Like the Free Press and Times Argus, The St. Albans Messenger gave its endorsement to Vince Illuzzi for Auditor.

While this comes as no special surprise, the rationale presented by Emerson Lynn in framing the endorsement certainly is.

Mr. Lynn maintains that Doug Hoffer is the more political of the two!  That’s right; that’s how it looks from where he stands.

…Doug Hoffer carries the banner for both the Progressive Party and the Democratic Party.  His a self-described “numbers man,” something Mr. Illuzzi is not.  But the key difference between the two is that Mr. Hoffer’s political biases are already established and well known.

He makes two representations about Illuzzi vs. Hoffer that are particularly far off the mark, calling Vince Illuzzi “his own man” and suggesting that Mr. Hoffer might need a

“tutorial in terms of what the issues are and what needs auditing and what doesn’t.”

He concludes the endorsement  with a reference to Mr. Illuzzi’s sketchy ethics history:

…Mr. Illuzzi, a lawyer, has had his license suspended for ethical violations (in) 1993 and he did not have his license restored until 1998.  He’s also not shy to find the political spotlight and rush to its center.

Does this sound like a man who should be entrusted with the sober work of the auditor’s office?

I could not resist sending a letter in response:

Emerson Lynn’s rationale for supporting Vince Illuzzi over Doug Hoffer for Auditor makes no sense to me.

He seems to think that Senator Illuzzi, a career politician, is the a-political candidate; whereas it is Doug Hoffer who has never sought any other political office and is interested only in serving as Auditor.

Senator Illuzzi’s interest in the office is, in fact, so politically driven that he couldn’t even decide which political office he wanted to run for, AG or Auditor, until what amounted to the last minute. He was even rumored to have been considering running for Governor, which remains an option for the future.

And that is precisely my point.  Senator. Illuzzi’s run for the Auditor’s office is a a strategy to better position himself for a run for higher office.  This is a perfectly legitimate strategy and I am not writing to criticize Mr. Illuzzi or his motives.

I just think that, for the Auditor’s office to function as it was intended to, the office-holder should not be distracted from its legitimate focus by the need to think strategically about personal political ambitions.

Mr. Illuzzi has done a fine job of representing his district in the Senate; and his reputation for working across the aisle is a testament to his talent for negotiation and political strategy.  The Auditor’s office is not well-served by these talents.

Mr. Lynn seems to think that Mr. Hoffer’s candor about his views makes him somehow more “political.”  But I would say that it only makes him that much more transparent than is Senator Illuzzi, who comes away from the Statehouse as a master of the hidden agenda.

Anyone who is familiar with Doug Hoffer’s work over the years knows that he is a disciplined policy analyst who scrupulously adheres to the highest principles of honesty and fairness.  Absolutely no one could better serve Vermont as Auditor than Doug Hoffer.

The Oyster Creek (New Jersey) nuclear power plant is on “alert” due to dangerously high waters.  

According to Arne Gundersen,  this means that the waters, having already risen 6.5 meters, are coming close to (at seven meters) submerging and disabling the pumps necessary to maintain “ultimate heat sink” in the spent fuel pool.  “Ultimate heat sink” is the constant cooling that is essential to prevent melt down.

_____________________________________________________________________________

A new podcast from Fairewinds Associates, and a new video featuring Arne Gundersen, raise some concerning questions about what might happen, in the wake of Sandy’s floodwaters, to the large number of nuclear reactors in her path.  

The podcast also considers the findings of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute that there has been no drop-off in the level of radiation in Japanese coastal waters.  This indicates that radioactive contaminated water continues to escape into the oceans from the devastated reactors at Fukushima, with no end to the flow in sight.

And now for something completely different.  

That dreary step-cousin of “Vermonters First,” “Vermonter’s For Health Care Freedom” has once again dragged its oxymoronic little self into our peripheral vision.

What caught our eye this time is another one of those pathetic push polls that read sort of like the joke that goes: “when did you stop beating your wife?”

The “poll,” to which anyone could respond (and I did) until it was pulled-down this afternoon, was very similar to a discredited poll by the same group back in 2011.

That previous online poll was cited as a definitive representation of the views of doctors, who supposedly would leave the state in overwhelming numbers if single payer was enacted …until it was discovered that anyone could respond to the poll, doing so as many times as they liked; and that each of those responses counted in the tally.

As only a few individuals even bothered to respond to the poll; and those who did were mostly onboard with the agenda; it was easy to get the desired results.

The poll du jour was sent to all legislators for response, and will no doubt figure in some future attempt to distort the opinion of that body.

Anticipating an early pull-down,  I copied the single question as it was posed, and the four possible responses:

Green Mountain Care single payer has been enacted into law, is being implemented and is scheduled to begin on January 1, 2017. The Shumlin Administration has asked the Legislature to defer consideration of a budget and funding plan until 2015. My view(s) on this issue is as follows:

1) GMC single payer should be repealed with or without a budget and funding plan.

2) Implementation of GMC single payer should be suspended

   until a budget and funding plan are approved.

3) Delaying consideration of GMC single payer financing until

   2015 is reasonable.

4) Comments/other    (a box was provided.)

Nice try guys.  Catch you later.

It’s been awhile since we last visited the white-knuckle world of nuclear energy roulette; but rest assured, it hasn’t gone away…at least not yet.

In the news, however, is a ray of hope.

The owner of a small nuclear reactor in Wisconsin said Monday that it would close the Kewaunee Power Station early next year because it was unable to find a buyer and the plant was no longer economically viable.

Yes, that old “cheap” argument for nuclear is finally being put to the lie.  

The low-cost of natural gas has been driving down energy prices per-kilowatt-hour so that much of the US’s aging nuclear generation “fleet” is operating at costs dangerously close to non-profit.  Add to that the inevitable repair and replacement costs associated with operating those reactors well past their planned life expectancy, and the likelihood that safety issues raised by the Fukushima accident will ultimately force costly modifications to operating reactors everywhere.

Taken altogether, these factors mean that nuclear will be hard pressed to sell the argument that it is an “inexpensive” alternative.

When more reactors begin to withdraw from the fleet due to these cost constraints, it will be difficult even for nuclear’s most passionate proponents to argue that federal support for new builds  represents a wise investment for American taxpayers.

Every day brings new reports of deteriorating nuclear infrastructure, and the challenge that safe storage of nuclear waste continues to pose.  The leitmotif behind all of this bad news remains the constant reminder that worst-case scenarios, like Fukushima, can and will happen unless significant new investments and stringent new regulation are imposed on the industry.

Meanwhile, Vermont’s own Fairewinds Associates continues its leadership role in nuclear energy education with a new Energy Education podcast feature, and offers this informative demonstration of how concerned citizens can get an accurate reading of radiation from samples they submit to a lab for analysis.

The Messenger followed-up today with Tayt Brooks’ response to Ms. Monroe’s closing questions. Unfortunately, neither article is available online at present; but suffice it to say that Brooks simply doubled-down on the misrepresentations made in the mailer. He had no response to the question concerning Kathy Keenan.

Whichever the case, we have to conclude that Lenore has bought herself a lemon.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

You may recall the shenanigans last August when the Franklin County Republican Primary was at hand, and the candidacy of businessman Joe Sinagra fell victim to what appeared to be a smear campaign from within the party ranks.  It is therefore unsurprising that the dirty tricks did not end with that primary.

Tuesday’s St. Albans Messenger carried an excellent front-page expose by Michelle Monroe on the ham-handed attempts by Vermonters First to spread false information about some of Franklin County’s Democratic candidates; and it seems that, this time, even a prominent Franklin County Republican is crying foul.

Our story begins with some of those infamous mailers from Vermonters First, urging voters to withhold their support from Democratic Senatorial candidates Don Collins (Swanton) and Caroline Bright (Georgia.)

The mailer claims Democrats now want to “push through the largest tax increase in state history. And they voted to keep it a secret from us.  They want to raise taxes on day care centers, dentists, barbers, carpenters, doctors and plumbers.”

Pretty scary stuff; and patently untrue according to Republican Carolyn Branagan (Georgia):

“What people have told me face-to-face…is there is no chance of expanding that sales tax to services. Not going to happen.”

The mailer goes on to distort the impact of Legislative changes to the property tax structure, suggesting that they were part of the supposed plan by Democrats to “push through” that huge tax increase.  In actual fact, the measures enjoyed bipartisan support and had nothing like the impact alleged by Vermonters First, even resulting in property tax reductions for a couple of towns.

The Messenger article concludes with a look at the mailer sent specifically to St. Albans City residents, which also targeted  first-time Democratic House candidate, Mike McCarthy, but curiously omitted longtime Democratic Rep., Kathy Keenan.  

As Ms. Monroe notes, Rep. Keenan joined Franklin County Republicans, Branagan, Chuck Pearce (Highgate) and Peter Perley (Enosburg) in supporting H.436, one of the two bills the mailer specifically blamed for the supposed tax hike.

At press time, Vermonters First custodian, Tayt Brooks, had not yet responded to Ms. Monroe’s questions:

…why Keenan was not listed with other Democrats as a candidate “we can’t afford;” what evidence Vermonters First has of a Democratic plan to tax services; and how, given the variable impact of the increase in the base education tax rate, increases in that rate can be presented to voters as a tax increase.

‘Looks like the Tayter is once more in the soup.  

I don’t know how many folks caught “free market” water boy, Art Woolf’s set up in Thursday’s Free Press, but I can guarantee you’ll hear it quoted soon as source material for more GOP whining about how Vermont is “bad for business.”

The article, entitled “Where Have All the Babies Gone?” focusses on the declining birthrate in Vermont since just prior to the “official” start of the recession in 2007.  It notes only parenthetically that the birthrate in the U.S. as a whole has declined over the same period; and it provides a Vermont-only bar chart illustrating the decline since 1990.

Look for this chart and the accompanying statistics, minus the parenthetical qualifier, to be frequently quoted as evidence that Vermont’s regulatory environment under a Democratic majority is causing young people to flee the state at an alarming and unnatural rate.  

Mr. Woolf reports that there has been a decline in the Vermont birthrate since 2007 of 7%;  however, when compared to the national decline in birthrate of 12% for the same period, this is little more than half of that figure.

Just as alarm over the “aging” of the Vermont population is a canard invented by Republicans to have something to cluck about; so also will be the “baby drain” meme.  

The reality is that, by most economic indicators, Vermont has survived the recession better than the majority of other states; and despite its overwhelming Democratic majority, the state seems to have a pretty good formula for offsetting a harsh climate with a social and environmental mystique that still attracts people to settle here.  

In fact, if there is such a great concern among Republicans for the declining birthrate in Vermont, or the loss of younger workers, perhaps they should be advocating for more relaxed immigration policies, favoring Mexican and Latin American families who statistically represent the American sectors where population growth continues to be higher.

Oh, no…’guess not.  That would just broaden support for Democratic candidates.  

When Franklin County senate candidates participated in a forum in Sheldon this past week, one of the questions they fielded concerned GMO labeling.

The candidates’ responses were especially telling.  Most seemed to think it was none of their business; a matter for the feds.

Libertarian Peter Moss characteristically said he “eats for enjoyment” and has no opinion on GMO’s.

Independent Judith McLaughlin was content to dismiss it as a federal fight.

Democrat Don Collins admits he didn’t “follow that piece of legislation” but is generally disinclined to “go out and make more work for people and hope it has an impact.”  Hmm…

Republican Norm McAllister, as the only House Ag Committee member to vote against H.722, a bill that would require labeling of all GMO content in dietary products, claims the disclosure requirement could harm small business in Vermont and recommends that anyone who objects to GMO’s simply eat nothing but organic foods(!); which, of course, is so easy for low income  Vermonters to do.  

Somehow, his position doesn’t sound so much like a benefit to small business as discrimination against poorer folks who would just like to know what they are eating.

Dustin Degree at least seems to have given the matter some small consideration, remarking that “no hard studies showing health impacts of GMO’s were presented” in connection with the introduction of H-722.  Of course he neglects to mention that none were presented because none are available, owing to the tremendous power of the chemical industry which has successfully suppressed any efforts at meaningful study.

Mr. Degree opts for inaction, repeating a tired old favorite argument of the GOP against most attempts at statewide regulation of almost anything: that GMO labeling would violate the Interstate Commerce clause, (which he refers to as the “interstate trade compact of the federal constitution.”)

Of the candidates, only Caroline Bright has recognized the significance of GMO’s to a profoundly agricultural state like Vermont; and only she has had the initiative to gain more than a glancing knowledge of the complex issues involved.

Immediately apparent to almost anyone who has even a superficial understanding of the plant “inventions” that GMO’s represent, is their largely untested impact over time on the health of the consumer.  It is this understanding alone that accounts for the fact that the vast majority of Vermonters, together with much of the developed world, favor GMO labeling rules.

“For me, the issue is really straightforward.  I think people have a right to know what is in their food” said Bright, “This whole discussion is really an issue of moving consumer protection into the 21st century.

Apart from this obvious concern, Ms. Bright has learned about the potential for calamity in a food system that becomes dependent entirely on monocultures, such as those being enforced in the U.S. and Canada by chemical giants like Monsanto, who now not only control the most abundantly grown and distributed crops in North America, but also the pesticides on which their success is dependent; and, she knows that, through an arcane and extremely litigious enforcement process, Monsanto has bound much of the American farming industry to its service.

So, this is entirely a federal matter and should be of no concern to Franklin County, the “bread-basket” of Vermont? Really?

In the coming decades, most experts agree that food crops will be the big economic driver as dietary demands of a global market continue to grow, and as arable land comes into even shorter supply.  To abdicate responsibility for GMO labeling to some distant federal process is not only cowardly and short-sighted, but it risks damage to the Vermont “brand” which has come to mean something in many parts of the world where GMO labeling is already an accepted practice.

Not to realize this represents stunning ignorance with regard to Vermont’s number one asset: its global brand.

Quite apart from the value that Joe Biden’s debate performance gave back to the Democratic ticket,  I am sure there are many like me for whom it just feels darned good to see someone from our generation give as good as he got from the pious junior know-it-all on his left.

Little slack is cut these days to aging actors, athletes and rock musicians who outlive their shelf-life in pop culture; and seniors are routinely blamed for suckling at the teat of Big Gov’ment.  

Twenty-first century living has completely buried the notion that the experience of age can often result in a thing called wisdom.  That possibility has gotten buried in the comic shorthand applied to people of our certain age.

It is simply assumed in the media that we are all incompetent, crabby, selfish, lazy and reactionary.

Last night, Joe Biden once more struck a blow against those stereotypes, making young Charles Atlas look peevish and prevaricating by comparison.  His vigor and passion equaled, and perhaps exceeded, that of his young challenger; and he made it eminently clear that he was not up past his bedtime.

So, on top of the debt of gratitude the Obama campaign owes to Joe the Debater, may I just add the appreciation of one old gal who sometimes feels like she is teetering on the brink of irrelevance.

This rather entertaining bit of GOP slapstick came up a couple of days ago; and since it’s been a day or two since their last faux pas graced the pages of GMD, we might as well start the week off with a bang.

What’s “entertaining” is certainly not the remarks  made by Rep. Jon Hubbard of Jonesboro and House candidate Charlie Fuqua of Batesville, but the flapping and flailing of the entire GOP as they attempted to flee the scene.

Arkansas is known for many things: Wal-mart, Razorbacks, and intern-diddling Presidents, for three.  Now add to that list the distinction of having not one but  two Republican candidates for the statehouse that have managed to make what are quite possibly the most objectionable remarks of this campaign season.

And that is one tall order, given the competition they’ve had from fellow Republican, Missouri’s Todd Akin and his “legitimate rape” remarks.

Aikin will have a lot of company now on the GOP wall of shame; and no attempt at false equivalency will ever lay a glove on Joe Biden.

For Rep. Hubbard has actually written a book that states that slavery was a

Contending that “blacks” have it a lot better living in America today than they would have had it if they were still living in Africa, Rep. Hubbard wrote in his 2009 book, “Letters to the Editor: Confessions of a Frustrated Conservative,”

“the institution of slavery that the black race has long believed to be an abomination upon its people may actually have been a blessing in disguise.”

As if determined to dig his hole even deeper, he adds:

“Wouldn’t life for blacks in America today be more enjoyable and successful if they would only learn to appreciate the value of a good education?”

Not to be outdone in the offensive arena, Mr. Fuqua advocates for deportation of all Muslims in his own page-turner, released in April, “God’s Law: The Only Political Solution”

“I see no solution to the Muslim problem short of expelling all followers of the religion from the United States,” he writes in his book, according to The Arkansas Times newspaper.

Interestingly, although Mr. Hubbard’s comments on slavery have been in the public domain for three years, and Mr. Fuqua’s e-book came out in April, the GOP had no comment about either candidates’s offensive writings until Saturday, when the state GOP Chairman, Doyle Webb released the following statement:

“The reported statements made by Hubbard and Fuqua were highly offensive to many Americans and do not reflect the viewpoints of the Republican Party of Arkansas,”

Rather than just leave it at that, Mr. Doyle went on to attempt a trifecta of offense by accusing Democrats of using the candidates’ outrageous writings as “distractions.”  That means there are at least three Republicans in Arkansas who should not ever, ever be considered for election to office.

Jay Barth, who is a poli-sci prof at Hendrix College in Conway, Arkansas draws a direct line between the racial intolerance of 1960’s Arkansas and both men’s appalling views:

“It’s hard to remember a set of remarks this extreme on racial matters by an Arkansas official since the state’s politics modernized in the late 1960s than that by Mr. Hubbard,” Barth said on Saturday.

‘Way to go, AR GOP!

It sure is nice to be able to write those words: Workers strike at Walmart!

Reports of striking Walmart workers have rolled out of four separate locations, from Florida to California, over the past couple of weeks.  Once, such bold collective initiative would have been unthinkable at the world’s largest retailer.

You may recall that, back in 2008, Walmart workers in the tire and lube department of a Walmart in Gatineau, Quebec, finally succeeded in unionizing in August only to see their department eliminated by Walmart two months later.  This has repeatedly been Walmart’s classic answer to organized labor.

In April 2005, a Walmart in Jonquiere, Quebec closed its doors in order to prevent the imposition of a union (UFCW) negotiated contract at the store.

As Wayne Hanley, former president of the UFCW tells it, the retail giant has, at every opportunity effectively sent this message to workers who might be tempted to organize:

‘If you join a union, they’re going to close your shop.’

Class action lawsuits by Walmart workers attempting to obtain relief for a laundry list of ill treatment, have become commonplace in the absence of union representation.

As recently as September of 2012 saw workers in Elwood, Ill. protesting retaliation against a group of workers who took their complaint about sub-minimal wages to court.

The lawsuit is the sixth filed by Elwood workers in three years. Three prior suits have resulted in settlement payments to workers. The latest claims that Roadlink Workforce Solutions–one of four subcontractors providing long-term “temporary” workers to Schneider Logistics, which operates the warehouse for Wal-Mart–frequently failed to pay overtime and minimum wage, in violation of federal, state and local laws.

Now it seems that some Walmart workers finally have had enough of big box bullying, and are taking organized steps to demand changes.

The strikes began with warehouse operators and workers protesting unsafe conditions, but quickly spread to stores all over California, under the umbrella of OUR Walmart, which is described as a “coalition of workers” rather than a recognized union.

Today, for the first time in Walmart’s fifty-year history, workers at multiple stores are out on strike. Minutes ago, dozens of workers at Southern California stores launched a one-day work stoppage in protest of alleged retaliation against their attempts to organize. In a few hours, they’ll join supporters for a mass rally outside a Pico Rivera, CA store. This is the latest – and most dramatic – of the recent escalations in the decades-long struggle between organized labor and the largest private employer in the world.

As St. Albans braces itself for location of the largest Walmart in Vermont, I take some comfort in the thought that, if and when this new store is built and occupied, it may well be in a new era of empowerment for Walmart workers.  

There are a fair number of folks here in Franklin County who, having been turned into activists by the threat of the proposed store, have become extremely well informed about Walmart’s labor practices and will gladly do whatever they can to promote the cause of organized labor at the new store.

It’s time to let Walmart know that we will be watching and waiting for the opportunity to push back at unfair labor practices, sound the alarm over anti-competitive behaviors and generally make the experiences that St. Albans has with Walmart known to the broader world of Walmart-watchers.

Walmart must make the St. Albans location the very model of good practices, bringing truth to every rosy promise that was uttered in support of the project; or be prepared for an epic public relations fail.