Category Archives: local/regional

The state of play for Trump’s enablers

local/regional, National, ,

nydailynews71618The New York Daily News front page on the day Trump met with Vladimir Putin in Finland and trashed the United States references his 2016 Iowa campaign remark that he could: “[…] stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,”

And his GOP enablers? Well, the New York Times reported some Republican leaders (mostly it seems those headed out the door for retirement) are expressing qualified outrage.

Yet as of today: “[…] no Republican in Congress pledged any particular action to punish Mr. Trump, such as holding up his nominees or delaying legislation, nor did any Republican promise hearings or increased oversight.”

More pointedly  Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration tweeted:

RReich716

In rare show of GOP courage one southwest Ohio state official resigned from the party as “a matter of conscience, and my sense of duty.” Here in Vermont?  Well, crickets so far — no press releases or remarks from Governor Scott that I know of or from anyone in the  VTGOP remotely  critical of Trump’s performance with Putin.

It was in Helsinki and not on Fifth Ave but for now it looks like Trump — as he predicted — may just be allowed by default to get away with this “shooting.”

And the GOP across the nation and in Vermont will be sure to stand at attention for the playing of “Taps” over the grave of our Democracy, while offering their ubiquitous and ineffective “prayers and thoughts” to the family and friends, as they do after every mass shooting that could have — should have — been prevented.

‘Tis the Reason to Say “Treason”

local/regional, National, , , ,

Kudos to BP for doggedly re-focussing us on Vermont’s timely issues.  These days, it is beyond me to do the job.  

I’m like the clueless cat who is so easily distracted by fast moving objects that he walks into walls.  Every morning I learn about some new outrage that Donald Trump has unleashed on basic American values and I’m off in hot pursuit.

So, please bear with me while I work through my indignity, time and time again.  

If you haven’t been surfing the underbelly of legitimate news sources, you may not have caught yesterday’s head-slapper du jour.  From The Washington Post and The Guardian, we learn that Russians are praising Scott Pruitt for removing restrictions on ASBESTOS(!) and showing their gratitude by marking bales of the carcinogen for export with Donald Trump’s face and name!!

Better than the Onion; you simply can’t make this stuff up.  In the story lie two reminders of the way in which the 45th president has so far managed to keep Republicans on his leash.

What, in any other administration, could singularly bring about ruin becomes nothing more than a forgotten anecdote when enmeshed amongst layer upon layer of daily scandal, violation  and incompetence.  Asbestos, the scourge of a healthy living environment throughout the late 20th century, has apparently been given one of Donald Trump’s famous pardons and is now poised for a comeback!!

It’s all but forgotten today because Donald Trump has spent the past two days ripping the pins out from under NATO and all of your traditional alliances, and shows every indication that he will kiss Putin’s pinkie when they meet privately later this week.

IMHO, it is time to break out the “T” word.  Surely it is treason for any president to take advantage of his presidential privileges in order to serve the counter-strategic interests of our most powerful adversary.

Still, the GOP has made its deal with the devil and is clinging to him like stink to garbage.  Most are so complicit at this point that they must inevitably be touched by the “T” word as well.

I was interested to read yesterday in the Messenger that one-term Republican Senator Carolyn Branagan, who filled Dustin Degree’s vacated seat when he was appointed to a position in the Scott administration, and who had earlier announced that she would not run again in 2018, announced that she was now considering running as an Independent.

No mention was made of her reason for dropping GOP endorsement, but Branagan is known to be a moderate and I’d like to believe that she has simply chosen the moral high ground.

Being a woman must be additional motivation to run far, far away, even from the Vermont GOP.

One has to wonder how many Republicans in regional races have made a similar decision to leave the party’s branding (and funding) behind.  Just how toxic will the GOP label prove to be in the coming years?

Vermont to allow “pop-up” business marketing on state’s rural trails

local/regional, , ,

“Surprising hikers on the trail where they would least expect it.” Merrell Magic

Coming to a Vermont state hiking trail on July 16th will be a commercial marketing campaign consisting of a “pop-up” back country lemonade stand sponsored and set up by Merrell Outdoor apparel and Backpacker Magazine. Vtdigger.com reports: The free lemonade is part of a social media marketing campaign called Merrell Magic to “celebrate the trails by surprising hikers and trail crews when they least expect it,” according to Merrell’s website.

pinkpopuplemonade

 

The “magic” usually takes the form of weary long distance hikers stumbling upon a cooler with ice cold sports drinks on the Appalachian Trail or a water cache in dry areas of the Pacific Crest Trail. Merrel Magic representatives have even cooked [?] beef tartare with duck egg for backpackers in Providence Canyon State Park in Georgia and thrown a pizza party for a Mount Rainier National Park trail crew.

That’s right. Vermont — the state that in 1968 (fifty years ago) banned highway billboards and has strictly enforced it to the point of challenging a town’s “vintage” style painted roadside mural (painted on a barn no less) — will now have businesses “popping-up” lemonade stands on state trails “… where they least expect it!”

It isn’t clear what, if anything is “in this” for the state to allow  Merrell and Backpacker Magazine’s lemonade stand to “pop-up” on a rural trail. Rob Peterson, regional manager of the state’s northwest parks, said : “[…] the lemonade stand proposal is an appropriate use of state trails because the wooden stand is “low impact” — it’s carried up on a backpack — and will only stay in place for a short period of time.

But what does it look like? Well, here’s a 23-second Merrell promotional video of their company lemonade stand popping up at Corona Arch in Utah https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IuJ9c9GD2U (picture the Pepsi Generation or Coke’s Teach the World to Sing commercials )

Now called “branding” not too long ago something like this was simply called advertising stunts. But, for Vermont  it is just a little “low impact” commercialization of part of our state parks this summer. What product branding stunts could be next?

Makes me wonder if Governor Scott can or wants to keep a lid on this kind of thing — is this a  state promotional he wants to make? I mean some people carry branding to an extreme and cover every available inch with signage for a business sponsor.govscottsponsoredby

Opening up Vermont parks and trails for commercial promotion  could be a tough one to limit or stop once businesses start their  “pop-up trail magic” branding (aka advertising) stunts and cooked beef tartare is served on our trails.

Maybe Merrell should take the hint and make this ad-fest like steak tartare: exceedingly rare.

No New Vista utopian city/state development for Vermont

local/regional, ,

The Valley News reports  some good news for the upper valley towns that Utah resident David R. Hall had targeted to build his Mormon inspired utopian city/state in. The mega-wealthy Hall is giving up his quest and will begin selling off almost two thousand acres he had scooped up in Sharon, Tunbridge, Strafford, and Royalton. If it had been completed, the city/state he envisioned would have encompassed 5,000acres and housed up to 20,000 people. Hall’s home-town Utah newspaper the Deseret News had correctly said the plan was received in Vermont “like a dead cow falling from the sky”

DCFFTSDavid Hall decided to sell the land after the National Trust for Historic Preservation placed the towns of Royalton, Sharon, Strafford and Tunbridge on its “watch status,” a special designation that accompanies its annual list of the “11 Most Endangered Historic Places,” he said this morning.

“The recent designation of the area as a watch by national historic was a genius move by those who oppose my purchases,” Hall said via email. “I admit that I am worn down by the drama and have decided to give in and get out of Vermont.”

Hall’s plan was first made public by Nicole Antal, a local librarian, who blogged about it on DailyUV.com when she noticed parcels of land in her town were being bought by a Utah resident. Local opposition efforts quickly followed to stop the “NewVista” project.

From the beginning Hall was remarkably off-putting with local residents. He eventually hired Montpelier public relations lobbyist Kevin Ellis. But though you can spin all you want, you can never make a second first impression.

There’s probably nothing like a single mega-wealthy person (or business) gathering up multiple parcels of land to cause a general sense of unease with small town residents. In the 2016 elections state politicians scrambled a bit to address the issue on record. And since no one in Vermont had ever dealt with a project on the scale or manner that Hall was proposing,  there was a question brewing about how well the state’s Act 250 development regulation law would apply to such a project. Eventually the Vermont House passed a non-binding resolution calling for closer scrutiny of Hall’s city/state project.

While most residents  in the four upper valley towns may breathe a sigh of relief (excluding a real estate agent or two perhaps), it’s worth wondering what might have happened if Hall had more personal P.R. skills or had been savvy enough to hire a connected Montpelier lobbyist like Ellis from the start. Happily though, Hall’s New Vista (rechristened  Windsorange LLC as of Aug. 2017 in a rebranding effort) seems to be about to come to a soft landing — and perhaps it’ll land in some other state.

Graff: ‘Local’ angry old man = Trump

local/regional

After Garrett Graff’s 2016 kerfuffle over not meeting residency requirements brought to a crashing end his plans on running for Vermont lieutenant governor, I’d have thought he’d be more aware of what local means. Born in Vermont but residing outside the state for the immediate-past 10 years, Graff left his job at politico.com and had moved back to the state in 2016 with plans to run for the second-highest elected office in the state. Sadly for him, a candidate for lieutenant governor has to have lived in Vermont for the four years before the election “without interruption of residency”- a requirement he did not meet.

Now I happen to notice he tweeted the following this Sunday in response to one of Donald Trump’s earlier tweets about immigration law and order: Local angry old man continues to lack third-grade understanding of US Constitution, or even basic creed engraved on US Statue of Liberty….

bye local

If Vermont approval polls are correct it is likely that a majority of residents would agree with Graff’s quip and his point about Trump’s understanding of the US Constitution.  But I’m not sure that — if asked to — I could find any Vermont resident who would consider Donald Trump a local angry old man. Vermont is just not where he’s coming from.

President of the United States: Baby-Snatcher-in-Chief

local/regional, National, Uncategorized,

Nothing Donald Trump does comes as a complete surprise anymore.  The more odious the things he said on the campaign trail, the more likely it has become that he will, sooner or later, hand down policy edicts as President that make those outrageous statements pale by comparison.  I am convinced that his early quip about shooting someone on Fifth Avenue and getting away with it was not merely a throw-away line.

So, no surprise there…

What still totally takes my breath away are the polls describing a malevolent turn to the Republican party as a whole, and the complicity of its surviving elite.  I call them “surviving elite” because a number of that elite have seen the writing on the border wall, folded their tents and stolen silently into the night.  Some, like John McCain, have not been so silent.

The defections only seem to strengthen Trump’s cult-like hold over the so-called “Grand Old Party.”

Last night, Kate Larose, candidate for the Vermont House from St. Albans held a campaign launch in the Bliss Ballroom of the Franklin County Museum.  Everyone was welcome, including the kids for whom there was a mountain of empty cardboard boxes and an invitation to build their own town.  Pizza, salad and ice cream sundaes were served up on a side-table.

Even though I know that Kate is running as a Democrat/Progressive, there was no specific reference to political party and the theme of the evening was our community: what we like about it and how we hope that it will improve.

I’m sure that this was a deliberate effort to counter the poisonous vapor of national politics wafting our way from the south, and refocus voters on local/regional concerns.

I commend Kate and the other gathered optimists who can see a future of harmony worth fighting for.  I am grateful for their positive fervor.

I once felt exactly as they do and wish I did still.

This year, I will volunteer to man the phones for Democratic/Progressive candidates and contribute what I can to each campaign, as I always have.  Not to do so would be inexcusable, I know.  

But I will do so without much hope for the future of our fragile greater democracy.

I like to think that local Republicans, my neighbors, could not possibly support the Fascistic inclinations and pure mean-spiritedness of Donald Trump, but those polls have forced me to look at them in a troubling new light.  While we always differed on matters of policy, I never doubted that they were good people with whom I shared most overarching values.  

That certain knowledge always made participating in the political process a pleasure.  Win or lose, It felt good to be part of something greater than myself, and I always came away with confidence in the overarching better nature of the “system.”

Not anymore.

Donald Trump has violated nearly every civil and moral norm of American society; has never accepted responsibility for any of the evil he has unleashed on that civil society; lies uncontrollably;  indulges his personal vanity in the most grotesque manner; enriches himself and his family, whenever possible, at everyone else’s expense; and has cynically undertaken a personal assault on the constitution, the like of which we’ve never seen before.

Anyone who excuses or enables this devil is not my neighbor, nor my countryman.  This is what constitutional crisis looks like.

If we survive this period of infamy, somehow reclaiming our democracy from the brink of oblivion,  we must be prepared to eliminate private funding from elections, reign-in influence by lobbyists, clearly define legal parameters to limit the ultimate power of the presidency, and seriously question the legitimacy of the two party system.   We will also have a heap of fence-mending to do with our traditional international allies: “Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa…”

Failing rigorous commitment to reform, we will justly assume our place on the dustheap of fallen empires throughout the ages.

Governor Scott: Who else governs this way ?

local/regional, ,

As if he planned it all along Governor Phil Scott is getting his veto showdown and possible government shutdown.

In May a budget bill was passed in the Senate with tri-partisan unanimous support. Since that time the legislature has offered up a number of responsible alternatives and possibilities for compromise with the Governor. All of them were rejected.

And on July 1st – if no budget agreement is made – we face a government shutdown. Funding for state colleges, state police, state parks, Medicaid programs, food stamps, Department of Motor Vehicle services and more would be in jeopardy, and closures are definitely a possibility. Vermont State treasurer Beth Pierce has warned repeatedly that this upheaval would damage the state’s cherished credit rating.

scott for gov2018

And now as if on cue, Scott’s re-election campaign has jumped in with both feet and sent around an email to his followers charging: “A small number of extremist Democrat and Progressive party leaders, and their political allies, are trying to scare Vermonters about a government shutdown,” the mailer said. “Don’t believe them.”

Scott’s campaign spokesperson, Brittney Wilson, said “legislative leaders are trying to startle Vermonters with a government shutdown, which is very unlikely and being used as a scare tactic.”

Here’s a question Vermonters might want to ponder as Governor Scott prints out his “VETO” bumper stickers for re-election: Who else governs this way? And do we want it here in Vermont?

Maybe it is time or even past time  for the popular notion that we have a special  “Vermont way” of “doing” politics be laid to rest. Thanks Phil, for bringing brinkmanship and a taste of conflict induced dysfunction  to Vermont government.

Think!Vermont still in its little box: “The problem with Vermont’s bright idea”

Business, local/regional, ,

Jeff Yang, a columnist for the Wall Street Journal, has an interesting look in a CNN commentary at the state’s pay people to move to Vermont & work remotely program.*  The program, designed to entice people to Vermont and increase the workforce, was described by Governor Scott as an example of thinking “outside the box.” In his CNN piece, Yang describes what a real “outside-the-box” Vermont  program might look like. Hint: it’s much more than what we’re doing now – layers of glossy websites, and flash & bang headlines.

outothebox

From  CNN: What’s ironic is how inside the box its “outside-the-box” thinking really is. Because while Vermont could be taking this moment to bring new diversity to a state that’s the second-whitest in the United States, it’s instead investing in initiatives that could easily end up maintaining the state’s culturally monolithic status. If Vermont had aimed this policy at explicitly encouraging new Americans to migrate to the state (the policy does not), it would be redressing a significant shortfall in the state’s demographics.

[…]  The fact is, as Vermont, and America as a whole, ages and sees its workforce decline, immigration is unquestionably a critical part of the solution. But Vermont is paying American workers to move to its small towns and rolling hills, even as millions of people are willing to do just about anything to move to the United States. Some are desperately fleeing horrific conditions in their native countries.

The difficulties of taking on such a task, Yang, says are great but not impossible. And although, he says correctly, Vermont is a welcoming state, he notes the mostly unsuccessful efforts to relocate Syrian refugees to his city by the former Mayor of Rutland in 2016. As a candidate that same year, Governor Scott called for a pause in the effort over what he called his “concerns” about security vetting of those new immigrants. Under criticism for his less than convincing argument, he softened his tone but remained committed to aggressive vetting of those particular immigrants.

Yang suggests that funds could instead be directed to encourage companies to hire immigrants and set up partnerships with universities to assist newcomers to build the state population, workforce, and economy.

If Vermont really wants to boost its economy – while attracting young professionals and technology entrepreneurship to the state – here’s a radical idea: It should use the funds it has set aside to line the pockets of mobile American workers and put them instead toward becoming a better destination for immigrants from Africa, Latin America, Asia, and the Middle East.

Now a program like that would put Think!Vermont way outside the comfortable little box it now lives in.

*Where were the media people who make up the snazzy names like Stay to stay, Think!Vermont etc. when Scott launched the get-paid-to-move-to-Vermont-work-remotely program? Maybe they ran out of budget to pay out-of-state pr-hype firms …

FLASH, BANG: “Move to VT get $10,000” Small print: poof gone!

Business, local/regional, ,

And “the payout is immense” screamed one story. Hmmm ten grand to relocate to Vermont? Sounds almost too good to be true! Well you don’t have to look too far to see that the promoted media campaign is running a few miles ahead of the actual plan. The fine print should cause anyone taking this bait seriously to hold off packing their bags.

The media grabbed it and ran with it: Vermont, the stories said, will reimburse out-of-staters $10,000 to move here provided they work remotely for a company not located here. The goal, the state says, is to encourage tech workers and young families to move to the state. In turn the theory is this will help grow our work force, boost our tax base, and we Vermonters will all live happily ever after. According to the Burlington Free Press, the program – which was passed unanimously in the legislature – originated when  Sen. Ginny Lyons, D-Chittenden,  wondered what it would take to get more workers like her son-in-law, who works remotely  while living  in Vermont, to move here.

like that Flash

The man charged with running the offer and managing the payouts, Governor Scott’s  secretary for the Agency of Commerce and Community Development Michael Schirling explains: “[It’s] very important to note from the outset that we have to design a program that we have not yet begun to contemplate the details of,”  Schirling said. “And there will be parameters around, you know, which of the allowable areas can be reimbursed for what amount over the two-year reimbursement period that’s allowed by the law.”

Basically it’s not that a remote worker who moves to Vermont gets a guaranteed $10,000 — which Schirling notes some of the recent buzz around the plan seemed to imply — but how they decide who gets how much is still being figured out.

In addition to not having worked out vital details of the plan, Sec. Schirling appeared unaware the roll-out was going to happen so soon and how the word about it spread. He told VtDigger.com he wasn’t sure what company among the ones they use for to promotion was behind the media blitz representing the valuable state brand. “I don’t know if it’s special PR. We have a company that we use, among many, that does some of our economic development marketing and helps with placement,” he said.

The State of Vermont and the Scott administration is pushing the brand and move-to-VT in particular hard.But even a good brand can begin to look foolish or desperate for attention. Especially if the details are not ready and the reward smaller than advertised. It’s just flash & bang, and then poof it’s gone.

Phil Scott vetoes structural mechanism for preventing working families from becoming the working poor

Business, local/regional, ,

One of the bills Governor Scott vetoed was H.196 an act relating to paid family leave. The bill was designed to: enable Vermont workers to take up to 12 weeks of paid parental and family leave, with a cap on six weeks of family leave per year. Supporters of the bill say that paid family leave will reduce stress for families and attract young people to Vermont who want to start families.ttvphilscott1

Research recently completed at Florida Atlantic University and Cleveland State University quantifies what had been suspected for years, namely that families without paid sick leave or family leave time are more likely to have incomes below the poverty line, experience food insecurity and require expensive state funded welfare services.

The studies published in two academic, peer-reviewed journals, Social Work in Health Care and the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, utilized data collected from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey to assess the effect of no paid sick leave on two key indicators of poverty, income and the need to utilize welfare services.[…] The authors argue that the main reason for these correlations are the higher cost of medical expenses, lack of preventive care and missed wages incurred by individuals and families who do not have paid sick leave benefits.

As LeaAnne DeRigne, Ph.D., associate professor of FAU’s Phyllis and Harvey Sandler School of Social Work, simply puts it, the study shows : “Paid sick leave benefits serve as a structural mechanism for preventing working families from becoming the working poor. Given the public investments made in welfare, food stamps and other social services, mandating paid sick leave is a clear policy lever for reducing the need for these services among millions of individuals nationally.”

If Vermont House bill H. 196 had not been vetoed and had instead become law, it would according to reporting in vtdigger.com have been paid for with a 0.136 percent employee payroll tax covering parental and family leave insurance. This would have provided workers taking this benefit to receive 70 percent of their income during the leave period.

Remarking on his veto of this bill Governor Scott said “While the goals of this legislation are admirable,” the governor said in a statement accompanying his veto, “it simply is not responsible to impose a new $16.3 million payroll tax on Vermonters.”

So Governor Scott, help us voters understand why exactly is it “simply responsible” to veto rather than sign H. 196 – a bill that clearly supports working families. Because I found that even the conservative Koch bros.-funded American Enterprise Institute concluded that financing such a plan through a payroll tax was a sensible approach.The group  admits it is not a “terrible” additional burden to pay for implementing family leave. And that seems almost an endorsement considering it’s from Koch Bros. funded organization.

So since he claims the goals of family leave bills are “admirable” yet still kills the bill, my question for Phil Scott would be: what shred of evidence – a study to cite, perhaps, that shows a small payroll tax increase could possibly do as much damage to Vermont working people as the lack  family leave benefits now does?

Remember: Affordable for whom?