Official CAMPAIGN STATEMENT of Liberty Union Candidate for VT Attorney General

1.   At the top of the list is the protection of the most vulnerable.   Every case of reported abuse of the disabled or elderly must be investigated in a timely manner – and prosecuted if the facts support prosecution. A backlog of hundreds of abuse cases shows a shocking lack of appreciation for the dignity of all human beings.  This should never happen again.  No excuses. No exceptions.

2.   Call for a moratorium on the use of Tasers by law enforcement.

3.   Consider the elimination of the Public Service Board.  In the meantime, appeal the decision of the PSB.  The 21 million dollar loan to CVPS should be returned to rate payers.  The authority of the PSB should be reviewed, so that in the future consumer rights will be protected.  

4.   Review/rescind the State policy which prohibits doctors/dentists, licensed in other States, from rendering compassionate medical care in Vermont.

5.   Insure the privacy of all medical records.

6.   Shut down Vermont Yankee.

7.   Decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana. Increase the Prosecution of violent crimes, home invasion, and other offences which are a threat to public safety.

8.   Support farmers and the economy by allowing the cultivation of hemp as an agricultural product.

9.   Rescind the Vermont policy which supports the frivolous Defense of the State in cases where the State is clearly at fault. When a person is injured or killed – or when there is damage to property caused by carelessness or negligence by the State, there should be no gaming of the system by the State.  The Courts should never be used as a tool to prohibit justice.  In addition, it is a waste of taxpayer money to litigate every case.   Sometimes an offer of a fair settlement would save money and insure a fair outcome.  Sovereign Immunity should never be used to deprive citizens of Justice.  Eminent Domain should be used only in the extremely rare case when the public good demands it.

10.  Restore the First Amendment in Vermont.  Political speech in public tax supported facilities should never be censored.  (See photos on the Internet of Dennis Steele being arrested.)   The banning of political books by public tax supported libraries should no longer be permitted. The chipping away of Constitutional Rights should never be trivialized.  Academic freedom in high schools and colleges should be supported.

The bottom line is this: The Office of Attorney General should never be used as a political tool. The power of the office is a sacred trust that must insure justice for all.  The Office of Attorney General should set the ethical standard for Vermont.

“When Fascism came, it was not brought by uniformed troops.

It was not imposed at the point of a gun.

Fascism came because citizens were too distracted to pay attention.

Voters were too misinformed to cast intelligent ballots.

And the mass of people failed to recognize the inherent danger

In the censoring of speech and the banning of books.”  RMJ

Rosemarie Jackowski is an Advocacy Journalist, Founder of Justice for Children, a member of Veterans for Peace, and author of  BANNED IN VERMONT.

Contact information:  E-mail dissent@sover.net   Phone 802.447.0868

A conversation that is under the radar might surprise some… the ‘exit strategy’ conversation.

The health care topic seems to be getting a lot of attention these days. In Vermont the Death with Dignity Bill was to be considered by the Legislature during the current session. It is now reported that the Bill will be put on hold. Physician assisted suicide is a controversial topic. Moral, philosophical, and scientific considerations are included in the debate.

In complete disclosure – I believe that all life is sacred. That puts me on one side of the argument – sort of. I also believe that if pain is so intense that it does not respond to any drug, compassion might be the preferred stance. Moral conundrums always make life complicated. To gain some clarity on this question, I recently had a conversation with a doctor. I chose a doctor who is highly respected for her humanitarianism. My question was whether or not pain could be so horrific that nothing would relieve it. I suggested putting the patient in a coma. The doctor told me intractable pain is something that can happen, and then she quickly expanded her answer. She said it is extremely rare. That is reassuring. It seems to me, a patient in pain should be given anything that works – morphine drips, pot, absinthe – anything if it can relieve intense pain. When nothing works, we have to rethink the moral dilemma.

The final decision about any medical procedure should be the right of the patient. To insure that this actually happens during a medical crisis, a health care advocate is necessary – not a health care contact. A ‘contact’ person is someone who exists for the convenience of the hospital. An advocate has a totally different role. The advocate can save a life or give permission to pull the plug. Your health care advocate is the most important person in your life. Usually, this is a loved one in the family – a spouse, a son, a daughter, a parent. In this culture the role of ‘family’ has been trivialized. Now many have no family in the same geographical location where they live. How can they have the ‘protection’ of a health care advocate? A less than perfect solution would be for every hospital to have on duty 24/7 a Patient Advocate who is not employed by the hospital and not in the chain of command of the hospital. This is necessary to avoid conflict of interest. Having a hospital Patient Advocate is like putting a band aid on a fractured skull, but it might be better than nothing.

Another solution would be to match those without an advocate with a compassionate member of the community. A project such as this could be taken on by church or civic groups.

Does pre-planning take care of end of life issues – maybe, or maybe not. An Advance Directive is only as good as the advocate who has the responsibility of insuring that the written requirements are met. Without a dedicated advocate, the Advance Directive is just another piece of paper.

The case of 30 year-old Ronald Comeau made nation-wide news a while back. He really needed an advocate as the decision to pull the plug was being considered. This case fascinated the nation when it was reported across the country.

Another more recent case proves that an advocate is necessary even after death. This case is sometimes referred to as the ‘Case of the Body Snatchers’. Even being rich and famous is not a guarantee of justice after death. The body of Alistair Cooke, British Journalist and host of Masterpiece Theater, was one of many that were not protected as required by law. The cutting apart of human bodies, so that human tissue, skin, and bone could be sold was a thriving business – for a while. It is not known how widespread this criminal activity is today.

Sometimes an advocate should even be present during dental procedures – as in the recent case of the Massachusetts dentist who used paper clips for root canal procedures. He is currently being prosecuted.

And then there are the murders in nursing homes – two have been publicized in Vermont lately. Is this just the tip of the iceberg? How many go unreported? No one will ever know. As a volunteer in a nursing home, I saw some things that were very troubling. But, on the other hand, I was impressed by some of the staff who did the real work of caring for the residents. Those staff members were kind and compassionate, and probably underpaid. Even with dedicated workers, a nursing home resident needs an advocate – one who will visit at unpredictable times. A reputable nursing home in Pennsylvania stopped feeding a resident. When the family questioned this, they were told, “Well, he was going to die anyway”.

One of the most important duties of an advocate is to guard against medical errors. My mother’s life was saved twice when we caught medication errors by the Hospitalist – the doctor assigned by a hospital in Pennsylvania. My mother’s personal physician would not have made these errors.

Medical personnel are among the most highly respected and valued members of the community. Excellent doctors saved my life twice. Most of us are blessed with dedicated doctors who are not paid what they are worth. Some surgeons and GPs are grossly underpaid. Too much money in health care goes to the top – pharmaceutical company CEOs, insurance company CEOs, hospital CEOs. Health care will not improve until the insurance companies are eliminated. Price controls on pharmaceuticals are needed. In Vermont, too much tax payer money is being drained from the system by the committee of experts hired to design the new system. Every dollar spent on administration, is a dollar that does not go to patient care.

A conversation that is under the radar might surprise some… the ‘exit strategy’ conversation. Some, while still in their prime years, look ahead and recognize the sad reality of living in the United States. Elder abuse and financial exploitation of the elderly are on the increase. In Vermont, the backlog of cases means that many will die before their case gets to the top of the pile. A law suit has been filed. “Vulnerable adults are people incapable of protecting themselves from the nephew who steals the Social Security check or the caregiver who leaves the woman with physical and cognitive limitations sitting in her feces,” said Barbara Prine of the Disability Law Project. For many, there will be no justice.

The prospect of inadequate health care, loss of the family home due to medical bills, and isolation all contribute to a distrust of the future. Add to that, the sometimes not too subtle message, that ‘old people’ are using up too much of medical resources and thus ‘stealing’ from their grandchildren. The guilt trip this places on the elderly is very painful. Not only the elderly, but also the disabled and those who need ongoing medical care, are marginalized in our culture. While having safe conversations, some admit that they are prepared. They have a plan for self-authorization when the time comes – before it is too late to take the necessary action.

This conversation is often with healthy, emotionally stable, middle aged people, living at home with their families. For one, money was the big issue. We have all seen families impoverished with health care expense. For another, in a nursing home, it was the poor quality of care he was receiving. He did not have a terminal illness, but he actively searched for a doctor who would assist him in suicide. He was not successful in finding one. He needed an advocate so that his quality of life could be improved. My friend did not need some exotic expensive medical procedure that could not be provided. All he needed was a compassionate humanitarian to come forward.

And then there is the man in Wayne, New Jersey. He was found dead in his home after being dead for a year. Maybe his life could have been saved by an advocate.

ROSEMARIE JACKOWSKI

Rosemarie Jackowski is an advocacy journalist and peace activist. She is author of BANNED IN VERMONT.

dissent@sover.net

 

This is not a problem limited to one State. It is an international problem affecting large areas from Maine to California, and countries around the world.

Some things should be uninvented – DES, HRT, GMOs, hexachlorophene in infants’ soap, nuclear power plants, nuclear weapons, drones… Now a new threat, the Smart Grid and Smart Meters. If these are good ideas, why is the free market not providing them? Why the need for taxpayer funding? The fact that this industry must depend on taxpayer money is just one of many reasons it is suspect.

The May 20, 2011 Sandia Labs News Release reported that 69.3 Million has been granted for Smart Meter implementation in Vermont.

During a December 2011 news conference Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin and Senator Bernie Sanders announced their support of a 15 million dollar government grant to Sandia Labs. The grant is to be used for implementation of Smart Meter technology in Vermont. This is a perfect example of Corporate Welfare. Sandia has a long, fascinating history.

From the Sandia website: “…Sandia National Laboratories’ roots lie in World War II’s Manhattan Project and its history reflects the changing national security needs of postwar America. Sandia’s original emphasis on ordnance engineering – turning the nuclear physics packages created by Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories into deployable weapons – expanded into new areas as national security requirements changed. In addition to ensuring the safety and reliability of the stockpile, Sandia applied the expertise it acquired in weapons work to a variety of related areas such as energy research…”.

Is it really a good idea to put the national electric grid under the control of any corporation? How about a corporation with a history of war and destruction? There are many unanswered questions.

The Smart Grid is the opposite of the movement toward sustainable communities and transition towns. Control of the grid should be local. When power outaqes occur, and they will, the smaller the area of the black-out the better. The larger the area, the more difficult it is for any emergency response. This puts large populations at risk for property damage and death. In September 2011 a large power outage affected more than 5 million people in California, Arizona, and Mexico. In recent years an ice storm caused a large power outage in northern New York State. Farmers were among those affected. Eventually farmers were able to access generators for milking machines on rural farms.

One of the big issues in Vermont is the lack of generators. When power goes out, individual home owners are on their own. Some home owners have purchased generators. Most cannot afford the high price. Estimates range upwards of $5000 for a hard wired generator that will allow a furnace to heat a home and prevent property damage. The damage caused by frozen pipes can be extensive. Also, there are health concerns for those who need electricity to power medical devices.

One of the most relevant questions is – why do we need a Smart Grid? Who will benefit? The first duty of a corporation is to its share holders. Profit and the bottom line trump consumer protection. In Vermont there is a history of this. For example, CVPS moved all of its emergency repair vehicles out of Bennington. The vehicles are now garaged many miles away in Sunderland. This decision to garage the vehicles in a less densely populated area was based on the corporate bottom line. That is understandable. It is not the duty of corporations to be benevolent. This is the way the capitalistic system works. The move of the vehicles has placed many homes at risk – especially during winter storms. This risk continues today.

Why the rush to an unproven technology? Will the cost per kilowatt go down for the consumer? Will there be privacy concerns? Who will have access to power consumption data of individual homes? For anyone with access, it will be easy to see which homes are occupied and when they are unoccupied. Will every home now need to be protected with battery powered burglar alarm systems?

Besides questions about the Grid, there are questions about Smart Meters. In some areas of the country they are illegal. There are questions about the synergistic consequences of additional EMF pollution in the environment. There have been reports of health devices and other electronic equipment being affected. Some believe that Smart Meters can cause cancer. All of the science is not yet in. It will take years. In the meantime, should people be used as guinea pigs for this big experiment? How much more would be accomplished if the science and money were dedicated to conservation and alternative sources of power? Every dollar spent on the Smart Grid is a dollar that is not available for other efforts.

There is another issue – that of the lack of a democratic process. In Vermont those who opt-out of the Smart Meter implementation will be charged an additional fee every month. It is reported that in Maine there is a one-time $40 opt-out fee. Op-out fees feel a little like blackmail. So far, the people have had no say in this controversy.

Maybe the most important reason to oppose Smart Grid technology, is that it places too much power in the hands of too few. Imagine bringing down the grid and the chaos that would result. No power. No refrigeration for the food supply in the summer. No heat to keep people alive in the northeast during winter. No transportation. No gas – it could not be pumped. No water – it could not be pumped.

A terrorist attack on the grid, is not the issue. Mistakes happen. Disgruntled workers react. Maybe the most sure thing is that technology fails. Sooner or later all technology fails. This is not a zero defects industry. If the unplanned shutdown damages large industrial turbines and generators, it could take many months to replace them. Think about many months without electricity.

Maybe the Smart Grid will be the greatest political/engineering feat of all time, or maybe not. Imagine just one flick of the switch and the entire system is brought down. This could be the end of everything – the real Armageddon. No food. No communication. No Internet. No life as we know it. Engineered back to the Stone Age without the survival skills that our Stone Age ancestors had.

Rosemarie Jackowski

Rosemarie Jackowski is an advocacy journalist and peace activist. She is author of BANNED IN VERMONT.

dissent@sover.net

When Fascism came, it was not brought by uniformed troops.

And the mass of people failed to recognize the inherent danger in the censoring of speech and the banning of books.

In Vermont there is a Movement toward Secession. Most citizens are unaware of this because news reports that oppose the status quo are censored. Newspapers have an ethical obligation to report news, but the obligation is not a legal one. The First Amendment does not apply to privately owned publications. Newspapers have the right to print, or not to print, anything they want.

How ironic it is that citizens look toward secession, which may or may not ever be achieved, while those in power have already successfully seceded from the Union. How did this happen? Those in power have successfully rendered the First Amendment irrelevant in Vermont – that is secession from the Constitution… secession of the worse kind.

First Amendment rights are further supported by the Fourteenth Amendment which compels States to uphold these rights. So why is that not happening? Where is the ACLU? Where is the Bar Association?

Why has the Vermont Attorney General not weighed in on this? The office of VT AG has a history of ‘protecting’ the government against the citizen. New York investigative journalist Josh Frank exposed the real politics of Vermont in his article, Dean’s Corruption in the Green Mountain State.

http://www.pressaction.com/new…

There are many examples of how government ignores Constitutionally guaranteed rights of citizens. Google ‘DENNIS STEELE ARRESTED’ to see photos of a gubernatorial candidate being arrested. His crime – he wanted to participate in a pre-election forum. There is a long fascinating history of arrests of non democratic/non republican candidates. When Candidate Steele was in Bennington, he was not allowed to participate in the debate. The debate was held in a public building. Public officials game the system to get around the law.

Think about who benefits from censorship of political speech – the Democratic and Republican Parties. To change that a real Statesman will be needed – not a partisan political figure – needed is someone who can put the rights of the people above the pressure from a political party. A grassroots movement by the people could do this. The problem is that because censorship is so widespread, many citizens are unaware that they have lost their First Amendment protection. People don’t know what they don’t know.

Though it would be redundant, as a last resort, we need a brave legislator to offer a bill something like this: Henceforth, in no public building, park, land, or any other facility which receives public funds shall any candidate be prohibited from participating in any peaceful political activity. Party affiliation – or lack of any Party affiliation – should not be used to discriminate against any candidate in any public space. This right of all citizens and voters to have access to information should not be infringed upon by towns, municipalities, cities, schools, libraries, or any other publically funded group or organization. Freedom of political speech must be held as a sacred right – never to be threatened by anyone – and to be honored by all. Public open spaces should be open to all citizens, at all times. The penalty for violation should be a $10,000 fine for the first offense. Increased for subsequent offences.

The rule should be – if you accept public money, you accept the prohibition against discrimination. The right to free assembly, and free disassembly, would not be infringed upon. Anyone could still practice discrimination in their own home or any other private space. Newspapers could continue to publish or not publish anything they want.

Below is an AP report from The Times Argus:

“…SOUTH ROYALTON (AP) – A third-party candidate for U.S. Senate was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct after being ejected from a debate.

Peter Diamondstone, of Brattleboro, the Liberty Union party candidate for the seat being vacated by retiring U.S. Sen. James Jeffords, participated in Tuesday’s debate at the Vermont Law School along with U.S. Rep. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Richard Tarrant, the Republican candidate for the seat.

He accused the United States of committing war crimes in Iraq.

“We are the terrorists, and the world needs to be armed against us,” said Diamondstone…”.

Diamondstone’s passionate and heartfelt message should have been allowed to be heard. It should have been debated openly. Diamondstone was ahead of his time. Now many across the globe, agree with his statement. Candidate Diamondstone’s arrest took place at the Vermont Law School. That is the ultimate irony. When the ‘law’ does not uphold the rule of law, how should citizens react? When the ‘law’ becomes the ‘outlaw’… a conundrum.

Will the First Amendment ever be restored in Vermont? I’m not holding my breath. Vermont has become the land of book-banning, censorship, and the arrest of those who try to make a difference. When any candidate is silenced, when any book is banned – every citizen should react. Censorship is the ultimate form of bullying. It is a declaration by those in power saying – we are above the law.

The Vermont culture was described by Shirley Jackson decades ago. Jackson’s book, The Lottery, remains relevant today. Some interpret her work as a classic description of society’s hostility toward those who do not conform. It was written while the author lived in North Bennington. Scholars still debate exactly what aspect of the culture inspired the author. Today, would libraries ban this valuable literary work?

Currently, how many school libraries across the country have copies of Howard Zinn’s History of the United States? Is this book banned in some classrooms?

The citizens must accept some responsibility for the degrading of their rights – but in defense of citizens – how can they be held accountable if they don’t know what they don’t know. When a book is banned, or when free speech is silenced, no one knows about it – unless there is a local newspaper that adheres to a standard of journalistic ethics. Too often, the newspaper is part of the problem.

When a school or library banns books – who would know? No one. Once in awhile knowledge about book banning leaks out. Even then, what can a citizen do? Most citizens have learned that fighting the system in a State ruled by cronyism – in a country where money rules – is a long difficult battle. Realizing that chances of success are often less than zero can be discouraging. It is during those moments, I remember an old quote – something that Peter Diamondstone once said: “We do not protest to change others. We protest so that others do not change us.”

Now is a time in history when silence is the greatest of all crimes.

Rosemarie Jackowski

Rosemarie Jackowski is an advocacy journalist and peace activist.

She is author of BANNED IN VERMONT.  

The Grinches of Wall Street

‘Twas the night before Christmas

And through the Senate and House

The money was flowing

To each Wall Street louse

The hedge fund managers and CEOs

Had told their tales of financial woes

Their stories were naughty – not very nice

They told of private jets and gluttonous vice

Meanwhile on Main Street the people were sad

No one could explain why things had gotten so bad

Some said the cause was market speculation

Others said Capitalism was the right explanation

Santa’s elves should create a People’s State

End all war, poverty, and hate

A Single Payer System would keep us healthy

Enough food for all – no need to be wealthy

At the shelter, the children were snuggled in their beds

As nightmares of foreclosure danced through their heads

A holiday miracle is what we need –

On second thought – we just might have to secede

ROSEMARIE JACKOWSKI    dissent@sover.net

Rosemarie Jackowski is an advocacy journalist and peace activist living in the USA.

A ‘Thank You’ to a Great President

Dear President Chavez,

I am writing today to express my sincere gratitude to you for all that you have done during past winters. Your generous contribution of heating oil – some free and some discounted –  to the people of the United States is appreciated more than you will ever know.

Here, in the northern part of our country winter temperatures often fall well below zero. Many citizens have suffered not only discomfort, but also health problems related to the inadequate heating of their homes.  Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has received testimony that some of his constituents have had to chop up their furniture to use for fuel – that was during last winter. Worse is predicted for next winter.

During the recent Congressional Hearings on the cost of heating oil, testimony was given stating that people will freeze to death in New England during the upcoming winter heating season.  Testimony also was given to explain the cause of the rapid increase in the cost of oil. Several expert witnesses testified that a large portion – maybe 70% – of the increase was due to Commodity Futures Speculators.

Some might suggest that the logical solution to the problem would be to arrest the Speculators, nationalize the oil companies, increase auto efficiency to 50MPG, and move toward wind, solar and tidal energy sources. None of those efforts will be timely enough to save the lives that will be in jeopardy this winter.  The time has come for a hero to emerge.  President Chavez, that is you. Only you can save us from the policies that have led the United States to this long, dark winter.

That other president, the one we have in our country, probably has access to more money than you have. Unfortunately, his priorities are not as humanitarian as yours. He has gotten himself, and us too, entangled in a rather gruesome situation in Iraq. Maybe you have read about it in your press. It looks like we will be spending all of our money for generations to come on weapons. That brings up another problem. Many in the United States cannot afford health care. If it is not too much trouble, next time you are talking to your friend, Fidel, please tell him we need doctors over here. Also, the need for dentists is so critical that my best friend  relocated from the United States to Costa Rica because she had a toothache.

In appreciation of your generosity during previous winters, I have been passing the word to everyone I know. I have been asking them to buy only Citgo gasoline.  

Please say, “Hello”, to the wife and family for me. Oh, I almost forgot to say that I admire the people of Venezuela who were smart enough to vote for you. Maybe some of them would be willing to come up here and help us run an election in November.   Right now it looks like we need a lot of help.

Rosemarie Jackowski            dissent@sover.net

Rosemarie Jackowski is an advocacy journalist living in Vermont.   She was arrested, tried, and sentenced for her participation in a peaceful protest of the war.  She appealed her conviction to the State Supreme Court. The conviction was over-turned. Then the government announced plans to retire her. After years of legal proceedings, all charges were dismissed.

 Loading ...