And of course they’re very much about profit (see here and here for examples).

What do all the above have in common? It’s all about insurance, and deliberately ignores ENsurance (yeah – made that word up – but it ought to make it into the mainstream lexicon).

As Europe and Canada have proven time and again: when dealing something as universal as the need the for medical care, the best insurance is a nationwide and paid for on a national level (yes … taxes).

That is the only insurance that can provide ensurance that we will all have access to appropriate medical care in times of injury and illness.

Insurance programs, even those as we have in here in Vermont, will never do it.