Category Archives: Uncategorized

Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?

Beyond the human price of Donald Trump’s promise to deport undocumented immigrants, there will be an economic price to pay. It is estimated that one quarter of Vermont’s farm labor force could be impacted by the new administrations anti-immigrant policies.

When milking crews and field workers are forced to leave the country, who will do the work of feeding America?

The conversation has already begun between the Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets and the Department of Corrections around the possibility of deploying a prison workforce to ensure that there are sufficient hands available to get the job done.

In Vermont, such a workforce probably stands a better chance of experiencing fair treatment and reasonable compensation than in more regressive states. In most states where prisoners have been made to work on farms to replace lost migrant help, the experience has been less than satisfactory, as the captive laborers tend to lack the work ethic, skill and efficiency of the immigrant workforce they replace, and compensation, such as it is, goes mostly to prison operators.

Paid or unpaid, such an arrangement would amount to slave labor supporting a cornerstone Vermont industry.

It’s too easy to rationalize away fair labor practices and compensation for people who have broken the law, no matter how minor their offense might have been.

We already have the highest incarceration rate of any advanced nation, reflecting a draconian inclination that does not become us. Rather than working to reduce prison populations as most people agree should be done, if states begin to rely on prison labor for their food supply, we might actually see a systemic reluctance to pursue alternatives to imprisonment.  Furthermore, when prison labor is charged with animal care, the results can be unsettling:

In March 2012, officials in Sutter County, California discussed ending prison work crews for a different reason. For decades, prisoners have been used to feed dogs and cats, clean their cages and even assess their health at the county’s animal shelter. Over the past five years multiple reports have cited shortcomings with the use of prison labor because prisoners, who are not trained in veterinarian care, have caused problems at the shelter by making mistakes and distracting employees….A 2007 grand jury report found that prisoners were partially responsible for an “abnormally” high number of animal deaths at the shelter.

This is of special concern in Vermont where dairying represents a significant portion of our farm labor needs.

During a forum on labor rights in Columbus, Georgia on April 4, 2012, Richard Jessie, second vice president of the Columbus NAACP, noted that “Our prison workforce is an enslaved workforce basically.” Commenting on the money the city saves by using prisoner work crews, which is reportedly $9 million to $17 million annually, he added, “We use slave labor to do much of the work that could and should be paid jobs.”

A prison workforce should not be Vermont’s fall-back plan for addressing labor shortages down on the farm. Efficiently maintaining our food supply requires physically challenging labor and more than a small amount of commitment to the work. An immigrant workforce has traditionally provided these qualities in exchange for relatively modest compensation.

Our entire food system has been built on those expectations and Americans would be very foolish to abandon the effort for meaningful immigration reform that would support their continued participation in our economy. If we begin to erode that compact now with an “emergency” use of prison labor, we may never be able to rebuild a timelessly valuable labor system again, and, given the regressive inclinations of the Trump contingent, could even live to see defacto slavery return to America.

Prison labor is not the answer.

Still searching the Extinction Burst

On November 9, just hours after Trump won the presidential election, hits on a six-year-old Green Mountain Daily diary spiked. And it still continues. extinctstats3 The GMD diary by the late Julie Waters was called The Extinction Burst. It offered her thoughts on using the behavioral concept called the extinction burst in a political application as a template to respond to what then was the new and increasingly strident anti-Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) Tea Party movement.

In psychological terms extinction refers to the process of no longer providing the reinforcement that has been maintaining a certain behavior. About an extinction burst Julie wrote: “You’ve got a child who is throwing tantrums.  In the past, the tantrums have gotten the child attention, which is exactly what the child wants.” To end this behavior cycle the tantrum should be ignored. And although there may be an increase — i.e.,  a burst of intensity — at the point where the tactic is no longer achieving the usual result,  the tantrum more often than not will end. Once the attention the child desired has been consistently and persistently withheld, the behavior cycle is broken and corrected. Or so the theory goes.

The problem Julie noted then (and it is even clearer now when applied to President Trump’s tantrums) is that some behavioral reinforcements happen without our participation and we can’t really control them — especially in politics. The following from the psychological definition is less than reassuring: Despite the name [Extinction Burst], not every explosive reaction to adverse stimuli subsides to extinction. Indeed a small minority of individuals persist in their reaction indefinitely.

I often check the GMD stats and they indicate the old diary isn’t going extinct; it is still getting regular hits. What does a steady flow of people searching out Extinction Burst on a political blog since Trump’s election indicate? I suppose people are still searching out coping strategies, or it could simply be the coincidental coupling of two Google search words extinction and burst suddenly becoming relevant .

By the way, other heavily searched words since Donald’s victory in November are “fascism,” “bigot” and “racism,” “socialism,” “resurgence,” “xenophobia” and “misogyny” among the most searched-for words. That is according to Merriam-Webster. But hey, what does she know?

oopcurseOne thing I do know is that Trump’s retrograde presidency is and will continue to be impossible to ignore.

[Ed. Note: We’re all thoroughly evolved here at GMD and are well aware dinosaurs and humans never walked the earth together-except in the funny papers and a taxpayer-funded Bible theme park in Kentucky,USA.]

Trump White House: “…it’s like a finely tuned machine”

yearightDonald Trump answered questions from the press for over an hour Thursday after announcing who his newest nominee for Secretary of Labor will be. His first nominee, a former fast-food executive  had withdrawn his name from consideration, due to lack of support from all Democrats and many Republicans in the Senate.

Trump  fielded questions after more than a week’s worth of administrative madness and chaos at his White House. You can review the eight craziest moments in his press conference here. His performance lasted for over an hour, he dodged questions, attacked the press repeatedly, and several times insisted his White House was running like “a fine-tuned machine.” 

And Donald Trump set another record this week; a new low approval rating. A PEW Research poll reported Thursday had his approval at 39 percent, another historic low for presidents in their first weeks in office.

To cap this off Trump is skipping out of town this weekend, taking his reality show on the road. As if needing to reassure himself, he will be dashing off to do a campaign-style rally-performance for Donald-friendly crowds in Florida. He’s leaving his “finely tuned” machine in Washington to hum along on its own.

Donald may simply need time to refocus his vision and get ready for the next week’s challenges. TrumpsidedownHowever, given Trump’s fiascos to date, it would be no surprise if a visit to the upside-down house in Orlando, Florida was on tap.

Vermont Secretary of State’s Twitter Poetry Corner

poetrycorner

 

Here’s a poem tweeted this morning from the Vermont Secretary of State:VTSoSIt doesn’t rhyme but late last month Sec. Condos wrote the following in an opinion piece:

“The time has come for Vermont to create an independent ethics commission to provide education and insight, addressing ethical issues across the Legislative, Executive, and Municipal sections of government”

Secretary Jim Condos is a tireless advocate for government transparency and an independent ethics commission — one with teeth that is.

Donald Trump’s Terrible Awful No Good Very Bad Day

There have been many days that prompted bloggers to adapt the popular children’s book title to frame the immediate chaos around Donald Trump’s political misadventures; but today of all days seems to cry out more than most for that redundant banner headline.

Leaving aside the trail of stinking piles drying in his wake every day, today might one day be remembered as the day that his epic losing streak began.

This morning, like so many Americans (and as I have done every morning since the inauguration), I reflexively turned on the news even before the coffeemaker in order to find out what new region of Twitter hell Donald Trump had taken us to overnight. Despite his best efforts to gin up international tensions, nuclear war hadn’t yet broken out, so I settled into my kitchen chair with a sigh  and a steaming cup of relief. It was going to be a pretty good day after all.

Mr. Trump’s immediate national concern seemed to be his adult daughter’s broken heart at being told by Nordstrom that they could no longer carry her line of merchandise because sales had been so poor over the last quarter. Never one to underplay a family slight, Mr. Trump had tweeted how “unfair” Nordstrom’s decision was; that it obviously was politically motivated, and that his daughter is such a good person who is always trying to get him to do “the right thing.” Then, for good measure, he tweeted it again to the vast readership of his official @POTUS feed.

Even though, for some reason, this gross exercise of  conflict of interest doesn’t set him up for immediate consequences, it does add to the growing file of transgressions that may ultimately be his undoing. Furthermore, Nordstrom probably has a pretty good case for a lawsuit.

Apparently Ivanka hasn’t been very successful at getting Dear Ol’ Dad to do the “right thing”, either.

The new twist this morning was that shameless Trump sycophant and consigliere Kellyanne Conway had taken it upon herself to ‘right’ Nordstrom’s ‘wrong’ by appearing on Fox news to give impromptu commercial endorsement for the First Daughter’s products and exhort the faithful to go forth and buy Ivanka’s crap.

Like so many of Trump’s closest advisors, Kellyanne’s qualifications for the job must be seriously questioned. Supposedly she is a lawyer, and yet, she seemed to be totally unaware that what she was doing in hawking Trump family merchandise on TV represented an immediate and gross conflict of interests, a breach of White House ethics, and a set-up for worsening optics on the general issue of conflicts within the Trump administration.

It seemed that what Kelly Anne had crossed was an ethics bridge too far even for the Donald, because it wasn’t long before the word came out that counsellor Kelly Anne had herself been “counselled.” What exactly this means is unclear, but it seems to suggest some acceptance of responsibility was finally being broached within the administration, if only by a side flunky.

But we had to wait until evening for the best news, when the 9th Circuit Court Decision came down as a sweep in favor of the plaintiffs. A crushing defeat for King Donald!

It ain’t over ’til it’s over, and there are a few more innings to be played in the game of anti-American immigration policy; but tonight we can pause in the battle for a little celebration, knowing that it’ must be somebody’s job at the White House tonight to sit on Donald and restrain his little fingers from unleashing a Twitter storm of unintended consequences.

Updated: McAllister- “In Vermont, women are the ‘Holy Grail’”

Update: (Feb. 6 )-  Friday, February 24 has been set as the date for continuation of the hearing on Mr. McAllister’s motion to reverse his plea deal.  Not only is Mr. McAllister likely to return to the stand for further testimony, but his son Heath may be called as well.   Popcorn optional.  ________________________________________________________________

On Friday, I took a break from the antics of our “Command-Her in Chief” to attend the courtroom speaking debut of Norm McAllister,  when he took the stand in defense  of his motion to rewind the plea deal he had earlier agreed to on the occasion of his second sex crime trial.

As you probably know, Mr. McAllister (formerly Franklin County Senator McAllister) took that plea deal last month after the court had devoted an entire day to seating a jury.

It seemed as if we were destined never to hear directly from the accused.

The plea deal should have been very attractive to Mr. McAllister, as it dropped some of the charges against him, thus reducing the maximum amount of jail time he would serve from life to seven years. Considering the weight of recorded evidence with which the prosecution was fully armed, no one was surprised that he seemed to accept the plea deal pretty willingly.

McAllister, 65, signed an agreement and pleaded no contest to two counts of prohibited acts and one count of lewd and lascivious conduct. In return, prosecutors agreed to drop the most serious felony, a charge of sexual assault, which carried a potential life sentence.

The very next morning Mr. McAllister surprised his own attorneys, and pretty much everyone else, by expressing ‘buyer’s remorse’ to NBC’s Stewart Ledbetter and suggesting he might retract his plea.

Friday’s hearing was scheduled to entertain arguments concerning the merit of McAllister’s request to retract.

His principle argument is that the attorneys who represented him, both in his earlier sexual assault trial and in the case for which he had taken the plea deal, had coerced him into accepting the deal. He has fired those attorneys (Brooks McArthur and David Williams), replacing them with his current representation (Bob Katims.)

Under oath, Mr. McAllister told the court that McArthur and Williams “brow beat” him into
accepting the plea deal; that they refused to let him consult with his son before making the decision; and that they had called him ‘stupid’ and ‘retarded’ for resisting and brought him to tears. He further asserted that they had told him that Vermont law was unfairly biased in favor of women, giving him the impression that he had no choice but to accept the deal right then and there.

He also maintained that the implications of the plea deal had never been properly explained to him and he had no idea that acceptance of the plea deal and the conditions of sex offender treatment attached to it was a tacit confession to the reduced charges.

It was quite a story. Once again, Mr. McAllister played the victim as he attempted to deflect blame to his lawyers .

Brooks McArthur, who was called to the stand after the break, refuted the idea that McAllister had been coerced, reading from the record to establish that Mr. McAllister had been questioned both by his attorneys and by Judge Martin Maley about his understanding and acceptance of the plea deal. He emphatically denied calling Mr. McAllister ‘retarded’ and making statements about gender bias in the Vermont court system, pointing to Mr. McAllister’s own assertion to Seven Days back in October 2015:

“…You’re screwed, because in this state, women are considered the Holy Grail,” McAllister told Seven Days. “Women don’t lie. I’ve had landlords come up to me and say, ‘You know, this is going to scare us, because if you rent to a single woman, you’ve got to have witnesses.’ There’s something wrong with our system. It’s great that nobody is above the law. But how does that work when you get accused of something you didn’t do? There’s a presumption that you must have because you’re a man.”

From Mr. McAllister’s testimony, it’s pretty easy to surmise that he was fully accepting of the plea deal while he was still in court; but, when he went home and was confronted by his son about the arrangement, he had a change of heart.

Day two of the hearing, in which Mr. Williams will be called upon to testify, has yet to be scheduled, but Mr. McAllister’s credibility has already been dealt a considerable blow. I don’t know about you, but I can’t see Mr. McAllister’s attorneys being so incautious as to call him “retarded” or opine that he couldn’t get a fair trial in Vermont because he is a man!

I am of two minds about whether or not I’d like to see Mr. McAllister’s plea deal reversed.

On the one hand, given Friday’s preview of his performance on the stand, I would sincerely love to hear him answer questions directly related to the charges against him. On the other, having witnessed how poorly the system served the young girl who was compelled to  relive humiliating details of her complaint in the first case, I do not wish this female victim any more exposure and pain than absolutely necessary in order to ensure that one sexual predator will never hurt another woman again.

Brokenhearted in America

In the wake of Donald Trump’s election and immediate overtures toward authoritarianism, many of us have found ourselves unexpectedly grieving the loss of the America we have trusted since childhood.  One of those folks came to me with a letter she had felt compelled to write to an estranged friend who was a Trump supporter.   After weeks of anguished internal debate, she finally could not bring herself to send it.  I thought it perfectly expressed the sadness and anger that divides us now; so I asked if I might share it with our GMD readers. She does not want me to mention her name so let’s just sign her “anyonymous” with a small ‘a’.

“So I have become one of “those” people. You know, the ones who have let the election spill over into their personal lives, someone who has lost a friend because of it, a friend I still care about but with whom I cannot figure out how to continue a relationship. I cherish my friendships. Lucky as I am to have family I genuinely love, there is a difference. Families have to accept you; friends choose to. To me, that is pretty sacred. So how could I let this happen? This was not an “unfriending” on Facebook. This was face to face across a small desk and was very painful for both of us.

We tried to talk. I apologized for withdrawing after November 8th. I could not pretend that all was well, and I thought it might take a few days to get back to normal, which then turned into more than a couple of months. I mean how does this happen? This was a friend, and the election was over and we had always voted differently. Yet, we had always had each others’ backs.

The apology did not go well. During my absence she had had some difficult times and I had not available. And I believe, like me, she valued our friendship. She felt betrayed and angry over my withdrawal. But soon the apology devolved into respective and familiar talking points. We had been in similar territory before over the years, finally pledging to not talk politics. And so the hardest thing to try to explain and answer was what had changed this time, and why I, too, felt betrayed when I had been the one to withdraw.

” What was different,” she asked. “What was different this time?”

And even now I am not sure why I could love before and find it so elusive now. But I think it has to do with choices truly mattering and that maybe I had not been honest before in our relationship by sidestepping them. Politics do matter. And choices and politics have consequences.

For me, the measure of character is how we treat each other, especially those more vulnerable and powerless. In any human interaction, my friend would most certainly treat people with kindness and respect. But she voted for someone who does not, someone who targets the vulnerable and powerless and weak; it is so easy to blame them and cull the herd. It’s what bullies and dictators do.

As one of our greatest writers said, we all bleed when cut. It seems to me that some people judge their blood, their pain more worthy, their hopes more legitimate. And while I do believe in an “illegitimate” president, I don’t believe in an illegitimate human being. And I just can’t get around that, try though I might.

I admit I am a holdout to “let’s look for the positive.” If anyone who has been struggling does well under our new regime, I will be happy for them. But I fear these gains might be made at the cost of our collective soul. Because, kind and caring as my friend is to those around her, her vote supported someone who treats people as throwaways because he just knows they are “ very very bad” people.

She has often talked to me about her belief in personal responsibility, which is important to me, too. And since she made a choice in her vote, I think that brings the responsibility of accepting that there are those in her life who will act or react based on it.

To maintain our relationship I would feel betrayed by having to pretend the things she supported by her vote are acceptable. If I have to not talk politics or discuss my deep feelings and values in order to stay friends, then I have a choice to make, too.

Sadly, I think I have made it.”

Perjury could save the nation.

Sunday musings in a flu and Robitussen-induced fog:

Congressional Republicans have all the power to stop Donald Trump’s march to catastrophe, but recognizing that they have been effectively castrated by fear of populist revolt from their base, we are left frantically looking for a “Plan B” before the Doomsday Clock strikes twelve.

Apparently our best legal opportunity to curb the insanity is to get him into court for any reason and force him to testify under oath. This has been suggested repeatedly in the media but, IMHO, hasn’t gotten nearly enough traction.

The man appears incapable of distinguishing truth from fiction and it is unlikely that he can restrain himself from at least one boldface lie in the course of any sworn testimony, no matter how brief.

Therein lies the easily pulled lynchpin to impeachment.

I would guess that, by the time he lies under oath, at least half of all congressional Republicans would leap at the chance to push him toward the exit sign if given that opportunity through a simple impeachable offense such as perjury.

They’ll know, of course, that they will still have Mike Pence (God forbid!) to do their rightwing bidding…but Pence is considerably less likely to launch a missile strike on a whim.  We might actually survive to to see another election.

The beauty is that Donald Trump has done so many nasty and double-dealing things to so many people over the course of his personal and business history that the opportunities for court-ordered depositions abound.

What the public and the media must do is find some way to reassure his myriad victims that they have the opportunity to do the country a great service simply by dragging his ass into court.

Donald Trump will inevitably do the rest. He is programmed to lie even about trivial things. He simply can’t help himself.

Comments Senate Bill 8 Ethics

This letter is to comment on Sen. Pro Tem Tim Ashe’s comments regarding the S.8 bill on the scope of an ethics commission and its powers, as published in the VTDigger, on January 17, 2017. His comments strike me as lacking administrative experience. I hope that my comments can help him to understand that serious lacks of ethics in Vermont’s governments seriously undermines trust in fair decision making throughout the State.

Proper ethics standards should not be vaguely determined by each incoming governor and rescission of those by the previous governor. It is inadequate to accept an officials statement under oath denying conflict of interest. Officials can, intentional or unintentially, confuse separation of their private and public interests. It is time to establish a full court press for ethical behavior by elected and quasi-judicial office holders and to define definitions and processes, by statute, to abolish such conflicts. The current Judicial Code of Ethics provides a starting point for such definitions. An ethics process which addresses all complaints of conflicts of the public’s interest, anticipated or not, needs to be established. The core of S.8 is that the citizens of the Vermont must be able to trust in the honest legislation, administration and enforcement of the laws of Vermont.

Sen, Ashe’s comment implying $300,000 is an exorbitant cost to assure honest government is not a service to the public of this State. Assurance of honest government is worth far more and should have a higher priority than any other Vermont expenditure.

Secretary of State Jim Condos is far better experienced and informed than is Sen. Pro Tem Ashe. That opinion is based upon forty-six years of observing the politics of Vermont and being delinquent tax collector, constable, listor and chair of a planning commission at the town level to being Vice President of the Northwest Citizens for Responsible Growth. NWCRG members observed conflicts of the public’s interest, corruption, in its losing battle against a Walmart Store in St. Albans. The Walmart permitting process that occurred is an ethical embarrassment to our State.

It is important and necessary that a dedicated group for the purpose of acting in response to ethics complaints be established. Of perhaps greater importance is where it should be located, in this State’s government. The organization must be removed from all politics of state and local government. I recommend that it report to the Vermont Supreme Court and be governed by the VSC’s Judicial Code of Ethics.

It need not be ‘a full-fledged, large bureaucracy’ as envisioned by Sen. Ashe. ‘Experience of what kinds of complaints are coming in’ is irrelevant. All should be considered for legitimacy. Complaints should be encouraged and rewarded, as found justified and worthy by judiciary.

To substantiate the above comments concerning the permitting of the Walmart Store in St. Albans, a chronology of ethics problems which I composed during that legal battle  is available at: http://witchcat.ws/Consequences/timeline.html.

Respectfully,

Perry Cooper, Bakersfield