I’d kind of like to just hunker down until November 9th but…
Category Archives: Uncategorized
A Banana Republic in Southern Vermont?
In this year of noise over imaginary voter fraud, little ol’ Vermont is confronting it’s own situation of questionable efforts to influence a vote.
Wind-developer Iberdrola of Spain is offering a cash incentive to all adult Windham and Grafton residents if, in an upcoming referendum, the voters come down in favor of its proposal to construct 24 turbines in the two towns.
Now, I don’t have a dog in this fight. Wind is a useful alternative to fossil fuel so long as the siting is responsible and well-considered Those determinations should be made by disinterested professionals. Local representatives of the people have an obligation to consider both those professional opinions and the sentiments of their constituents in making a final decision. I also understand that the popular vote in Windham/Grafton is non-binding.
Nevertheless, it sets a poor precedent for the permit process, and potentially for other processes going forward, when what is tantamount to a bribe is allowed to influence the vote.
I understand the argument that says this is a way to ensure that compensation for hosting the towers will reach all residents by equal parts; but if that were the only goal, there are other ways to handle this after public opinion has been fairly sampled.
After the case for and against has been heard and a public opinion vote taken without undue influence, if the project is deemed unobjectionable, then is the time to discuss the particulars of compensation.
If it becomes the habit to offer this kind of cash incentive in order to grease the wheels of voter “opinion” there could be unexpected consequences.
Should a project succeed in the permitting process only because popular support has been bought by the developer, and despite valid opposition by those most affected, some important values will have been compromised. Should that project then prove a huge mistake for the community as a whole, the fundamental principle of public input could be permanently undermined.
I was grateful to read Secretary of State Jim Condos’ carefully chosen words about the more egregious proposal to make payments only to registered voters. Certainly the current proposal that extends to all permanent resident adults is more equitable, and even arguably less of a direct bribe to voters.
Nevertheless, menace to the process is still very real in this arrangement; and, since the bribes are being offered by a foreign corporation, there is an ironic echo of colonial exploitation in the whole affair.
The FBI and Gossip Cops
In a letter Friday to congressional leaders, FBI Director James Comey said he will continue an investigation into Hillary Clinton and certain email exchanges. 
Comey’s announcement came along despite the likelihood that some — or all — of the new emails are duplicates of those already seen by the FBI .He even included a written warning to Congress that he “cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant.” Also significant, voting is already underway in many states, and Election Day is coming up fast. And this announcement, coming so close to voting day, violates longstanding Justice Department advisories regarding investigations.
Reacting to Comey’s precedent-breaking October surprise announcement, two former deputy attorneys general, Jamie Gorelick and Larry Thompson, wrote the following in The Washington Post:
As it stands, we now have real-time, raw-take transparency taken to its illogical limit, a kind of reality TV of federal criminal investigation. Perhaps worst of all, it is happening on the eve of a presidential election. It is antithetical to the interests of justice, putting a thumb on the scale of this election and damaging our democracy.
They say this is damaging to our democracy, but it’s lucky for Gossip Cops (and maybe the GOP & Donald Trump) Comey and the FBI are on the case.
Democrat Dick Mazza “anchors” Scott campaign TV spot
Erstwhile Democratic State Senator Dick Mazza is the featured “anchor” in a 30-second TV spot for Republican gubernatorial candidate Phil Scott. 
State Senator Mazza, supposedly a Democrat, has a long history of crossing sides to support and assist the VTGOP in statewide office races.(notably Dubie for Governor 2010 and Scott for Lt. Gov. 2014) so this isn’t exactly a surprise.
But now, in 2016, it is one close, close race for governor. The results of VPR poll released yesterday showed the gubernatorial race to be a dead heat with plenty of undecided voters (14%) remaining. Democratic candidate Sue Minter has worked long and hard and gained ground over Scott’s early advantage in statewide name recognition. So, now along comes her fellow Democrat Senator Dick Mazza to help … Republican Phil Scott.
What can you say but “Hey, thanks a lot. Dick!”
Celebrating civility
Perhaps under the poisonous influence of Donald Trump , civility seems in short supply this election season, even in some of Vermont’s statewide elections.
Randy Brock has taken the low road in challenging Dave Zuckerman for the office of Lieutenant Governor (see below), and rather than focusing on policy, has chosen to run ads distorting Zuckerman’s words and assassinating his character.
I found that a pretty pathetic sign of the times..
So I was pleased to hear the high tone that Marina Brown, the Liberty Union candidate for Auditor of Accounts, adopted in an interview on VPR yesterday.
She explained that she wants the auditor’s office to create a web portal through which members of the public might more easily access all manner of government records. She says her goal is to improve transparency.
When asked what issues she has with two-term Auditor Doug Hoffer (D/P), Marina Brown (LU) said simply that she thinks he is doing a good job.
A minor party challenger complimenting the incumbent while simply presenting how she thinks the office could be improved would not usually be cause for much discussion; however, in this poisonous election cycle, it was as welcome to my Trump-weary ears as caroling on a snowy Christmas Eve.
Thank you Marina Brown.
The GOP are all Trump-heads now
A poll conducted by Politico/Morning Consult allowed respondents to view the lewd “Access Hollywood” video and Trump’s subsequent “apology.”
Those who took the poll rated their reactions to the clip on a scale from zero (very negative) to ten (positive) and a 74-percent majority had a negative reaction. However, other findings are unsettling but probably not surprising.
As of now, GOP voters largely want the party to stand behind Trump. Nearly three-quarters of Republican voters, 74 percent, surveyed on Saturday said party officials should continue to support Trump. Only 13 percent think the party shouldn’t back him.
Well, Trump knows he solidly captured the GOP base and did so early on. I am thinking back to his remark from back in January: “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.”
The Washington Post broke the story!
NBC News had access to the Trump Access Hollywood tape for four days last week but due to legal hemming and hawing it was finally scooped by The Washington Post. The Post moved quickly and took just five hours to vet the tape and decide to make it available to the public.
It is worth recalling that months ago a vengeful Trump took away The Washington Post’s campaign press credentials, banning the newspaper’s staff from his campaign events. In June, Post executive editor Marty Baron wrote this: “Donald Trump’s decision to revoke The Washington Post‘s press credentials is nothing less than a repudiation of the role of a free and independent press,”
Shortly afterward blogger Charlie Pierce wisely noted what this meant for Trump:
“ […] See, in my experience, this is how Marty Baron tells someone that they f*cked with the wrong executive editor.”
Pierce suggested helpfully that it might aid Trump’s understanding of the gravity of what he had done for him to visit disgraced Cardinal Bernard Law “[…] at the Basilica of Our Lady Of The Clean Getaway in Rome” [also see the movie Spotlight].
Endorsement Season!
Like so many others, I have been spellbound for too long by the train wreck on the national campaign stage. ‘Time for a cup-half-full moment, as we note some of the great endorsements netted by a few deserving folks.
Since it could be argued that this is the year of Bernie Sanders, perhaps the best endorsements of the 2016 campaign season flow from his celebrated hands. Of course, Bernie reserves his stamp of approval in state races for the few, the proud: the Progressives!
He has bestowed this blessing on Dave Zuckerman for Lieutenant Governor; auditor Doug Hoffer for reelection; Senate candidates Anthony Pollina (Washington) and Chris Pearson (Chittenden); and House candidates: Jill Charbonneau (Chittenden 1); Mari Cordes (Addison 4); Celene Colburn (Chittenden 6-4); Diana Gonzalez (Chittenden 6-7); Susan Davis (Orange1); Robin Chestnut-Tangerman (Rutland-Bennington); Mollie Burke (Brattleboro); Sandy Haas (Rochester); and my good friend Cindy Weed, who is once again standing for the House in Franklin 7.
If I missed anyone, please chime in in the comments. I put this list together a little hastily as I wanted to be sure to get it up on GMD in a somewhat more timely manner than has lately been my habit.
Vermont Conservation Voters (VCV) has released their full roster of statewide endorsements, just in time for early voting which began today, and a couple of Bernie’s picks are in that lineup, as well.
Making the VCV “Team” are Sue Minter for Governor, Dave Zuckerman for Lieutenant Governor, Jim Condos for Auditor Secretary of State, T.J. Donovan for Attorney General, and Doug Hoffer for Auditor.
Anyone familiar with the sustainability mission of Vermont Conservation Voters will not be the least bit surprised by their picks.
“Vermont Conservation Voters is pleased to endorse a slate of statewide candidates with strong environmental values, all of whom are committed to ensuring the state continues working toward healthy drinking water for all Vermonters, clean lakes and rivers, climate action, sustainable communities, and other environmental priorities,” said Lauren Hierl, Political Director for Vermont Conservation Voters.
It may surprise some that the VCV has declined to endorse for Treasure, but also consistent with their mission is the obligation to occasionally withhold the ‘carrot’ as well as the ‘stick:”
“VCV is not endorsing a candidate in the Treasurer’s race this year. While VCV appreciates Treasurer Beth Pearce’s work on issues such as water quality funding and energy efficiency investments, the organization is hoping to see more leadership from the Treasurer’s office on divesting the state’s pension investment portfolio from fossil fuels”.
Congratulations to all the above, and good luck in the coming fray.
Monster slugs are devouring defenseless baby birds in nests
That’s right, it is the month’s best (mostly) non-political headline!
It seems a certain type of slug has been found to be preying on young chicks of ground nesting birds in Europe. “The actual moment of slugs predating on nestlings isn’t easy to observe,” says Katarzyna Turzańska at the University of Wroclaw in Poland. “You are more likely to come across the traces of the ‘tragedy’: dead or alive nestlings with heavy injuries, covered in slime – and often slugs’ droppings found nearby.”
Scientists say this is an unusual but not unheard of behavior among slugs. Studies have recorded similar events before, and of course scientists observe that slugs do leave a slimy trail. “When a slug finds itself inside a nest – probably accidentally, or maybe by actively searching for this type of food – it just starts foraging on the living nestlings using its radula, or tongue covered in tiny teeth,” says Turzańska. “The nestlings are unable to defend themselves and are eaten alive.”
Luckily the resemblance Donald Trump’s hair and a slug-like caterpillar share was already made years ago, so it wasn’t toooo big a stretch of the imagination to make a connection to this wildlife behavior. Notice that the tactics Trump used to take over and dominate the GOP presidential primary election are remarkably similar to those employed by the predatory slug for devouring ground-nesting chicks.
While in the GOP primary, accidentally, or maybe actively searching them out, Trump was able to “devour” 16 rival Republican candidates. These were the GOP “nestlings” Christie, Rubio and all the others he defeated, who are now dead politically or alive with heavy injuries – left covered in “slime.”
And if you need more evidence, look at the trail Donald Trump leaves behind – he is the alpha slug of the GOP.
Carbon Tax Hysteria
I’ve been staying off the GMD front page during my campaign to return to the House, but I just can’t stay silent while the Vermont GOP slings hyperbolic lies in Franklin County and on the internet. Our friend at the Vermont Political Observer has been covering the fuzzy math on this, but I want to call attention to a couple of local candidates who are beating the drum louder and louder in Franklin County.
I walked in to get some documents about my parent’s property at the Swanton Town Clerk a few months ago around the end of the session, and Rep. Marianna Gamache had left a petition on the counter. It had a shocking headline: “STOP THE DEMOCRATS’ CARBON TAX!”
A Franklin County Republican once told me that there’s a big difference between being an advocate and being a legislator and boy does someone need to take his advice. The more radical Carbon Tax proposals have no hope of moving forward as is, but they bring up important conversations that we need to be having. I wouldn’t support a carbon tax that dramatically increased the cost of gas or heating fuels in a single year, but there are some related policies that are going to be critical to our energy and transportation infrastructure in the coming years.
One such policy, with bipartisan support, is moving from “cents-per-gallon” fuel taxes to a “vehicle miles traveled” approach to paying for our transportation budget. I drive a hybrid and get 52 mpg in the summer. That means I fill up half as much as the average car, and pay half the amount of fuel taxes. As cars have become more efficient, and some drivers have gone fully electric, the transportation fund has taken a hit. With alternative fuels there is a disconnect between how much fuel you pump and how many miles you drive. We have to make sure the way we pay for the roads is fair and doesn’t overburden a particular group of users. Wow, something Phil Scott and I agree on.
Another example is a heating fuel surcharge to support low-income weatherization. I’ve always thought that it was crazy to give heating subsidies to folks year after year (LIHEAP) when we could make their homes more comfortable and energy efficient with a one-time investment in insulation and other cost-effective weatherization.
So, would Mike McCarthy support a big scary carbon tax that radically increases costs to everyday Vermonters? No. I would however make improvements to how we pay for the heating and transportation programs that are smart policy and better for the environment. These energy policies will save the vast majority of Vermonters lots of money compared to the way we currently pay for heat and transportation programs.
Most of what you just read was published as a response to the County Courier’s candidate question of the week: “Do you support the proposed carbon tax?” Do you know what Rep. Corey Parent’s response to this question was? One line: “No, because we cannot afford it.”
Thanks for the thoughtful discourse on climate change and energy policy Franklin County Republicans. This is about what we’ve all come to expect.
Early endorsements, from VCV’s perspective
Turning away from the portentous spectacle of national politics for a moment to focus on our regional races feels somehow reassuring today; yet there is a bit of drama and controversy to be found even close to home.
A couple of days ago, Vermont Conservation Voters ( VCV) released their list of early endorsements and some were disappointed to see that a favorite candidate didn’t make the cut.
It is important to remember that these are only the early endorsements, and they were reserved for legislators with demonstrated leadership on environmental issues, whose voting record on key legislation identified by the VCV was over 90%, both in the current session, and for her or his legislative lifetime. Further endorsements will be forthcoming in the fall and will extend to many more individual legislators.
As a former board member for the VCV, I thought I might use the platform of GMD to explain how the sausage gets made, when it comes to endorsements.
Early endorsement from VCV would carry no weight if it was easily won.
In Vermont, we are blessed with a legislature that is, to a large extent, accepting of climate change science and supportive of responsible environmental safeguards. But even within that general consensus, opinions differ on how best to achieve those safeguards and where priorities should be established.
Clearly, Philip Baruth is one of the good guys; and his contributions will certainly be celebrated in the next round of endorsements. That being said, how fair would it be if, having forewarned legislators on what bills would be scored and, therefore, would figure into the early endorsement metrics, VCV made an exception for Philip? How much credibility would VCV have if they held him to a different standard than every other lawmaker?
Philip is an experienced legislator who, I am sure, has a pretty good grasp of strategic politics. I doubt that he is particularly surprised or crushed by the early pass. Every now and then, even the good guys, who are just doing what makes strategic sense to them, end up on the wrong end of the equation. It’s called ‘taking one for the team,’ and Philip is no stranger to the experience. He’s a courageous legislator who probably doesn’t need bouquets just for doing his job to the best of his ability.
Odum has well explained the minutiae of everyone’s voting records, so I won’t go into that all over again. Suffice it to say that Sen. Baruth’s score on just the votes that the VCV identified as critical for the current session ended up falling short of the 90% mark.
Informed by research and education, the VCV must pursue the environmental advocacy
positions that they feel best suit their mission, regardless of occasional awkward moments with their usual allies. Environmentally responsible legislators, like Philip, must also follow the course of their best judgments.
Mutual respect should be understood to be in effect, and mutual interest in what is best for the environment remains the goal in each case.