I enjoy Jon Margolis’s work a lot, but he does suffer chronically from that journalistic beyond-left-and-right-itis. What I mean is, he rarely misses an opportunity to assert that “the left is saying ‘x'” while “the right is saying ‘y’,” and that he – as an objective journalist – can see that neither are correct, and reality is in the middle. On some particularly egregious cases where a Republican has done something untoward, his obligatory Dems-do-it-too counterpoints have at times been rather strained.

In the case of his commentary on the Till survey, where we at GMD are once again IDed as the fringe lefties, he doesn’t offer a strained counterpoint per se, but to strike his middleman ground, he is forced to ignore a key documented fact.

Here’s Margolis from vtdigger:

On the other side of the political spectrum, the liberal Democratic web site Green Mountain Daily accused Till of “trying to derail” the bill.

This seems unlikely. Dr. Till voted for the bill, though he has been critical of some aspects of it.

It seems unlikely only if you choose to ignore the email from Till that was forwarded to GMD. Again, that was an email clearly sent by Till to his fellow ideological opponents of the heart of the proposal: the modified Hsiao single-payer model. A reminder; in it, Till said:

Thanks to all who have answered my survey.  Anyone who has not yet completed it please do so.  If you need the link please email me directly.

[…] I want to make it clear that the single payer religion is very strong in Montpelier as is the magical thinking that it will cure all problems with our health care system.

I want to make you all aware that next Thursday, April 7 at the State House there will be a public hearing for providers.  I’m pretty sure the single payer crowd plans to pack the room and witness list.  The more of you that can come to Montpelier and testify the better.

Best wishes,

george till

So Till set up an open-ended, unscientific, unverifiable “poll.” Then he sent a rallying email to those of a certain ideological bent to be sure and take advantage of that “poll” in order to muster a rhetorical defeat of those he identified as the opposition. Frankly, it is unreasonable not to assume that the poll’s very intent was to scuttle the fundamental mechanisms of the bill. Certainly that’s what supporters of the legislation – both inside and outside the legislature – concluded. 1+1=2. No “liberal” math needed, just math.

I suppose the argument could be made that “fundamentally changing its very essence” is not the same as “derailing,” but it would be a naive argument, or at the least a real reach. Bills of this magnitude and complexity are houses of cards. They don’t get fundamentally reworked without virtually collapsing. Catamount Health passed over the complete collapse of the House bill in the Senate. That both the original House bill and the Senate’s ultimately triumphant Catamount alternative were about “health care” doesn’t alter that fact.

Till did vote for the bill, as we noted. And in the context of his full engagement with the bill – before, during and after its passage in the House – its hard to see that vote as anything other than cynical, even craven.

This from the office of Burlington Mayor Kiss:

“I have accepted Jonathan’s decision with regret,” said Burlington Mayor Bob Kiss.  “I want to thank him for his hard work and personal commitment to the City throughout his career.  Among many other accomplishments, Jonathan’s management of the budget has resulted in 5 straight fiscal years of a level general services tax rate and an increase in the City’s undesignated reserve fund from $75,000 to over $5 million.  Jonathan has also built a strong management team in the Clerk-Treasurer’s Office which will ensure a successful transition.”

Leopold’s resignation letter can be seen here. Here’s the quote that most will notice:

I regret the difficulties the City has faced as a result of the BT controversy and I hope the

City is able to resolve these issues. In hindsight, I believe that we could have made a more complete disclosure of the violation of Condition 60 when we first learned of it in November 2008.  This has resulted in an unfortunate division within the city.

I believe it is time for Burlington to come together and move forward.  I do not want my continued role as Chief Administrative Officer to polarize the City further or hinder progress in addressing the challenges of the future.  I will work with you to develop a sound budget for FY 2012 and to provide a smooth transition

Here’s a fun sidenote on the George Till Survey Monkey monkey survey that’s too fun to pass up. We’ve heard Republicans defend the unscientific online poll which was built by Democrat Till out of his desire to derail the “single payer religion.” They haven’t learned that the first lesson of what to do when you’ve trapped yourself in a hole is to stop digging, though.

I found this in the comments at vtbuzz from a few days back. It’s Rep. Anne Donahue (R-Northfield) trying to claim the high ground by asserting that it was a breach of trust for pro-reform legislators to take the poll themselves as a demonstration of just how bogus it is, and how (un)seriously it should be taken:

The only persons other than MDs who were aware of the access code to respond, however, were members of the House Health Care Committee.

I believe Dr. Till felt he could trust the ethics of his peer physicians and his legislative colleagues to maintain legitimacy of responses. Sadly, that proved to be a misplaced trust

Actually, Representative, what you refer to as an “access code” is generally called a URL, or more colloquially, a web page address. You know, those things that are wide open and identified by search engines. Of course, the simple charge that legislators passed on a web address already in statewide distribution doesn’t have quite the punch that suggesting they dishonestly passed out a secret code does. Also, acknowledging that the “access code” was nothing more than a URL in a browser would kind of reinforce your opponents’ point about the absurdity of the whole exercise, no?

Look, I’ll be the first to grant that there are a lot of things to like about Rep. Donahue, but this is silly.

So here, then, are some more Rep. Donahue-style access codes. Oh lord, think of the havoc which will be wrought now that GMD is daring to make them public:

• CIA access code: https://www.cia.gov
• The Federal Reserve: http://www.federalreserve.gov
• Apple computers: http://www.apple.com
• The Vatican: http://www.vatican.va
• The Biggest Loser: www.nbc.com/the-biggest-loser

Can you handle the awesome access power?

If you’ve spent any time in the liberal news-web at all, you know who Lt. Dan Choi is. Choi was discharged from the military two years ago “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and became the highest profile activist in the nation for its repeal. Here’s a bit from his wikipedia page:

Choi received a discharge letter following his coming out on The Rachel Maddow Show. In response, Choi penned an open letter to U.S. President Barack Obama and the United States Congress.[11] In the letter, Choi challenged the morality and wisdom of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, writing that the policy is “a slap in the face to me. It is a slap in the face to my soldiers, peers and leaders who have demonstrated that an infantry unit can be professional enough to accept diversity, to accept capable leaders, to accept skilled soldiers.”

Despite his appeal and a Courage Campaign petition signed by almost 162,000 people,[12] on June 30, 2009, a panel of New York National Guard officers recommended that Choi be discharged from the military.[13] As of February 2010, Choi was serving again in his National Guard reserve unit, the discharge having not yet been “finalized”.[14] On June 29, 2010, Choi’s discharge was finalized.[1]

Choi is among 59 gay Arabic linguists, along with nine gay Farsi linguists, who have faced a discharge from the U.S. military from 2004 through 2009, according to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.[15]

Here’s Part 1 (the video portion) of my sit-down with Lt. Dan Choi before his talk last week at Norwich University in Northfield, on April 5th. Lt. Choi talked freely about a range of topics over the course of our 20 minutes or so. In this video segment, he talks a bit about his impressions of Norwich University before going on to discuss the nature of this historical moment we find ourselves in vis-a-vis equality (and what a privilege it is to be a part of it). He also gets a kick out of my calling him a celebrity (he – in progressive activist circles he’s a superstar!), discusses activism in general, and spends some time on the question of why, during the Tea Party backlash, progress on GLBT rights still seems to be creeping forward. Choi discusses how the activism around equality in the 21st century is more about personal identification, rather than than making legislative demands, and talks about the “honor” implicit in the act of coming out.

Part two, where Choi discusses his Christian faith, among many other topics, will be in good ol’ fashioned text. Look for it in the next couple days.

Absolutely jaw-dropping. From the comments:

Rep. Till addressed the Democratic caucus today concerning the brouhaha with his survey. Basically, he was angry with the fact that the survey had been tainted by “contaminants”. He referred to the fact that some members of the caucus had accessed it, as well as maybe some others in the building. He admitted that he was naive in the way he developed the survey, trusting perhaps that it would be only answered by physicians, but now on second thought said he should have put in some failsafe mechanisms like perhaps requiring some form of identification.

He was looking to rescue the survey and make it salvageable in some form, and asked that any in the caucus who took it come forward or if any member knew of people who had taken it to notify him. If from what VT Buzz, the BFP political blog, said, Rep. Jewett had indeed taken the survey, and he was in the room as Rep. Till gave his address to the caucus. Talk about an uncomfortable moment.

Also interesting was the mention that websites had provided a link to the survey. Anyhow he mentioned how much time and effort he had put in (100+ hours in his reckoning) and around $1000. He was upset at how advocates had compromised the survey. C’est la vie. There is still more to this story as Dr. Till tries to resurrect the credibility of his survey.

Boo frickin’ hoo. Is this guy for real?

So let me see if I have this right: Till is complaining about being victimized because the online poll he tossed up with the stated goal of defeating the “single-payer religion” as he put it hasn’t worked out the way he wanted? That people have objections to a now-famously invalid exercise in political propoganda? This guy thinks he’s the injured party?

Puh-leeze. And pretending to be ignorant about the validity of wide-open browser-driven “polls?” Who doesn’t know that this isn’t a valid way to do a real survey? What else does Till not understand about the real world’s painfully-obvious? As one GMD reader suggested, this defense is reminiscent of George Bush and the supermarket scanner.

But I don’t think he’s that ignorant. After all, he laid out what the point of his survey was – not to get a dispassionate sense of the opinions of physicians, but to develop a tool to scuttle health care reform.

Which means he’s really just whining that he was made to look bad. It takes a lot of cojones to call out Jewett like the commenter says was done in the caucus – or perhaps just a complete disassociation from reality. (NOTE: Jewett – and probably Michael Fisher as per the morning’s VPR report – were not explicitly called out, but challenged by inference based on media reports. Thanks ec.) Jewett, who is one of the lawmakers Till cynically and dishonestly attempted to manipulate through this exercise in clumsy persuasion, is now being rhetorically bullied by Till for doing the responsible thing and checking out the reality of the poll himself – for not shutting up and falling into line when told to by his better from Jericho. If lawmakers didn’t feel insulted by the phony survey, they should feel insulted by his clumsy efforts to intimidate them in the caucus in a feeble effort to resuscitate it.

Finally, he’s bemoaning the wasting of his 100+ hours and $1000 that went into the “survey.” WTF!?!? The questions seem to have been generated right out of his agenda-purposed head, and $1000? He clearly didn’t use more than the features of the survey monkey “pro” version – so we’re talking about a whopping $32 if its run two months. Nor did he hire a proofreader, as there was a mistake on the first page (the survey has been shut down now).

So what’s with all the time and money? Is he wining and dining the folks he wants to fill it out or what? In any event, I think a second career as an accountant is probably not in the cards.

This guy’s sense of personal entitlement is astonishing. Time to dial down the ego and live with the fact that this one goes in the “loss” column, Dr. Till. You blew it – badly. It’s way past time to walk it back if you want to maintain any hope of salvaging a single vote from your base next time around.

Is this the next phony “survey” likely to be in circulation at the Statehouse, following George Till’s online survey monkey nonsense?

This one has been created by a prominent employer benefits administrator in Vermont, Hickok and Boardman, and distributed to their employer clients statewide. Not necessarily their issue, but a quick search of the Secretary of State’s site reveals that President Scott Boardman of H&B (who are also in the real estate business) to be a longtime Brian Dubie and Jim Douglas campaign contributor, so…

Here’s the link to the online survey which, again, seems to have no restrictions on who can take it, or how many times (assuming you delete your browser cookies or restart your computer before taking it again): healthcare-reform.questionpro.com.

On the Till survey, since our initial report on the absurdness of it all, there have been a couple media reactions. VPR this morning discussed the issue head-on. No surprise there, as they take their jobs as journalists pretty seriously.

The Times Argus and Rutland Herald seem to have doubled down, though. I dunno – maybe it’s Pulitzer-Prize winner Moats’ issue with us blogmaniacs, or maybe it’s right-wing publisher Mitchell’s political determination. I suspect the latter in the case of this weekend’s op-ed which uncritically references the Till survey (paywall – no link available).

However, neither notion accounts for Vermont Press Bureau reporter Peter Hirschfeld’s equally uncritical accounting. He references questions around the survey in his weekend piece, gets a quote from Till and counter-quotes from single-payer advocate Dr. Deb Richter.

The problem is, this isn’t a he-said-she-said situation. The Till “survey” was objectively ridiculous. In fact, you can find such online surveys routinely ridiculed, and they are never – never – cited by reputable media outlets as legitimate. Never. (See jvwalt’s diary here that includes reference to the Vermont AP’s explicit rejection of the survey) Hirschfeld chose to play simple stenographer here instead of reporting, and it’s a shame. If he was uncomfortable stating the objective reality that the Till survey was bunk himself, he could easily have put a call into any academic anywhere who could have told him that online, browser-driven surveys like that aren’t just un-scientific, they are anti-scientific. Unfortunately, he didn’t – just chose instead to leave it hanging out there as though reasonable people might consider it to be legitimate. In doing so, he did not fulfill his responsibility as a journalist and did his profession no favors.

Perhaps he was acting under orders of Publisher Mitchell? Who knows, but I no longer believe that Hirschfeld is promoting his own agenda when he does something like this. I think he’s better than this, and was just sloppy. Live and learn.

But I know that having the Times Argus and Rutland Herald powers-that-be wax intellectual and professional while promoting the merits of a half-assed survey monkey poll is… well, as a Vermont media person myself, it’s embarrassing. Do we have to embrace such hokum and make ourselves look like backwoods clods? Ouch.

IBM’s John O’Kane has long played the role of Vermont Republican leader. Yes, Democrats across the spectrum, from Peter Clavelle to Peter Shumlin, have all tried to play him as though he may be approachable, even reasonable on issues – always to no avail. Regarding the health care reform now working its way through the legislature, one would think O’Kane and IBM would at least be open to the idea that a more active government role could mitigate spiraling costs borne by their business and – more importantly – could inject some fiscal predictability into future corporate budgets.

But forget it. O’Kane is IBM in Vermont, and O’Kane has proven time and time again to be nothing more than a Republican ideologue, not open to any serious, non-partisan analysis of policy impacts to the corporate entity that signs his paychecks. It’s a shame.

So, predictably, IBM is stepping front and center into the role of scuttling the landmark health reform currently working itself through Montpelier. Fortunately for us, Vermonters for Health Care Freedom, the anti-health care reform point operation, has inadvertently dumped some documents into the greater internet via sloppy email, and are now in full-blown circulation – documents which give a glimpse into their legislative strategies for moving forward for we in the semi-professional, citizen journalism set. Documents seem to come via The Fleischer Jacobs Group (a financial firm, which is a subsidiary of a much bigger financial firm – NFP Securities, Inc.), which is playing a role in the lobbying effort for IBM. It’s a machine of sorts, and I’m a little unclear on all the working parts.

We’ll be analyzing these over the coming days, but rather than play gatekeeper, I’ll start with posting what I’ve got. Take a look and comment on what you find. We’ll reference your comments and thoughts as we add our own and develop the conversation over the coming days. Team journalism!

Peter Welch plugs away in the (crazy) House. Yesterday he took to the floor denouncing another goofily-titled GOP bill, the Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011 (H.R. 910), which would prohibit the EPA from considering greenhouse gasses as pollutants and exempt them from regulation. There is no stopping bills like this in the House these days (they should get stopped in the Senate or at the President’s desk), but it’s still critical that Welch and his allies make a lot of noise, rather than roll over for the House of Tea Party Representatives.

Welch: “The authors of this bill have come to the conclusion that global warming is a hoax. Give them credit, getting there was not an easy task and flies in the face of the unanimous conclusion of American scientists. Supporters of this legislation are following the long-established tradition we humans have, the ability to disregard the obvious and proven when that conflicts with our ideology.”

Okay, this is pathetic. This “Survey” by Rep. George Till, who cravenly voted for health care reform while continuing his efforts to scuttle it behind the scenes, is even more bogus than I thought. Even worse, it was reportedly funded by the College of Medicine at UVM. Your tax dollars at work.

One wonders how much funding was allocated and where it actually went, as the survey itself is an online poll. From survey monkey. That’s about $14/month for their bells-and-whistles reporting features (unless you just go for the free version). If the survey cost more than that, I’d be curious to see where the money went (not to proofreading, as you’ll see if you check it out).

And don’t take my word for it. Want to play doctor? Here’s the link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/9SD9YRJ. Take the survey, clear your browser cookies and take it again. And again and again.

Any media outlet giving serious time to this bogus survey should be ashamed of itself.

And Till is wasting no time playing health care reform slayer (again, recall that he voted FOR this bill). Till had a meeting last night with Fletcher Allen doctors which was little more than a pep rally for the defeat of the reform bill, according to witnesses. He was joined by Fletcher Allen Senior Membership Teammates John Brumsted and Theresa Alberghini DiPalma.

Democratic Representative George Till of Jericho has released a “survey” that some in the media are eating up. While showing Vermont physicians are split on supporting “single-payer” health care (presumably either a straight-up version, or the modified form being pushed through the legislature), it also indicates that a quarter of those surveyed were “likely to stop practicing in medicine in Vermont if a government-run single-payer were initiated.”

That’s pretty harsh language, and as we all know, how questions are phrased impact the answers received. One also wonders a bit about the genesis of this “survey.” WCAX’s coverage included the following from universal coverage activist Deb Richter:

“That was a nonscientific survey,” said Dr. Deb Richter, a Vermont physician. “I happen to know that people took it who weren’t physicians who pretended they were. And there were people who took it more than once. So it’s hard to believe the results of a survey that weren’t scientifically done. So I wouldn’t make any conclusions about that.”

But this came from George Till – Democratic lawmaker. Isn’t he supportive of health care reform? The WCAX story labeled him so:

(Till) is a physician and supports the move to single-payer.

Surely that’s true, yes? After all, here’s a link to Till’s supporter page on Democracy For America’s website, which lists health care reform as one of his issues:

I believe that we have an obligation to provide universal health care and must find a way to bend the health care cost curve to accomplish this.

In addition, he voted for the reform bill in the House. That should make it clear, yes?

But wait a minute, the coverage of the survey in the Rutland Herald & Times Argus (paywalled) describes Till quite differently; as a single-payer “skeptic.”

So which is it – and which media outlet did not do their due diligence?

Based on emails in circulation, “skeptic” is closer to the truth, and WCAX has no business pushing Till as a proponent. Till, despite his vote, works behind the scenes to undermine the effort in no uncertain ways. Here’s an email from Till pushing his “survey” (emphasis added):

Thanks to all who have answered my survey.  Anyone who has not yet completed it please do so.  If you need the link please email me directly.

[…] I want to make it clear that the single payer religion is very strong in Montpelier as is the magical thinking that it will cure all problems with our health care system.

I want to make you all aware that next Thursday, April 7 at the State House there will be a public hearing for providers.  I’m pretty sure the single payer crowd plans to pack the room and witness list.  The more of you that can come to Montpelier and testify the better.

Best wishes,

george till

So here’s a guy who ran on reform, voted for it, but behind the scenes is working the media to scuttle it, referring to single-payer as “magical thinking” and its proponents as members of a “single-payer religion.” He dismisses the overwhelming positive testimony as the “single payer crowd” packing hearings. And on his own website, he’s already laying out the framework to be able to run for re-election on both sides of the issue.

Lots of words leap to mind: disingenuous. Cowardly. Are you for it, or against it, Dr. Till? Against it before you were for it before you were against it, I suppose.

One thing for sure is that the reliably progressive district he represents deserves better. Till should have the light of day shined on his attempts to dupe voters by playing both sides of the issue, and if there’s any justice, he should find himself primaried by a better candidate next year.