( – promoted by Sue Prent)

State Committee members occasionally get odd pieces of snail mail. The one I got recently from the Poultney (southwest of Rutland) Rotary Club qualifies.

It was an invitation to the club’s “Governor James H. Douglas Roast & Toast Gala Dinner.”

Well, turns out they didn’t mean it literally. To help “roast & toast” the governor as a farewell gesture, the Rotarians want their expected 250 guests to pay $75 per plate (grossing almost $19k for the event).

But don’t worry, nothing raucous will happen at this shindig, the Rotarians promise:

The event will be a fun and tasteful affair, bringing friends and colleagues together to celebrate Governor Jim Douglas’ many years of public service.

Begs the question why someone who hates government and wants to shrink it drastically has spent his entire adult life taking a government paycheck. I wonder if he’ll collect his per diem for that day. I also wonder which of those categories — “friends” or “colleagues” —  a Democratic State Committee member would likely fall into.

Of course, if you can’t attend the October 9th affair, you can buy an ad in the commemorative book that will be published:

We hope that you will attend this event honoring the Governor and his wife Dorothy; we promise to make this an enjoyable occasion for all. There will be a commemorative book distributed at dinner, and space is available to place an ad for all to see, be it a promotion for your business or parting words for our Governor. Enclosed you will find a sell-sheet explaining the details. [emphasis added]

A full page ad to tell the world what you’d like to say to the Governor costs $200. A quarter-page ad costs half that.

Rotary is an international business-oriented service club founded in 1905 for men; it began admitting  women only in 1987, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in support of a California chapter which had allowed women in. Its two mottos are: “Service above self” and “They profit most who serve best,” the latter motto changed to its current gender-neutral language only 6 years ago. A quick search using the Rotary International’s “club locator” tool turned up no results for the Poultney club; a search for a website for the Poultney Rotary Club likewise found nothing.

Rotary clubs are described as “a non-partisan, non-sectarian and secular organization […] open to business and professional leaders of all ages (18 and upwards) and economic status.” They have admirable projects, like eradicating polio and awarding scholarships. Maybe inviting Democratic State Committee members to this event is its best expression of its nonpartisanship.

I dunno, but it was a headscratcher as to why I would want to spend money I don’t have to “celebrate” a governor I’ve been working to defeat since 2002.

And, btw, there was no mention of any ribbons for Gov. Scissorhands to sever for old times’ sake. Perhaps the program committee should look into that.

[Note: bumped back to the top to keep reminding readers that their vote today is important! ~ NanuqFC}

Whichever candidate you support, I have just one favor to ask, one reminder to offer: VOTE in the primary election.

The election is today, Tuesday, August 24.

Democrats, at least, will never have a better chance to pick a competent, principled candidate to carry us into the governor’s office.

And there are the down-ticket races, too:

Lt. Governor: between Steve (“fighting for the middle class”) Howard and Chris (“farm-to-plate”) Bray.

Secretary of State: Charles (“it’s a non-partisan office”) Merriman vs. Jim (“policy is important”) Condos.

State Auditor: Ed (“I’ve done this before and I can do it again”) Flanagan vs. Doug (“thorough and complete”) Hoffer.

Your vote will never matter more than it does in this primary election.

Whatever your choices — make them. Today. Please.

Two separate items in the “it would be funny but …” category:

First, according to Susan Smallheeer over at the Rutland Herald, the new NRC resident inspector at the Vernon nuke plant should fit in easily to the Entergy corporate culture: he is one of its own former employees:

The new senior resident inspector from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission worked for Entergy Nuclear, the owner of Vermont Yankee nuclear reactor, until 2006, before he left to become a federal inspector.

But a spokesman for the NRC said David Spindler stopped working for Entergy Nuclear in 2006, well beyond the two-year hiatus federal regulations call for.

Oh, well, then, that’s okay. Especially since the NRC spokesman, Neil Sheehan, added this admonishment:

“If an NRC employee faces a conflict of interest, we expect them to discuss it with their supervisors in a timely manner,” he said.

Just like the NRC responded to the tritium leak “in a timely manner.” Don’t we all feel safer now?

Second, Ed Shamy, publisher and editor of The County Courier, a weekly paper out of Enosburg in Franklin County, has editorialized eloquently on a request for bids for a private contractor to make Vermont’s license plates … which are currently made by Vermont prisoners.

Shamy researched the Vermont prison hourly pay rate: 25 cents an hour ranging up to a max of $1.35 an hour:

The state is asking private vendors if they want to make our license plates, and how much they would charge. There could be cost savings to be had, and Vermont is looking beneath every rock and cow pie for cost savings these days.

Well, don’t forget that these prisoners also get room and board, not reflected in the hourly wage.

Perhaps hiring a non-jailed Vermonter could be cheaper. Lots of us can only dream of 25 cents per hour. Another option could be a few thousand school-aged children from mainland China who are looking for work outside the fireworks factory.

Shamy’s editorial was well done, and includes an explanation of what makes Vermont  license plates special: debossing.

(Note: The Courier has limited online access without subscription, but Ed is working on providing a link for us to this editorial, which I’ll add later if it works out. Otherwise you can read this week’s free content at www.countycourier.com)  

There are new numbers out on Vermont’s currently six-way race, but you’ve got to consider the source: Rasmussen, widely regarded as, uh, sympathetic to Republicans. If you click on over, the polling site reports that Republican gubernatorial candidate Brian Dubie leads all five Democratic candidates.

Why might we question that outcome? Well, they also show Republican Governor Jim = fire-all-the-union-employees (unless-they-work-for-Entergy) Douglas as enjoying a 64% approval rating. One has to wonder at their claim they screened their respondents for likely voters. Other somewhat odd results suggest that Sen. Susan Bartlett has better name-recognition than Sen. (and former Lt. Gov.) Doug Racine:

Dubie and Markowitz are the best-known of the candidates. Dunne and Racine are the least-known.

The good news, if the poll is to be believed, lands in Sec. of State Deb Markowitz’s lap. Of the five D candidates, she polls the closest, lagging only seven points behind the debate-shy Dubie, 46% – 36%. Racine and Bartlett poll equally behind Dubie at 48%-35%, followed by Peter Shumlin (51%-33%) and Matt Dunne (51%-29%).

[Update: It’s been brought to my attention that the text at the Rasmussen Vermont poll site says Bartlett lags Dubie in a head-to-head by 52% – 26%.

When State Senator Susan Bartlett is his Democratic opponent, Dubie holds a two-to-one lead, 52% to 26%.

I was looking at the charts in the right-hand sidebar which show Bartlett and Racine with the identical difference. The chart info is copied after the flip. Just one more reason to ask questions about any data.]

Election 2010: Vermont Governor

Brian Dubie (R)48%

Doug Racine (D) 35%

Some Other Candidate 5%   Not Sure    12%

Election 2010: Vermont Governor

Brian Dubie (R) 48%

Susan Bartlett (D) 35%

Some Other Candidate 5%   Not Sure 12%

One other, uh, interesting thing in the data is the some other candidate/unsure category. In the Markowitz head-to-head, it’s 14% (4% some other; 10% unsure). For Shumlin, the total duh factor is 16% (6 and 10); Racine’s and Bartlett’s total duh factor is up one more at 17% (5 and 12 each); and Dunne’s is 20% (6 and 14).

And even Republican leanings can’t suggest that U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy will have to break a sweat in his re-election campaign, but that’s another poll.

There's new numbers out on Vermont's currently six-way race, but you've got to consider the source: Rasmussen, widely regarded as, uh, sympathetic to Republicans. If you click on over, the polling site reports that Republican gubernatorial candidate Brian Dubie leads all five Democratic candidates. Why might we question that outcome? Well, they also show Republican Governor Jim = fire-all-the-union-employees (unless-they-work-for-Entergy) Douglas as enjoying a 64% approval rating. One has to wonder at their claim they screened their respondents for likely voters. Other somewhat odd results suggest that Sen. Susan Bartlett has better name-recognition than Sen. (and former Lt. Gov.) Doug Racine: 

Dubie and Markowitz are the best-known of the candidates. Dunne and Racine are the least-known.

 The good news, if the poll is to be believed, lands in Sec. of State Deb Markowitz's lap. Of the five D candidates, she polls the closest, lagging only seven points behind the debate-shy Dubie, 46% – 36%. Racine and Bartlett poll equally behind Dubie at 48%-35%, followed by Peter Shumlin (51%-33%) and Matt Dunne (51%-29%). [Update: It's been brought to my attention that the text at the Rasmussen Vermont poll site says Bartlett lags Dubie in a head-to-head by 52% – 26%.

I was looking at the charts in the right-hand sidebar which show Bartlett and Racine with the identical difference. The chart info is copied after the flip. Just one more reason to ask questions about any data.]

Election 2010: Vermont Governor Brian Dubie (R) 48% Doug Racine (D) 35% Some Other Candidate 5% Not Sure 1

Election 2010: Vermont Governor Brian Dubie (R) 48% Susan Bartlett (D) 35% Some Other Candidate 5% Not Sure 12%

One other, uh, interesting thing in the data is the some other candidate/unsure category. In the Markowitz head-to-head, it's 14% (4% some other; 10% unsure). For Shumlin, the total duh factor is 16% (6 and 10); Racine's and Bartlett's total duh factor is up one more at 17% (5 and 12 each); and Dunne's is 20% (6 and 14). And even Republican leanings can't suggest that U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy will have to break a sweat in his re-election campaign, but that's another poll.

To hear the Douglas-Dubie Administration tell it, you’d think that Vermont’s public schools are wasting money on all sides. But you’d be as wrong as they are. Republicans love “tests” as a measure of “outcomes.” Well, you can’t get much better outcomes than these:

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, Vermont’s 8th-graders achieved the best scores in the country in reading. Fourth-graders came in second after Massachusetts.

Not to mention that results in math posted last fall showed Vermont’s 8th-graders getting the second-highest scores in the country, with 4th-graders ranking third.

Now how do you suppose a small state like Vermont managed to get those outstanding results?

“Vermonters invest in their local public schools, year after year, because they recognize the importance of hiring the best and brightest to teach their children,” [Vt NEA President Martha] Allen said. “It is gratifying – though not surprising – that Vermont’s students continue to achieve at such high levels.”

So much for undermining public education by using vouchers to funnel public money to private and religious schools, as has been proposed by the state’s current Republican administration.

Republicans somehow never allow facts to get in the way of their ideology.  

There are new numbers out on Vermont’s currently six-way race, but you’ve got to consider the source: Rasmussen, widely regarded as, uh, sympathetic to Republicans. If you click on over, the polling site reports that Republican gubernatorial candidate Brian Dubie leads all five Democratic candidates.

Why might we question that outcome? Well, they also show Republican Governor Jim = fire-all-the-union-employees (unless-they-work-for-Entergy) Douglas as enjoying a 64% approval rating. One has to wonder at their claim they screened their respondents for likely voters. Other somewhat odd results suggest that Sen. Susan Bartlett has better name-recognition than Sen. (and former Lt. Gov.) Doug Racine:

Dubie and Markowitz are the best-known of the candidates. Dunne and Racine are the least-known.

The good news, if the poll is to be believed, lands in Sec. of State Deb Markowitz’s lap. Of the five D candidates, she polls the closest, lagging only seven points behind the debate-shy Dubie, 46% – 36%. Racine and Bartlett poll equally behind Dubie at 48%-35%, followed by Peter Shumlin (51%-33%) and Matt Dunne (51%-29%).

[Update: It’s been brought to my attention that the text at the Rasmussen Vermont poll site says Bartlett lags Dubie in a head-to-head by 52% – 26%.

When State Senator Susan Bartlett is his Democratic opponent, Dubie holds a two-to-one lead, 52% to 26%.

I was looking at the charts in the right-hand sidebar which show Bartlett and Racine with the identical difference. The chart info is copied after the flip. Just one more reason to ask questions about any data.]

Election 2010: Vermont Governor

Brian Dubie (R)48%

Doug Racine (D) 35%

Some Other Candidate 5%   Not Sure    12%

Election 2010: Vermont Governor

Brian Dubie (R) 48%

Susan Bartlett (D) 35%

Some Other Candidate 5%   Not Sure 12%

One other, uh, interesting thing in the data is the some other candidate/unsure category. In the Markowitz head-to-head, it’s 14% (4% some other; 10% unsure). For Shumlin, the total duh factor is 16% (6 and 10); Racine’s and Bartlett’s total duh factor is up one more at 17% (5 and 12 each); and Dunne’s is 20% (6 and 14).

And even Republican leanings can’t suggest that U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy will have to break a sweat in his re-election campaign, but that’s another poll.

No one loves the Healthcare Insurance Reform Bill. At best it ameliorates the worst abuses of the private insurance companies and makes sure 95% of Americans would be covered with or without subsidies. At worst it’s a huge dump of public funds to private business with a mandate that everyone must buy coverage.

But there it is. The bill (I think it was HR3590) passed by a vote of 219- 212 at 10:48 p.m. March 21, the first full day of Spring.

In a roll call vote that followed three hours of debate on war and peace, Vermont Rep. Peter Welch voted with Rep. Dennis Kucinich, 58 other Democrats, and 5 Republicans on Kucinich’s House Concurrent Resolution 248.

That resolution, “pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution,” in effect would have set a timeline for withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan:  either within 30 days of the passage of the resolution or by Dec. 31, 2010 if the earlier date would lead to an unsafe withdrawal.

The resolution failed by a vote of 356 to 65.

Ron Paul was one of the Republicans. Curmudgeon and cynic Barney Frank was among the 12 handfuls of Democrats voting in favor, as was Tammy Baldwin, the first out lesbian congresswoman, and outspoken Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida’s 8th District.

On the huh?! list was Michigan’s Bart Stupak in the yes column (when did he start acting like a Democrat?) along with disgraced Democrat Rep. Eric Massa  (must have been his last vote, the seat is now listed as vacant), and under-investigation Rep. Charlie Rangel, both of New York. Perhaps when there’s nothing more to lose, these guys can finally vote their beliefs.

NH Democrats Paul Hodes (now running for Senate) and Carol Shea-Porter joined voted against.

I’m glad Peter Welch was among the 65 voting for peace now, even if some of the company was a tad unsavory.

Doris Haddock, aka Granny D, died Tuesday afternoon, March 9, 2010. She had turned 100 years old in late January, and celebrated with a party at the NH State House. When she was 90, she walked across the entire country for campaign finance reform (there’s an HBO documentary available free on Hulu, called “Run Granny Run”).

In 2004, she ran a very grassroots campaign for Senate against Sen. Judd Gregg. She lost, yes, but not before showing up the GOP for the arrogant, elitist gang it was, and Gregg for the patronizing sexist he is.

There’s a website dedicated to her speeches, many of which still pertain to how politics is done in 2010.

Here’s a quote from one given in 2000 in Boston on election reform:

We elect our representatives to represent our values and our needs in shaping public policy and allocating community resources. In this work, the regular citizen doesn’t stand a chance if elected representatives must first go to wealthy special interests to fund their campaigns. The representation game is over before it begins.

It is nothing particularly new. But in the past, the wealthy lived among us. We shopped in their stores on Main Street and their children went to grade school with ours. We shared the same community interests and values.

We are now talking about inhumane organizations of inhuman scale and international allegiance. They care not if our main streets or our families prosper or if they blow away. We must not have these monsters influencing our community decisions. We must not allow them to provide funds for our candidates, where those funds will deny us proper representation.

And another, also on campaign finance reform from November 2000 that still rings true:

I set out on my walk across the United States at a time when the leaders in Congress were saying that no one cared much about campaign finance reform. I wanted to demonstrate that I indeed cared, and I hoped to meet others along the way who cared. That is what I found.

Not very many people understood the term “campaign finance reform,” but nearly all of the thousands of people I met felt and still feel that they no longer have senators and congressmen who represent their interests. They believe that wealthy special interests have taken away their opportunity for a representative democracy. And many, many people got teary-eyed or they cried outright about it. They sent me on my way with a prayer for success for all of us, and many of them –over 2,000 of them– came to join me for the last mile in Washington, D.C. That was a joyful day, but despair, sadness and anger were the typical emotions I encountered along my way.

On that last day of my walk, we started from the graves of Arlington–rows upon rows of white stones that mark the sacrifices that have been made for the idea of freedom and self-governance. I felt those honorable spirits walk with us to the Capitol to demand an end to the political bribery that now dominates Washington. This bribery nicely calls itself campaign finance–much as a prostitute might wish to be called a personal companion. But it is what it is.

Rest in peace, Granny D. Others will carry the torch against corporate funding of campaigns.

If/when Congress passes a campaign finance law restricting coroporate-financed campaigns and contributions by foreign corporations, maybe they should call it the Granny D Public Campaign Finance Act.