The push is on to get a Cerificate of Public Good from the Public Service Board before there is a ruling on the appeal of Vermont Yankee/Entergy vs. the State of Vermont, and, in the interim, to block the PSB from acting to close the plant on schedule.   Entergy’s pulling out all the stops to court flagging public support for continued operation.

I don’t know if other local papers carried it, but last night the Messenger boasted a full-page ad from Vermont Yankee telling us why, on the one-year anniversary of the Fukushima nuclear disaster,  we shouldn’t give the safety of VY another thought because they are on the case!

Was this deliberately timed to distract the public from that elephant in the corner, the plant’s poor prognosis for reliability, so that the conversation visibly revolves around an issue over which the State has no jurisdiction? Maybe that’s giving them more credit than they are due.

In any case, as Stardust alerted us several days ago, that old black magic “reliability” recently reared its ugly head again when a system failure forced a down-scaling of service.

Now that we have a better idea of what was involved, we thought it was time to revisit the incident on GMD’s front page.  VTdigger yesterday reported on the technical issue, involving a key component, that forced Vermont Yankee to begin operating at reduced capacity.  Explaining that the role of the condenser is to act somewhat like a radiator, Digger reports that its functionality was compromised in the following way:

Last November, during a planned refueling outage, plant workers applied a protective coating – an epoxy or plastic – to the tubing in the condenser… At the beginning of February, nuclear engineers at the plant discovered that the the thermal heat exchange efficiency of the condenser was greatly reduced. Last week, the plant had to lower its power production by 50 percent because back pressure was building up in the condenser.

Apparently, the coating applied to extend the life of the condenser, which dates to the plant’s start-up 40 years ago, compromised the “efficiency” of the system.  In this case “efficiency” refers to its ability to operate without a pressure build-up.

…And in the very competitive category of “I Told You So,” the winner is…Arnie Gundersen.  

When asked in his 2003 testimony to the Public Service Board to name

a component likely to have an adverse effect on reliability under extended power uprate conditions

Mr. Gundersen responded that the condenser was likely to present exactly the scenario of improper repair and subsequent failure that has now occurred.

Gundersen, of Fairewinds Associates, now predicts that this thermal issue is likely to worsen in summer:

when the water temperature of the Connecticut River rises from springtime temperatures of 50 degrees to 70 degrees.

The upshot is that further power reductions will be likely so long as the plant continues to operate with the affected condenser in the system.

Sounds like a reliability issue to me.

On a different front, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders is challenging the NRC to explain how they could go ahead and extend the Vermont Yankee operating license within just days of the unprecedented disaster at Fukushima which involved reactors of exactly the same generation as the one at Vermont Yankee.

Sanders, who, a year ago called for a moratorium on relicensing aging nuclear power plants in the U.S. until there had been an opportunity to draw lessons from the Fukushima chain of collapse, today chastised the agency for its unwillingness to alter its relicensing initiatives, and the federal government as a whole for policy that heavily subsidizes the nuclear industry and does not respect the right of a state like Vermont to phase out aging nuclear facilities in favor of sustainable energy built on other platforms.

“In my state there is a strong feeling that we want to go forward with energy efficiency and sustainable energy. I believe that we have that right. I believe that every other state in the country has that right,” Sanders said. “If we want to move to sustainable energy and not maintain an aging, trouble-plagued nuclear power plant, I think we should be allowed to do that.”

When I was little there was a “company” dessert, consisting of lumps of meringue adrift on a sea of custard.  It was fancifully named “Floating Island,” and belonged to the confectionary  landscape that included “Baked Alaska” and “Rocky Road.” But this isn’t about dessert.

As a great continent of potentially hot garbage travels slowly across the Pacific toward points west on the America shores, we have a little time to ready ourselves for delivery of the motherload.  

The leading edge of floating debris from the tsunami that swept Japan just about a year ago is expected to begin making landfall in Hawaii any day now, and NOAA’s Marine Debris Program wants to know when, and what, it turns up.

It is estimated that roughly twenty tons of the stuff is headed east, and the entire delivery phase may take a couple of years.

Some  of the debris seems likely to be swept into a giant slow-moving circle,  heading back toward the Hawaiian Islands and then cycling round for a second delivery on the mainland. Computer animation of this effect calls to mind the eddies of water in a flushing toilet.  

Some of it may even ultimately reach the “Great Pacific Garbage Patch,” that doughty landmark of our addiction to plastic that festers and chokes a vast reach of the South Pacific.

NOAA dismisses the possibility that the floating debris field may be carrying radioactive waste to American shores, reassuring denizens of Oregon and California that most of the debris was launched and resolutely moving away before the nuclear accidents began to unfold; but the behavior of floating materials, even in NOAA’s simulations, raises the specter that some material may have been “re-delivered” at Fukushima, only to be contaminated in the aftermath on the radioactive shores before washing once again out to sea.  

NOAA seems to be the first to admit that they don’t really know much about the path of the debris.

… there is still a large amount of uncertainty over exactly what is still floating, where it’s located, where it will go, and when it will arrive

They don’t even know how much of it will actually make it to points along the West Coast, observing cheerfully that much of it may sink to the bottom of the ocean during its journey.  Their prognosis of low radioactivity in the debris field relies rather heavily on the beneficent ability of the ocean to dilute all the badness away.

In fact, NOAA’s FAQ page has a rather odd way of allaying fears (emphasis mine):

Why isn’t this considered an emergency yet?

It’s hard to take emergency actions when there’s so little information about what we’re responding to – remember: it’s possible that most of the debris will break up, sink, or get caught up in existing garbage patches. We’re working on creating contingency plans that will address scenarios ranging from no debris to high levels of debris.

If I were a tuna or a whale I might find that of damn little comfort.

I wanted to add a link to this Japanese news report which explains rather succinctly why Meredith Angwin’s assertion of a low cancer risk is based on faulty assumptions.  And here’s another!

……………………………………………………………………………………

Sunday will mark the first anniversary of the  earthquake and tsunami that devastated northern Japan. It is also the first anniversary of what is arguably the worst industrial accident in history, at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station.

Even though the natural news cycle has pretty much abandoned the Fukushima story, it’s ongoing impacts are far from over, and there continues to be a steady pulse of revelations concerning contamination vectors, bad decision-making, cover-ups, downplays and plain old distortions.  

Nuclear nerds have Enformable, which features a wiki-like stream of internal correspondence surrounding the disaster at Fukushima as well as news of “events” occurring at other nuclear plants in the U.S. and abroad.

For the rest of us who need to make sense of it all, there have been the outstanding videos of Vermont’s own Fairewinds Associates, which offer expert analysis and nuclear “education” in easily assimilated units.

Greenpeace has just released a new publication, “Lessons from Fukushima,” which includes a chapter by Fairewinds’ Arnie Gundersen: “Regulatory Capture and the Fukushima Daiichi Disaster,” which focuses on the regulatory failure piece that contributed to the disaster, including conflicts of interest in the regulatory culture and reliance on faulty safety assessment models.   It appears that regulators and plant operators alike fell victim to their very own spin efforts in the attempt to gain public support for nuclear energy.  Gundersen notes that the very same vulnerability undermines the effectiveness of the U.S. regulatory culture within the NRC.

In a recent televised interview, Gundersen notes that, on March 16, just five days after the Fukushima nuclear accident began, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission relicensed Vermont Yankee. Among the NRC memos concerning Fukushima that have to come to light was a remark made on March 12, 2011, stating that the Mark 1 containment (the design shared by the Fukushima reactors and Vermont Yankee) is the

“worst containment in the world.”

When someone inquired in a follow-up memo if this meant that the NRC would withhold relicensing of VY pending further study of the accident at Fukushima, the response was that relicensing would go ahead as planned but the public announcement would be delayed until the stir over Fukushima had died down.

Meanwhile, the PR engine of the nuclear industry must be working overtime to keep a lid on things

Chemist Meredith Angwin of the Ethan Allen Institute and “Yes Vermont Yankee” put her oar in the water with an op-ed in Friday’s Messenger, anticipating the likelihood that, on this anniversary, some may be tempted to compare Vermont Yankee to Fukushima Daiichi.  This, she insists, is utter nonsense, citing the number of reactors at Fukushima and the epic nature of the events preceding their failure as evidence that there is no relationship,  while conveniently overlooking the shared design flaws that were central to some of the critical failures that occurred at Fukushima.   As Gundersen observes in the video interview, the design flaws and vulnerabilities of Mark 1 reactors have been known to the industry and the NRC for the past thirty years.

But she doesn’t leave it there.  Applying a second coat of shineola, she insists, somewhat counter-intuitively, that as a result of the Fukushima accident

“…few (if any) excess cancer deaths can be expected among civilians.”

She wraps it all up with a speech about how many more people have been killed by coal use, apparently completely dismissing any other alternative.  

“Coal…nuclear…coal…nuclear.”  The devil or the deep blue sea?  

We’re supposed to strike our foreheads and cry,

“Of course, how could we be so blind?  Much better to allow private number-crunchers to operate badly designed reactors for decades beyond their “sell-by” date, risking the occasional nuclear disaster and racking-up centuries of lethal waste.”

Can I have the check please?

In St. Albans City, Ryan Doyle defeated Joe Luneau and Chad Spooner held his seat against Will Howrigan.

And it appears that math-challenged Alburgh Town Clerk/Treasurer Carol Cleland and her equally challenged daughter, Lister Cheryl Dunn will NOT be returning to office this year.  What a surprise.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

As always, the comings and goings in Chittenden County will more than dominate the news on Town Meeting Day; and we at GMD will take a special interest in the Montpelier City Clerk’s race in which our own favorite candidate, John Odum, will hopefully prevail.

I would be remiss if I didn’t take this opportunity to call attention to some of the stuff that’s going on in my home County of Franklin, which can be quite compelling as well.

A given is that the City of St. Albans will have a new mayor by the name of Liz Gamache (Democrat.)  An extremely popular candidate, having served in the past both as interim City Manager and Chair of the Downtown Committee, Liz is running unopposed, and the prospect of having this intelligent, capable, and progressive woman in the driver’s seat brings a smile to many faces around here!  As some may recall, I have had an openly hostile relationship with outgoing Mayor Marty Manahan, so I am definitely to be counted among that happy number.

City Council has two seats in competition this year: Wards 5 and 6.  Sitting Councilman, Chad Spooner is being challenged by a member of the extensive and powerful Howrigan clan, Will Howrigan, in Ward 6; and in Ward 5, Ryan Doyle is giving sitting Councilman Joe Luneau a run for his money.

I use the phrase “run for his money” advisedly, as Luneau has all the money, being himself  a member of the wealthy and influential Luneau family.  Doyle, however, has youth and idealism on his side, and has favorably impressed those of us who know him well, as carrying the real future of St. Albans in his vision.   He is perhaps the most independent political aspirant that this City has seen in a very long time.  He actually refused campaign donations, on principle!

Mr. Luneau has his allies on the City Council, and as a bloc under his direction, they generally oppose “non-essential” expenditures and anything that might raise the tax rate.

One example of a “non-essential” expenditure that Mr. Luneau opposed last year, was functional repair to the City pool, which generally serves the needs of the underprivileged in our community.  His family business is a large car dealership that is in the process of relocating to the Town’s growth center at Exit 20 near the proposed Walmart; so his interest is more in facilitating drive-through traffic than in pedestrian welfare issues.

He’d like to see the City spend the $50,000. that it still has available from the Walmart deal, on road improvements to Federal St.; this, despite the fact that the Federal Street Connector is already in the pipeline for major funding and will cost several millions of dollars to complete. That $50,000. could go a lot further toward making the pedestrian experience in downtown St. Albans more conducive, thereby encouraging foot-traffic on Main St.

Greasing the wheels of democracy, Mr. Luneau, Mr. Howrigan and Republican Representative Dustin Degree hosted a big pancake breakfast for the voters a couple of Sundays ago; and they have so many signs out there that they might as well be running for governor!

Mr. Luneau and his bloc, which will include Mr. Howrigan if both of them are elected, will likely form a powerful resistance to much of the initiatives that will be introduced by Liz Gamache and her own allies on the City Council.  This could get interesting, and I for one plan to begin attending Council Meetings, as a member of the public, rather than just watching them on public access TV.

In the Town of St. Albans, things are already well-beyond “interesting,” and approaching all-out warfare.  Bill Nihan, a retired Pacific-rim manufacturing manager, has persuaded and bullied his way to virtual control of the Town’s development agenda.  This is particularly significant since it is practically their only agenda.  

The Town has avoided committing to niceties like sidewalks, public spaces and recreational opportunities.   Like Mr. Luneau’s bloc in the City, Mr. Nihan’s bloc in the Town is opposed to just about anything that might raise the tax rate or slow development of the big box build-out of retail at Exit 20.

The Planning Commission of the Town is also elected rather than appointed by the Selectboard.  As a consequence, the Planning Commission has been frustrated repeatedly in its attempts to draft a Town Plan that will satisfy both the requirements of the Regional Planning and the vanity of certain Selectboard members.  So that is an ongoing drama on the perimeter.  

Despite Selectboard opposition, the Town Planning Commission, being an elected body, was free to pursue the question of merger with the City in a joint study-group, which they have done enthusiastically.  

The Selectboard, as a body, has refused to endorse the study and are withholding access to appointed staff which would make the work of the study committee much easier.  But not all members of the Selectboard oppose the study, and this election will determine whether the intransigent Nihan bloc will maintain control of the board.

With, one-, two-, and three-year seats on the line, the election has coalesced into a kind of showdown between three Nihan-backed contenders – Brent Palmer, Steve Coon and Bernie Boudreau – who seem to have made a pact not to answer any questions raised by the Messenger except in writing; and three sane opponents – Bruce Cheeseman, Paul Larner and John Gray.  Stay tuned.

Finally, we can’t leave Franklin County/Grand Isle without mentioning the “mistake” made by Alburgh Town Clerk and Treasurer, Carol Cleland, who has admitted to “accidentally” overpaying her daughter, Town Lister, Cheryl Dunn $17,381. which represented 46% of her annual salary!

Lest anyone raise an eyebrow at the family connection, Ms. Cleland also overpaid another lister, James Magner, by $5,755.

So, we are to conclude that it was an honest mistake and she is just guilty of gross incompetence?  Wow!

Coming as this does on the heels of the Hardwick embezzlement conviction, which also involved a mix of family relations, perhaps we must conclude that towns should choose bona fide graduates of the outside gene pool to manage their books.

I’m sure there are many more compelling dramas playing out in local politics that I have missed, so I invite you to expand in the comments section.

We takes our entertainments where we gets it!

This morning, when I checked our mailbox, there was a hand-printed manilla envelope with no return address. Three “Forever” stamps had been applied, but the carrier also attached an envelope demanding thirty-five cents for insufficient postage.  It was addressed to my husband, so I handed it off to him and he opened it with a shrug.

Inside were two extreme right propaganda pamphlets “Rethinking Revelation Chapter 13,” an “end times” rant, by one Bob Fraley; and “Barack Obama’s Rules for Revolution” by David Horowitz.  That charming little number is another attempt to tie the president to Saul Alinsky, whom, we are expected to believe was the personification of evil and the high-priest of godless communism.

This is a little hard for a native Chicagoan to swallow, when Mr. Alinsky’s message of social responsibility was part and parcel of what I was taught in sociology class at my Catholic girls’ high school there.   Barely twenty years ago, being tied to Saul Alinsky’s name would have done nothing but enhance a presidential candidates’s appeal.

Now, with all of this print material sent willy-nilly into the void, I’m a-thinking this represents some serious investment (not withstanding the cheesy postage due).  I looked for a postmark and there was none present, leading me to conclude that it must have originated locally.  

Much to our amusement, my husband, who is Canadian and has therefore never even registered to vote in the U.S., has long been targeted by Republican mailings.  We’re not sure why. Something he bought or inquired about years ago probably tagged him as a potential recruit.  He gets petitions to sign, requests for donations and even letters thanking him for all of his support.  This latest mailing no doubt belongs to that Twilight Zone of misdirected marketing.

But the message is clear: even crazy fringe groups  will have a huge war chest of Super PAC funding indirectly available to somehow enable a particularly ugly and virulent campaign this year.

The more desperate and disorganized the Republicans become, the less they have to lose by resorting to outright lies and association with the most toxic outliers.  

They’re on the ropes and it’s no holds barred.

That was the point of Bill Maher’s one-million dollar donation to the Obama Super PAC, as he explained in his Friday night broadcast.  This general election will be different from all those that came before.

Unimaginable sums of money are poised to flow into the Republican campaign at a moment’s notice; and a perfectly timed mass-release of misinformation targeting voters individually on their prejudices and fears (like the poison packet in my mailbox) has the very real potential to impact  voter turn-out and overwhelm common sense.

As Maher pointed out, it’s happened before even when campaign contributions were limited.  Who among us seriously thought there’d be either a President Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush, nine months out from their election?

The conventional wisdom has been that, “It’s the economy, stupid!”  So, if things continue to improve on that front, we should be safe from the lunatic fringe. Right?

Wrong.  

They are lunatics, and, as has been demonstrated by key Republicans on numerous occasions over the past few months, they will say ANYTHING to fire-up their base, no matter how wild or irresponsible.

If only that base turns out in substantial numbers on election day to “purge the infidel,” while the rest of us sort of trickle in, still grumpy with Obama disappointment and confident that common sense will prevail without our help, we could be in for the rudest of surprises.

2008 saw the highest voter turn-out ever in the US. That number dropped significantly in 2008 as new voters who became  engaged in the process in 2010 failed to be inspired by Mr. Obama’s first term performance. We’re reaping the product of that disengagement in what amounts to Tea Party control of the House.

But this watershed election is about something much bigger and more consequential than who will be our head of state for the next four years.   It is about  restoring a balance of power in the Supreme Court, so that the Citizens United decision can be reversed and wholesale degradation of the democratic process can be brought to an end.  This is our only chance to get it right for the forseeable future.  

For that reason it is tremendously important to remember that no matter how much money the Super PACs throw at this election, dollars don’t vote; people do.  That’s why, disappointed as we may be with President Obama’s lack of progressive initiative, we must do everything humanly possible to see him relelected.  

The alternative is simply unthinkable.

Well, Marilyn finally got to attend Town Meeting in full accordance with her civil rights. Franklin observed a one year moratorium on prayer at Town Meeting today.  _________________________________________________

Town Meeting Day in Franklin County has come to mean one thing in particular for me; a check-in to see how First Amendment champion, Marilyn Hackett is faring in her effort to have public prayer dropped from the Town Meeting agenda in Franklin.  

To my mind, Marilyn is making the ultimate argument for that freedom of conscience that some would call “religion.”

Every year, Marilyn requests that Town Meeting not commence with the customary Christian invocation, and every year that invocation nevertheless takes place; but Marilyn does not give up.

She’s been told that she is welcome to leave the room before the prayer begins, and to return once it is over; but Marilyn quite reasonably argues that this essentially “closes” the meeting to her, and asks instead that a secular invocation distributed by the Vermont League of Cities and Towns be substituted for the Christian prayer.  

Those who must share a prayer can do that elsewhere before coming to Town Meeting, which is supposed be an open citizen interface, in adherence with Vermont law:

Chapter I, Article 3 – Freedom in religion; right and duty of religious worship

That all persons have a natural and unalienable right, to worship Almighty God, according to the dictates of their own consciences and understandings, as in their opinion shall be regulated by the word of God; and that no person ought to, or of right can be compelled to attend any religious worship, or erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any minister, contrary to the dictates of conscience, nor can any person be justly deprived or abridged of any civil right as a citizen, on account of religious sentiments, or peculiar mode of religious worship; and that no authority can, or ought to be vested in, or assumed by, any power whatever, that shall in any case interfere with, or in any manner control the rights of conscience, in the free exercise of religious worship. Nevertheless, every sect or denomination of Christians ought to observe the sabbath or Lord’s day, and keep up some sort of religious worship, which to them shall seem most agreeable to the revealed will of God.

This year, Marilyn has the ACLU in her corner; and yesterday, her arguments to end public prayer at Town Meeting were considered by the State Superior Court.

Even though Superior Court Judge Martin Maley has said that a decision will not be handed down before Town Meeting is held this year, Ms. Hackett says she will be attending Town Meeting as usual.  

When asked to issue an injunction prohibiting the Town from including the prayer in this year’s meeting, the Judge declined to do so, giving the excuse that he will be

“out of town…and won’t have the time to decide whether an injunction is necessary.”

As this year’s brand of religious crazy seems to be shifting from Islamist fundamentalism to Christian fundamentalism, and the social agenda of the Republican party sounds like something from the Eisenhower years,  Ms. Hackett has to be especially courageous to hold her ground and even raise the stakes.

Romanticized by the rest of the county, Town Meeting has become the very symbol of direct democracy; but for Marilyn Hackett, it is a painful annual reminder that her views are not respected by her community.

“I will not give up my democratic rights,my civil rights,” he said.  “But it’s a miserable experience.  I go home and cry every year.”

(You can read Marilyn’s own thoughtful and well articulated arguments in my April 15, 2010 post on the subject.)

The primary cycle has been dominated by such extreme Republican dysfunction that most Democrats are enjoying it as disbelieving spectators; but there is something other than Republican melt-down that makes the 2012 primaries especially noteworthy.  

2012 is the first year in which a new amendment to the state constitution allows young people who will be eighteen by November 6, but are still shy of their eighteenth birthday as of primary day, to vote in a presidential primary election.  Vermont is one of the first states to take this initiative.

Credit for proposing the new amendment belongs to three young students, Kate Levasseur, Ellie Beckett and Courtney Mattison who were serving as State House interns when they came up with the idea; and to two social studies instructors at BFA Fairfax, David Clark and Judith Stewart, who encouraged their effort.

The amendment, dubbed “Proposition 5,” which was overwhelmingly endorsed by voters in November 2010, permits seventeen-year olds who will be eligible to vote by the date of the general election to more fully participate in the process of both statewide and presidential elections.  They will not be administered the Voter’s Oath until they are of age, but their vote in the primary will be accepted on an equal footing with that of every other voter in the state.

It is hoped that this early engagement will serve not only to better prepare young voters to make a choice in the general election, but  will also increase the likelihood that they will fully commit to a lifetime of voter participation.

On February 6, taking advantage of new technology now available to Vermont schools, Secy. of State Jim Condos, a passionate supporter of the early engagement model, met with eighty BFA Fairfax students in a virtual “classroom” to listen to their comments on the new amendment, to answer their questions and to explain to potential first-time voters what they can expect.  

BFA Fairfax students have even made their own “get out the vote” video and expect a good turn-out by BFA seniors on primary day.

In a year where voter suppression has once again reared its ugly head on the national scene, it is comforting to know that, at least here at home in Vermont, we are invested in the idea of voter empowerment and expanded participation.

“Congratulations” to all those seventeen-year old Vermonters who will have the excitement of voting in their first primary this year; and “thank you” to Secy. Condos for demonstrating, once again, what meaningful engagement by a state officer truly is.

One quick reminder from Secy. Condos to all Vermonters: The last day to register to vote (on March 6)  is Wednesday,  Feb 29, by 5pm, at your local city or town clerk’s office.

We kind of knew it was coming, but today’s announcement that the Burlington Free Press switch to a tabloid format is at hand still came as an unwelcome surprise at my house.  We kind of like the big-sheets littering our breakfast table.

Of course, the BFP experience has been modified numerous times since news giant Gannett acquired the paper back in the early ’70’s.

Free Press readers saw the same decline in breadth and depth that was visited on so many papers over the past couple of decades as ownership consolidated and online media pressured the bottom line.

Fans of the “funnies,” like my (then) young son, mourned repeated raids on the comic pages.  

Finally, in a company-wide sweep that laid off 700 employees nationwide, the Free Press lost six of its newsroom staff in 2008.  

                             ……………………………

The new format will feature “color on every page.”   That sounds attractive enough, but it hints at the possibility that there may come to be more emphasis on engaging pictures than on expository text.  Could the Free Press one day feature a “centerfold” like some British news tabloids?

What most concerned me about today’s announcement is that it seems to suggest that there will be two different “tiers” of news provided to subscribers.  Print subscribers will get a more expansive product, while online readers will be paying for something less complete:

“Our strategy is to create a more robust website and be the media of now on the Web, with in-depth narrative reporting in print,” said Jim Fogler, president and publisher of the Free Press.

What exactly a “more robust website” might be is an open question.  Despite much promisory hyperbole I am doubtful that less will mean more.

“Local news and in-depth coverage, that’s our franchise and we will not waver from that,” Fogler said. “We will offer more narrative and more polish for print as opposed to what we post online.”

As a daily print subscriber who values the opportunity to source the entire text via the web for the purpose of engendering a fully-informed dialogue with GMD readers, I don’t much like where this seems to be going.  If I were solely a web subscriber, I would like it even less.

We could have a different conversation about paywalls: their pros and cons.  This isn’t about paywalls; it is about simple access.  I think the Free Press has some more explaining to do.

I think this deserves high visibility here on GMD.

It pretty much speaks for itself, but can be supplemented with the many pieces we have featured here over the past years.

It has been my privilege to share with our readers the excellent analysis provided in a series of videos that can be viewed on  Fairewinds Associates website.

Arnie Gundersen of Fairewinds is featured in the CNN report.

It’s done.  The Payroll Tax Cut has been passed, leaving most Americans heaving a small sigh of relief and President Obama looking like a winnah.

There’s nothing wrong with that, but Bernie Sanders, who voted against the measure in what amounted to a token protest, would like to remind us that Republican demands that the cut be fully funded, mean that its passage was tied to the diversion of

That’s right; the Republican effort to weaken Social Security in order to support their case for privatization has once more had its way.