Please note update below; new information from the Vermont Foodbank.

Looks like Jason Gibbs has his thinkin’ cap on. The former Douglas Administration utility infielder turned political PR flack, now representin’ Bruce Lisman’s Campaign for Vermont, is presumably trying to relaunch CFV in a more convincingly nonpartisan way — following its rather disastrous 2012 debut as a stalking horse for Republican talking points.

So I sense the fine hand of “gowithgibbs” in a press release announcing CFV’s latest publicity stunt — er, display of compassion:

More than a dozen partners of the independent, non-partisan advocacy organization Campaign for Vermont met Jan. 16 at the Vermont Foodbank to volunteer and talk with human service providers about the growing demand for services, the importance of post-holiday giving and the need for a more vibrant economy where no one is left behind.

We trust it was a more productive visit than Paul Ryan’s infamous 15-minute photo opportunity at an Ohio soup kitchen, which backfired on Ryan because it was transparently phony, and backfired on the charity because some donors objected to its politicization.

The Lismaniacs did actually do some work, unloading “dozens of donated boxes of food. The use of “dozens” implies a figure between 24 and 99 boxes. With “more than a dozen” Lismaniacs on hand, that must have taken at least several minutes of hard labor.

(See note below; per Vermont Foodbank, the Lisman crew did actually do a significant amount of work.)

And then came the talking, which is what this little Potemkin set-piece was really all about.  

As Lisman explains, the poor and needy provide a useful backdrop for CFV’s vision, in which an unleashed free market brings an end to hunger and want:

“The increasing demand for the Foodbank’s services, and assistance provided by countless other organizations, is an important reminder of why we founded Campaign for Vermont.”

…”The Vermonters who will benefit most from our policy work are those who currently rely on the Foodbank and other compassionate service providers to get them through the challenges of today with hope that there will be more opportunities for them tomorrow.”

Yeah, well, unless your “policy work” has changed dramatically from the free-marketeer-inspired rhetoric of Lisman 1.0, “the Vermonters who will benefit most from our policy work” are the rich and powerful. Those are the people who benefited most from the untamed Wall Street gold rush of the last few decades; and it was in the canyons of Wall Street where Lisman made his fortune and formulated his ideas.

But hey, the visit to the Foodbank wasn’t just a one-time publicity stunt. It was the first in a series of publicity stunts, as CFV plans to hold public policy forums around the state — and will accept donations to local food pantries at each event.

How kindly. And how apropos: bring a can of beans, and get a load of CFV’s ideological beans.

________________________________________

UPDATE. I received the following message from John Sayles, head of the Vermont Foodbank. In light of this, I admit I was too harsh on the CFV gang; it was more than just a Paul Ryan thing. (I sitll question CFV’s viewpoint and platform.)

Bruce Lisman himself and more than a dozen people who support Campaign For Vermont did indeed come to the Vermont Foodbank and spent about 3 hours sorting 4000 pounds of grocery salvage product. It is a task that the Foodbank relies on volunteers to accomplish.  

Dozens of groups – churches, businesses, civic clubs, and groups of friends – come to our Barre and Brattleboro locations to sort hundreds of thousands of pound of salvage every year.  We thank every group and never ask their motives or political affiliation.

In fact, I would invite the bloggers of GMD to come in, bring their friends and see if they can beat the CFV total!

Thanks to John Sayles for the information. I don’t know if we’ll be able to meet his challenge; we at GMD can hardly organize our way out of a paper bag.

Here’s something guaranteed to send the conspiracy theorists fleeing into the woods.

The state is looking for ways to shore up transportation funding, which is largely reliant on a per-gallon gas tax. Problem is, cars are getting much more efficient and more people are carpooling or taking public transit, so gas tax revenues are slipping.

Which means the government is looking at alternatives to the gas tax. One of them is a “vehicle miles traveled” (VMT) tax.

So how, you may ask, could the government possibly know how many miles you’ve driven? Take it away, Dave Gram of the Associated Press:

Vermont Transportation Secretary Brian Searles said calculating how much of a VMT tax is owed would be done through the global positioning system devices that are expected to be standard equipment in cars later this decade.

”It’s a GPS device that is capable of tracking location, time,” he said, adding that he was aware that might raise privacy concerns.

Oh, surely not. The government can tell where your car is at any moment in time? Nah, that won’t set off any alarm bells among the tinfoil-hat brigade. Especially when this idea comes out the same week as President Obama’s TEAR UP THE CONSTITUTION AND GRAB ALL THE GUNS!!!! plan.  

I can see it now. The state police enforces traffic laws statewide from a single central command post. Your car’s computer will be notified by the VSP computer of any traffic offenses you might commit, and will then communicate wirelessly with your bank to electronically transfer the amount of the fine to the state.

As part of health care reform, the health department will be able to tie in to the GPS, and will send a warning message if you park at a fast-food joint. And when you stop for gas, don’t buy any fatty snacks; the gas station’s computerized cash registers will be part of the system too. Buy a microwave burrito, and ding! your insurance premium goes up.

And don’t even think of stopping at one of those freeway “parking areas” to take a piss. They’ll KNOW.

I wouldn’t advise stopping at that 24-hour “massage parlor” either. Big Shummy is watching!

Hm. The People’s Lawyer, Attorney General Bill Sorrell, has some big-time reservations about a proposal to allow greater public access to records of criminal investigations. He’d like to keep state law just the way it is, according to VTDigger:

In testimony to lawmakers on Thursday, Vermont Attorney General Bill Sorrell delivered a spirited defense of keeping criminal investigation records largely closed to the public.

Seems he has some privacy concerns. Or so he says.

Problem is, this isn’t some left-wing radical fever dream; the openness proposal comes from none other than Governor Shumlin.

And it’s based entirely on the well-established and thoroughly tested federal rules for disclosure, as we reported on January 4:

Shumlin would like the Legislature to adopt existing federal standards for releasing such information, which state that “records of criminal investigation can only be withheld if disclosure would result in specific harm.”

There’s another advantage to accepting the federal guidelines: “There’s a large body of record around the federal guidelines that will clarify when something should be disclosed and when it can’t be disclosed.”

Allen Gilbert of ACLU-VT supports the legislation. And Senator Dick Sears, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who is not known as a transparency firebrand, says he is leaning toward the Shumlin proposal.

But wait, there’s more:

The law enforcement community, which sometimes opposes opening public records, supports the Shumlin proposal. An attorney for the Department of Public Safety, which oversees the state police, said her department has supported a move to the federal standard since early 2011.

All righty then. On one side we have Governor Shumlin, the federal government, the Vermont ACLU, and the law enforcement community.

On the other side, singing a plaintive rendition of “All By Myself”: Bill Sorrell.  

So yesterday, a bunch of Republican lawmakers came out with a campaign finance reform plan. It was, in many respects, very similar to proposals put forward by Secretary of State Jim Condos and VPIRG.

The plan, unveiled by a group of ten Republican lawmakers and actually sponsored by Rep. Kurt Wright, would require electronic filing of campaign finance reports, more frequent reporting of contributions and expenditures, and a requirement that if a single donor is responsible for more than 50% of a SuperPAC’s funding, that person’s name would have to appear on the organization’s mailers and advertisements. Peter “One Man Band” Hirschfeld (behind the Times Argus paywall):

Republicans’ proposals, however, are almost indistinguishable from those put forward by organizations and officials who lament the proliferation of super PACs.

…Secretary of State Jim Condos said the list of ideas offered by Republicans is nearly identical to the plan he put out shortly after Election Day.

Well, okay then. Everybody’s happy, right?

Er, no.

House Majority Leader Willem Jewett, a Ripton Democrat, struck a dismissive tone Thursday.

…Jewett said the disclosure proposals forwarded by Republicans on Thursday aren’t even “really what we as Democrats think of as campaign-finance reform.”

Asked to list aspects of the Democratic Party’s campaign-finance platform not included in the GOP presentation Thursday, Jewett said they were still under construction.

Eh?

I don’t know who pissed in Jewett’s cornflakes, but listen. The Republicans are AGREEING with you on significant aspects of the issue. Sure, there are differences, but Wright’s plan is clearly a positive step. The correct response isn’t a dismissive sneer; it’s more along the lines of “We welcome the Republicans’ support for reform proposals very similar to those endorsed by the Governor and Secretary of State, and we look forward to a bipartisan effort to bring much-needed transparency to our campaign finance system.”

I mean, you’ve got a veto-proof majority. You’ve got the corner office. In the next four months, there will be plenty of chances to ignore the Republicans and stomp all over their ideas. But on a rare occasion when there’s some real common ground, why not be just a little bit gracious about it?

(For those without access to the Mitchell Family Organ, the story was also covered by Paul Heintz at Seven Days and Andrew Stein at VTDigger.)

Earlier today, I contacted Shumlin spokesflack Sue Allen to see if the Governor had issued a statement on President Obama’s gun control proposals.

You know, since the Governor had earlier refused to take any stands whatsoever on the issue until the President came out with a plan.

Well, I just got an answer. Here’s the Gov’s statement in its entirety:

“No one should have to go through the tragedy experienced by the families in Newtown last month.  I appreciate the thorough discussion about gun violence prevention by President Obama, Vice President Biden and others. Common sense dictates that we will only make progress in curbing senseless violence in our country with a 50-state solution.  I support the President’s recommendations, and urge Congress to work collaboratively to adopt comprehensive federal legislation.”

It takes him a while to get to the point, but as I read the final sentence, the Governor has issued a complete endorsement of the President’s plan — the executive orders and the proposed legislation.

That ought to put a dent into his NRA rating.  

Huh boy. Jeff Wennberg’s had himself a brainstorm. The head of anti-health care reform group “Vermonters for Health Care Freedom” is seeking donations to make a documentary film promoting their free-market approach (a.k.a. doing nothing). Peter “One Man Band” Hirschfeld:

Vermonters for Health Care Freedom wants to raise $18,250 to fund production of “Lessons from Canada,” a documentary it says will show what a train wreck single-payer is north of the border.

Wow. $18,250. That’ll go a long way. On a production-quality scale of one to ten — one being “community access TV” and ten being Michael Moore’s “Sicko” — eighteen thousand bucks ought to buy you a “two.” But hey, it’s amazing what you can do with a cellphone and iMovie.

Beyond the immediate quality question comes this: Is VHCF so strapped for money that it has to make a special plea to raise a mere eighteen grand? Doesn’t Jeff have Lenore Broughton on speed dial? That’s sofa-cushion money for her.

VHCF has managed to paste together a “trailer” for the project, visible on its fundraising website above the following pitch to prospective donors:

This documentary will help us activiate (sic) an already existing coalition of conservatives, independents, and moderate Democrats who think Vermont’s single payer plan is reckless.

That would be the “existing coalition” that backed the entire VTGOP to a catastrophic defeat in the 2012 election. Months and months of anti-reform saturation advertising from Campaign for Vermont, VHCF, Vermonters First, and the VTGOP completely failed to convince anyone outside the conservative core — and now a cheap video is going to “activiate” this imaginary coalition? Dream on, Jeff.

Judging by the trailer, the video will rely on anecdotal stories from people who feel victimized by the Canadian system — individuals, doctors, and conservative commentators. The problem with that approach is, the actual evidence is on the other side.  

Last week, the National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine released a 400-page report detailing the many shortcomings of America’s “best in the world” health care system when compared to other developed nations. As noted by the Washington Post’s Harold Meyerson:

Of the 17 countries measured, the United States placed dead last in life expectancy, even though we lead the planet in the amount we spend on health care (17.6 percent of gross domestic product in 2010 vs. 11.6 percent each for France and Germany). We get radically less bang for the buck than comparable nations.

The report finds that America’s death rate for people younger than 50 is “almost off the charts” due to poor diet, lack of exercise, and high incidence of violent deaths. (Need more guns, I guess.) Plus the fact that for many Americans, health care is “inaccessible or unaffordable.” The report says:

Americans benefit less from safety net programs that can buffer the negative health effects of poverty and other social disadvantages.

The US mortality rate is 17th out of 17 for those under 50, and 16th out of 17 for those under 70.

But after that, our death rate plummets. “By the time American seniors hit 80,” Meyerson writes, “they have some of the longest life expectancies in the world.”

Part of the reason, he says, is that we’ve winnowed out the weak and sick, and those who can’t get health care, while the healthiest and wealthiest live a long time. But the bigger reason:

…at age 65, Americans enter a health-care system that ceases to be exceptional when compared with the systems in the other 16 nations studied. They leave behind the private provision of medical coverage, forsake the genius of the market and avail themselves of universal medical insurance. For the first time, they are beneficiaries of the same kind of social policy that their counterparts in other lands enjoy. And presto, change-o: Their life expectancy catches up with and eventually surpasses those of the French, Germans, Britons and Canadians.

To borrow the title of another wildly successful documentary, that’s an awful lot of Inconvenient Truth. But I’m sure Jeff Wennberg will go on believing that a handful of irked Canadians is all the proof he needs that single-payer health care doesn’t work. And besides, FREEDOM.  

In every one of his ham-fisted efforts to evade the gun control issue, Governor Shumlin has consistently called for a 50-state solution. And when asked for his opinion on possible new laws or regulations, he has consistently said he would wait for Vice President Biden to finish his review, and for the President to announce concrete steps — saying that he had faith in the process and the Administraiotn.

Well, today the waiting is over. President Obama announced a series of 23 executive orders aimed at tightening federal regulation of weapons and enhancing gun safety and public awareness. He also plans to introduce legislation that calls for…

…a ban on assault weapons, limits on high-capacity magazines, expanded background checks for gun purchases and new gun trafficking laws to crack down on the spread of weapons across the country.

And now, the Governor will have to make a decision. Does he stand with the President (in whom he had such faith), or does he stand with the National Rifle Association?

Or does he finagle his way around it?

Again?

So there’s this. Two different divisions of the Vermont Attorney General’s office are involved in the Macadam Mason case. He was the Thetford resident who died last June after being Tasered by state trooper David Shaffer.

Over here, the criminal division is investigating police conduct; specifically, was Shaffer justified in firing his Taser?

And over there, the civil division is defending the state police in a lawsuit filed by Mason’s partner, Theresa Davidonis. The civil division has refused to share any investigative documents with the plaintiff, citing the ongoing investigation by the criminal division.

Last week, a judge ordered the criminal division to provide an update on its probe, and explain why it’s taking so long to complete. Yesterday, the chief of the division said it was “a complicated case,” but added that it should be done in “two to three weeks.”

Meanwhile, on Monday in civil court, the civil division moved to dismiss Davidonis’ lawsuit for lack of evidence.

Hmm. One division withholds the evidence, the other tries to quash the suit for lack of evidence.

Maybe this is exactly how the system is supposed to work, but it sure does look bad.  

The civil division has previously argued that the withheld documents are “entirely irrelevant” to Davidonis’ claim. Those documents include:

…the audio recording of Shaffer at the scene of the incident, formal statements made by all VSP personnel who were present, documents related to Shaffer’s Taser training and Mason’s autopsy report.

I’m not a lawyer or anything, but that documentation seems kinda-sorta, y’know, relevant to me. I’d even say it’s crucial. And again, maybe this is how the system works — lawyers routinely file motions to dismiss, even if they know there’s no chance of winning — but good God, it makes the AG’s office look like a con man running a three-card monte game.  

It isn’t that hard, actually.

Yes, we find our share of reasons to criticize the Governor. For one thing, bad news is always more fun than good news. For another, we have pretty tough standards for liberal politicians. But there are some very good reasons why Shumlin was named “Most Valuable Governor” by The Nation.

So I’m taking a brief time-out from the usual snark and criticism to say a few good things about the Governor.

There are three very important issues on which Shumlin has staked out very progressive stances. First, he is one of a very few leading American politicians who pays serious, consistent attention to global warming. While the political establishment is obsessed with deficits and the national debt, Shumlin shines a spotlight on a much greater threat to our long-tern stability. And while most politicos are enthralled by the temporarily “cheap” energy from sources like tracking and tar sands, Shumlin has stuck to his vision of a green energy future for Vermont.

Second, he is the only politician I know of, who’s in a position to do something about it, who is committed to single-payer health care. Yes, there are plenty of questions about the specifics: What about the working poor? What’s the funding mechanism? WIll he have to give away the store in order to appease the business community? Can he make the system efficient enough to bend the cost curve? But at least he’s making the effort, and he’s made single-payer a cornerstone of his governorship.  

Third…

… at a time when public-sector unions (and workers) are under widespread attack — and his own budget is under immense pressure — he is a vigorous defender of those unions and workers. As quoted in The Nation:

“What is puzzling to me about the current debate about state budgets is that the focus has been not on bringing people together to solve common problems, like we have done in Vermont, but on division and blame. I do not believe that those to blame for our current financial troubles are our law enforcement officers, firefighters and other state employees whose services we take for granted.”

As The Nation rightly concluded, “Not many governors talk like that — or mean it.”

There are other things I like about the Governor. He has a real commitment to making government work as well as it possibly can. That’s not a sexy issue, but it’s critical: an effective government is the best argument for the liberal cause. Examples: the Dashboard and Spotlight initiatives, aimed at making government more transparent and accessible online; and the (belated) crackdown on buggy IT contracts.

When I look over the range of issues, I see a relative handful where I disagree with Shumlin. Gun control, the makeup of the emerging mental health care system, his resistance to an income-tax increase for high earners. Those differences are emphasized by his air of self-confidence that comes across as arrogant (and sometimes actually is), and his stubborn refusal to change his mind — or to admit it when he does change his mind. That makes him seem more obnoxious and contrary than he actually is. And makes him an easy target for the basement blogger class.

But when I look at the issues, all of them, I find that agree with the Governor more often than I disagree. He deserves a lot of credit for the things he’s done or begun to do. And he should expect our continuing scrutiny, and our criticism when we believe it’s warranted.  

Generic Thumbs Edition.

The Washington Electric Co-op, for declaring its opposition to a proposed three-year moratorium on new utility-scale wind projects. WEC has a solid track record for supporting renewable energy and being responsible to its customers. It’s small and local. It was sensitive enough that it chose to install wired “smart meters” rather than the wireless type. In its statement,  WEC says a wind moratorium “would be a serious, regressive and damaging mistake.”

WEC notes that we are already feeling the effects of climate change, in a statement issued during our dramatic mid-January thaw; and says that Vermont’s clean energy goals cannot be met “without incorporating some commercial scale wind projects into our landscape at selected and appropriate locations.” And regarding the allegation that Vermont is charging willy-nilly into wind power at the behest of big corporations, WEC says this:

Since 2002, three Vermont Governors have each established an open process for discussing wind siting issues, establishing criteria and encouraging public input. Although the commission established by Governor Shumlin is still at work, the efforts conducted by the Douglas and Dean administrations have been heeded and respected as projects have been considered. Vermont has now been considering, planning, debating, legislating, implementing and regulating wind generation for well over ten years. Vermont should not and has not “rolled over” for developers of wind projects, and the projects that have been approved have been subjected to tough rigorous review.

I’m sure the anti-wind folks will have a ready explanation for WEC going over to the dark side, and I’m sure I won’t buy it.

 Jim Deeghan and the credibility of the Vermont State Police, the latter now under repair. The disgraced former state trooper has pleaded guilty to taking more than $210,000 by faking time sheets, work reports, and traffic tickets. And also, according to the Freeploid, “not forwarding case paperwork for prosecution,” which would seem to suggest that some reported crimes were tossed in the dumpster by Deeghan. Yikes.

Authorities are stoutly insisting that Deeghan was a single bad apple. As far as we know, that’s true. But we also know that the system was unforgivably open to this kind of fraud. Given that, plus the loose talk that tends to circulate in an environment like a State Police barracks, the state has to count itself awfully damn lucky if Deeghan was, in fact, the only one to pad his overtime.

I’ll also give a tiny “Thumbs Down” to a rather ludicrous statement from Colonel Tom L’Esperance, VSP Director:

L’Esperance said he believes the 30,000 calls for state police service since the Deeghan case was uncovered in July shows Vermonters still have faith in the department.

Yeah, sure. Those Vermonters had so many options to choose from when they needed to report crimes.

And while we give a “Thumbs Down” to Deeghan and the VSP’s stunningly lax timesheet system, there’s an accompanying “Thumbs Up” to the Freeploid’s Transparency Tracker, Mike Donoghue, who should now be able to get access to all the documents that had been withheld pending resolution of the case. Given the Freeploid’s devotion to the cause of transparency and the irresistible juiciness of l’affaire Deeghan, I think we can look forward to lots and lots of articles from the keyboard of Mr. Donoghue.

After the jump: An honorable departure, a questionable one, treasure in a cornfield, and more gubernatorial fumbling on gun control.

Longtime Freeploid reporter/editor/etc Candace Page, who has announced she will retire in the spring. Page spent most of her career at the Burlington Free Press; 33-plus years in all. For the past seven years, she’s covered the environmental beat. The Freeploid’s story announcing her retirement summed up her accomplishments like this:

The winner of numerous journalism awards, Page is regarded at the Free Press and beyond as possessing an extensive knowledge of the issues she covers, and of her native Vermont; cultivating a rapport with sources from all walks of life; and being a “consummate storyteller” with a deep command of the language.

Couldn’t agree more. We wish her all the best, and thank her for her long and valued service.

 The freely revolving door between government and private sector, for allowing unseemly spectacles like this:

Karen Marshall, who spearheaded Gov. Peter Shumlin’s universal broadband expansion efforts, will be the new president of VTel Data Network. The company, based in Springfield, Vt., received $116 million in federal stimulus grants in 2011 for broadband expansion in rural, underserved areas of the state.

Nothing against Marshall, but it just looks really bad when you have a top Administration official leave public service for an executive job with one of the companies she dealt with. What’s worse, as VTDigger reports, the announcement came less than two weeks after the Shumlin Administration had announced a $5 million grant to VTel. Marshall insists that her contact with VTel regarding possible employment did not begin until after the grant was announced. If true, it all happened incredibly quickly; executive moves like this are usually a matter of months, not days.

There may be nothing at all fishy going on here, but the optics are terrible. It doesn’t reflect well on the credibility or independence of the Shumlin Administration. Methinks we need a few more ethics laws.

Jesse Rodriquez of West Camp, New York, for pioneering a potentially lucrative market for Vermont agriculture:

Vermont State Police who arrested a man on drug and traffic charges have found 2 ounces of cocaine in a cornfield after a brief chase.

Yeah, Rodriquez left his car and ran into a cornfield, where he tried to dump his drugs before he could be arrested. But hey, sounds like a delightful way to spice up the old Corn Maze business. “If you stash it, they will come.”

The Keene, NH-based contractor, Baybutt Construction, for screwing up a whole bunch of projects on both sides of the Connecticut River. Baybutt is apparently on the skids; it’s been failing to pay subcontractors on a variety of jobs, and its headquarters is scheduled to be part of a foreclosure sale on February 1 — generally a bad sign for the future viability of a commercial enterprise.

Here in Vermont, Baybutt was the contractor on a renovation of a state office building in Brattleboro, and the town library in Rockingham. Last week, the Rockingham Selectboard voted to terminate its contract with Baybutt because of its failure to pay subcontractors or to secure a required performance bond.

The contractor’s apparent implosion has put several projects on hold, and left numerous subcontractors holding their respective bags. I haven’t seen a total figure for its outstanding obligations, but it’s likely they run well into the seven figures. Double yikes.

Our best buddy Governor Peter Shumlin, for continuing to flail unconvincingly around the issue of gun control. Yeah, he still insists upon a 50-state solution because “if states have different laws, you’re going to have different outcomes.” Not sure what he means by that; elsewhere he has argued that state-by-state doesn’t work at all. If different laws result in “different outcomes,” doesn’t that mean the state laws do have some effect after all?

Beyond that, he’s making it just a tiny bit clearer that he really isn’t in favor of any significant new national gun regulation either. Mass shootings, he told VPR, are caused by “factors other than gun laws”:

“It isn’t as simple as putting a particular gun lock on, or banning a particular weapon or banning a particular magazine. It’s more about looking at what we have become. Our approach to violence, our approach to mental health treatment, our glorification of violence.”

Again, the Gov is offering a slightly softened version of National Rifle Association dogma — shifting the blame away from guns and ammo, and toward mental illness and a culture that glorifies violence. Yeah, good luck reforming our entire culture.

Further, Shumlin refused to take a stand on potential measures like an assault-weapons ban or tighter background checks because “none of [those] things… will solve the problem.”

Uh-huh. So what you’re looking for is a measure that will completely solve the problem once and for all. Nothing halfway; nothing that would merely make it harder for someone to shoot up a school.

Maybe we should apply that same principle to the War on Terror, eh? Airport security is out because it “doesn’t solve the problem.” Homeland Security? Shut it down; it “doesn’t solve the problem.” Military missions and drone strikes? Uh-uh; they “don’t solve the problem.” What we need, if we are to follow Governor Shumlin’s reasoning, is a measure that will separate mentally ill terrorists from deadly weapons and change the cultures that glorify violence.

I can hardly wait to hear him try to dance around Joe Biden’s recommendations.