NRC praises ‘flexible’ strategies

Once in a while, just to see what I can see I’ll take a look at the US NRC blog. It is a special place where it almost seems believable that everything nuclear is always under control, always has been and always will be  — forever and ever.FukushimaMeltdown101113 However, a recent NRC post, on the anniversary of the Fukushima disaster tells me  “…great strides” have been made in the past five years. The NRC is getting even better!

A key lesson from the accident was that plants must be prepared for events not contemplated when they were designed and constructed. Plants’ strategies to address external events must be flexible enough to deal with variety of circumstances.

VYkidpoolAll that would be much more reassuring if  images of Entergy’s half dozen or so  kiddie pools full of tritiated water at Vermont Yankee weren’t still fresh in the mind of Vermonters.VYkidpool2 Granted Entergy’s plant is not operating but this can’t be what the NRC meant by flexible strategies.

 

 

Sec. of State Jim Condos on “Sunshine Week”

It is always my pleasure to share Jim Condos’ words on any subject with GMD readers.  Open government has been Sec. Condos’ priority since he first stepped into the office.  It is a topic near and dear to my heart so it is a particular pleasure to bring this to you:

Sunshine Week, celebrated nationwide this week, is about opening the blinds and letting the sun shine in on government.

My long understanding about Open Government’s importance began while growing up in VT and is based on 18 years on the South Burlington City Council, 6 years on the VT League of Cities and Towns Board, 8 years in the VT Senate, and 5+ years as VT’s Secretary of State.

VT’s history has several examples of Vermonters who support Open Government – including former state legislator Matthew Lyon – jailed in 1798 for his beliefs; U.S. Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) – strong advocacy of Federal Freedom of Information; and my work with current Democratic Governor Peter Shumlin, to strengthen VT public records laws.

Who can argue against open and transparent government?

It means different things to different people. Arguments can be clouded with misinterpretations of the law, personal interests, and other factors. It also is easier to make decisions when nobody is watching.

The vast majority of our elected state/local officials are trustworthy, dedicated and passionate individuals who want to do the right thing.  However, corruption can exist.  In small doses corruption can be just as corrosive to our democracy as any prominent scandal, undermining the public’s trust.

There are many cases in the news where public and elected officials have clashed on their interpretation of laws covering public meetings and/or public records. Sometimes one side is clearly right – the other side is clearly wrong. Sometimes there is grey area in the law that is open for interpretation.

However, even with these grey areas, Vermont’s Constitution and state statutes have always been clear in their fundamental intent:  VT’s public officials ARE accountable to the people.

From the Vermont Constitution, Chapter 1, Article 6:
“That all power being originally inherent in and consequently derived from the people, therefore, all officers of government, whether legislative or executive, are their trustees and servants; and at all times, in a legal way, accountable to them.”

This is the very basis of public office – elected officials represent the people and are accountable to the people.

And just in case there was any confusion over the intent of Article 6, the VT statutes for Open Meeting Laws (1 V.S.A. § 311(a)) says:
“…the legislature finds and declares that public commissions, boards and councils and other public agencies in this state exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business and are accountable to them pursuant to Chapter I, Article VI of the Vermont constitution.”

Sunshine Week should be every week, and every day!

VT’s open meeting law recognizes that the media and the public are one and the same; AND they are entitled to: properly warned public meetings; posting of meeting agendas; an opportunity to express one’s opinion on matters considered by the public body during the meeting; knowing why a public body is going into Executive Session; and, the posting/availability of minutes 5 days after the meeting – even if in draft form.

Let’s continue this journey, that all public bodies conduct the business of the people and are, thus, accountable to the people.

Again, from the VT statutes (1 V.S.A. § 315), Access to Public Records:
“…to provide for free and open examination of records consistent with Chapter I, Article 6 of the Vermont Constitution. Officers of government are trustees and servants of the people and it is in the public interest to enable any person to review and criticize their decisions even though such examination may cause inconvenience or embarrassment.”

These excerpts support a mandate on government (state and local) transparency so the people of VT know what is happening in their government. The only time the people lose their “right to know” is when greater harm to an individual or the state could come from releasing certain information. However, in these very rare cases, the burden of proof for withholding information is on the state and the exemption must be laid out in statute.

Public records are defined as: “…any written or recorded information, regardless of physical form or characteristics, which is produced or acquired in the course of public agency business.”  1 V.S.A. § 317(b)

The courts have upheld the notion that the public’s access to records “shall be liberally construed to implement this policy, and the burden of proof shall be on the public agency to sustain its action.”

This means if that which is being disputed falls in a gray area – the courts will likely fall on the side of disclosure.

Simply, illegal meetings and improperly withheld public records offend our notions of openness, accountability, and the core of our democracy.

Open Government just makes good sense for officials and the people they serve.  

So, to any public officials reading this – please think twice about what you “text,” “tweet” or “email” a fellow board member or constituent.  Those messages can all constitute government work and be classified public records.
And to the public, in Vermont, you do have a right to know!

Let the sun shine in and on government – let’s restore our faith in government.

Jim Condos, Vermont’s 38th Secretary of State, has served since January 2011.

Phil Scott swims with the GOP

Last November Phil Scott was reported to support the growing call for stopping planned Syrian refugee immigration. Shortly thereafter he had to clarify his position to say that he had meant “pause.” Scott’s awkward swing at the anti-immigration issue didn’t look too good for a first-time gubernatorial candidate.

Not that he was the only state executive to weigh in. In the panic and unease following the early-winter terrorist attack in Paris, amid reports and rumors of a connection to the Syrian conflict, the Republican governors of Maine and Massachusetts and others said they would halt efforts to relocate Syrian refugees to their states.

Phil Scott and Republican gubernatorial candidate Bruce Lisman both expressed a similar desire to hold off allowing Syrian resettlement in Vermont. Both were rebuked by supporters of allowing vetted war refugee immigrants to come to Vermont. Among the critics was Governor Shumlin, Democratic gubernatorial candidates Sue Minter and Matt Dunne, who said Scott and Lisman were “playing to our worst fears.”

Scott responded, saying in part “[…] I probably should have gone a little further to explain that I don’t understand the situation and I certainly don’t feel like we can pause or stop the refugee program in its entirety,” and from there proceeded to backtrack.

In very short order, Scott also suggested his position had been “misinterpreted” (VPR published the transcript of the interview), and found himself clarifying that he didn’t understand the refugee vetting process, was worried about security and wanted a “pause” not a “ stop.” He even helpfully added that “pause” meant “to stop, take a breath, explain the process and then resume.”

Belatedly he arranged for Vermont Public Safety Commissioner Keith Flynn to “get a couple of people together to explain it [security vetting process] to me.”

I say he backtracked, but looking back to last November it appears more like he just squiggled around awkwardly after sticking his neck out a bit and luckily for him finessed the issue –down the memory hole — away in a few news cycles.

So what might cause the normally cautious Lt. Governor to uncharacteristically speak out against I mean, come out in favor of a “pause” on war refugee immigration to Vermont? In this particular bit of clumsy international-state policy pronouncement, he may have spent down a little of the Phil-Scott-is-a-great-guy credit he accumulated with Democratic crossover voters.

It should now be obvious that while Phil Scott and Donald J. Trump are very different politicians, they both belong to the same Republican Party.

And since national polls show Republicans were twice as likely as Democrats to say that some religions’ teachings promote violence, there is broad support in the party for these views.

In a survey conducted in January, Pew found that 65 percent of Republicans or those who lean Republican want to hear blunt talk about Islam, even if it includes blanket statements about the faith, while 29 percent prefer that politicians be careful not to criticize the faith as a whole.

Only 22 percent of Democrats and those who lean Democratic want politicians to use sweeping statements to criticize Islam, while 70 percent prefer more nuanced approaches.

So Donald J. can go around the country yowling “I think Islam hates us.” and find himself soaring in the polls. Vermonter Phil Scott hasn’t done that, but given Trump’s primary victory here, you can make the case that even in Vermont Scott is now swimming in the same fetid pool of GOP voters. And to win the governorship he must appeal to those Trump voters.

Multiple choice: Snyder, Lisman or Scott

Okay time for a pop quiz:

Who said the following?“It is time for a new model.  It is time for customer service government.  The role of government is to treat you, the citizen, as the customer and look at life through your eyes and say ‘How can we help you succeed and how can we get out of your way.’”

A.) Bruce Lisman (R, Wall Street)  wsi 1

B.) Rollo Tamasi

C.) Gov. Rick Snyder (R, MN)

D.) Lt. Gov. Phil Scott (R, VT)

E.) none of the above

Answer:  C.)

It is Snyder’s governing philosophy as he explained when he first became Michigan governor. He also issued assurances that  radical streamlining of regulations aka ‘getting government out of the way’ wouldn’t be detrimental to the health and safety of the public or to the environment.

The city of Flint Michigan’s lead tainted drinking water, caused in part by Snyder’s administration, probably was in the back of many people’s mind when reports surfaced that we are having a toxic water crisis right here in Vermont. It is much smaller scale but just as bad for those affected.

We are already seeing how our state agencies and government officials will cope with the short term issues-supplying drinking water, testing wells, etc. In the long run an examination of how the contamination was allowed to happen and future regulatory policy corrections will likely be explored by the next governor we elect.

It is probably worth noting that both Vermont Republican primary candidates for governor are expressing strategies for governing eerily similar  to Snyder’s.

In fact Lisman’s recent editorial about what he calls the “valued customer citizen” could have been cribbed directly from the Michigan Governor’s remarks. “First, I’d ask you to re-imagine our state’s government – one that treats its constituents as valued customers and sees employers as strategic partners,” said Lisman.

And  like Lisman, Lt. Governor Scott has a vivid imagination.Imagine if we had a governor’s office that treated every sector in the same way,” he says. But all sectors are not the same.

Financial sector regulations are designed to guard against poisoning the economic wellbeing of the state. However, in a different sector, say the chemical industry, unique rules must prevent poisoning people, water, and the economy. There was plenty of bailing out done but there was no need to distribute bottled water during the credit default swap crisis.

And speaking of the chemical industry: Lt. Gov. Scott had a chance to practice the industry-friendly philosophy he preaches when he cast a rare tie-breaking vote in the Senate. That 2015 vote probably pleased the chemical industry. His “Yes” vote killed a bill that would have strengthened recently enacted regulations (Act 188) controlling toxic chemicals used in children’s toys.

Scott opposed the changes, so as not to ‘create uncertainty’ for the industry, and suggested the existing weaker regulations should be “given a chance” so we could “see what happens.” It is worth stressing his choice was between strengthening the existing rules governing “chemicals of high concern to children” in toys or keep the law in its present form, which is considered weaker.

Hard to know exactly what form governor Lisman or governor Scott’s re-imagined government might take, but a quick glimpse at the havoc wrought from Snyder’s Flint-style customer service gives a frightening preview of the experiment.

Re-imagine that.

Updated: Jim Condos backs Bernie…& it’s a Michigan blowout!

Following a shockingly unexpected victory for Bernie Sanders in the Michigan primary, these folks must feel especially good about their gutsy decision.

Vermont Secretary of State, Jim Condos, and Rep. Tim Jerman of Essex Junction have announced that, as superdelegates to the Democratic party convention, they will be joining Peter Welch in supporting Bernie Sanders’ bid to become President of the United States.  I completely overlooked the news that Democratic Party Chair, Dottie Deans, also threw her super support behind Bernie!  I must have been suffering from double-Dean vision.  Well done, Ms. Dean!

The pair waited until after Vermont’s voters had spoken in the primary to announce their choice because both felt it important to lend their weight to the choice of the people of Vermont.

Bernie Sanders, as we all know, walked away with all of the pledged delegates, when he scored more than 86 % of the popular vote in the Vermont primary.

It is unfortunate that Governor Shumlin and Senator Leahy could not wait to see what is the will of their constituents before throwing their own superdelegate support behind Hillary Clinton, who gained less than 13% of the popular vote. Howard Dean, who as a former Democratic Chairman also enjoys superdelegate status (and who once defeated Senator Sanders in a gubernatorial race) was another early Hillary supporter.

It would have been nice to see them also refrain from endorsement until after the people had spoken, but the Clintons represent a formidable bloc in the Democratic party, demanding and receiving loyalty based on their combined history of  electoral success; and nobody ever said that party politics were fair…or even particularly democratic.

Anyway, thank you Secretary Condos, Dottie Deans and Tim Jerman for resisting the siren’s song of power politics and instead remembering your own loyal constitutents.

Your contribution puts you on the right side of American history at what we can only hope will prove a pivotal moment.

Donald Trump is an EB-5 funded developer

It seems Donald Trump and Vermont’s NEK mega developer Bill Stenger have something in common-they both love EB-5 investors from China.

Considering all his anti-immigration and China is “killing us,” stealing our jobs and money rhetoric, Trump surprisingly has no qualms accepting Chinese investor financing for a development project in New Jersey under the Trump® name. chairmantrump1

The Federal EB-5 visa program provides foreign investors with a US green card, for them and their families, and (after two years) permanent resident status in exchange for agreeing to invest $500,000 in an approved US business.  In recent years the majority of EB-5 foreign investment funds have been from wealthy Chinese. EB-5 provides a “safe” place for their cash outside of China. Is it possible Donald’s EB-5 immigrant investors are issued a Trump visa card?

The Trump investors’ EB-5 money is for a 50-story luxury apartment building in New Jersey only a short distance from Lower Manhattan. It is licensed under the Trump name and run by the Kushner Company. Jared Kushner is married to Trump’s daughter Ivanka.

Kushner Companies is a New Jersey-based real estate firm built by Kushner’s father Charles, a former rainmaker in New Jersey Democratic politics who pleaded guilty to a federal campaign finance violation, filing false tax returns, as well as attempts to silence a witness. Charles was sentenced in 2005 to a prison term of two years. He remains active in the company. Jersey City is the first and, so far, only Trump project for the company.

About the Chinese funded NJ development, a Trump spokesperson says: “This was a highly successful license deal but he [Trump] is not a partner in the financing of the development.”

In his campaign for the Republican nomination for president Monday, Trump took a break from beating up on China, and in remarks the NYTimes.com called “unusual, if not anachronistic,” went after Japan for currency manipulation. And the band — or at least its bombastic tuba — plays on.

Dog Pack on the Hunt for Lt. Gov.

There is already almost half a dozen members of the pack in the hunt, by my count, and now one more will try to fit their collar and tags in the clutch to run for Lt. Governor. And now perhaps sniffing an opportunity Sen. John Rodgers (D-Essex/Orleans) is considering it.

The NEK’s Rodgers wants to see if a run for Lt. Gov. makes sense: “I’ve got some folks looking at numbers and figuring out a path forward. If it looks doable and feasible I’ve got to figure out if it fits into my personal life.”

The field as of today – Randy Brock will as of now is the only Republican. Boots Wardinski of Newbury will be running as a Progressive and Dr. Louis Meyers who is new to politics will run as an Independent.hatnring

On the Democratic side, current office holders Sen. David Zuckerman P/D,  Rep. Kesha Ram D have announced their candidacies. Brandon Riker of Marlboro who has never held elected office is reportedly also running. Earlier former Politico.com editor Garret Graff explored making a run but dropped out. The former Montpelier resident’s plans were disrupted when — to his shock — he discovered that he did not meet eligibility rules, after a ten-year absence from Vermont — a state he claims as his “mental home.”

Maine and New Hampshire are two of five states that find no reason to have an office of Lt. Gov. at all, but here in Vermont people are falling all over themselves to run for the part-time job. The official duties are limited but include being acting governor in the governor’s absence and being President of the Senate, except when exercising the office of Governor. And of course, in the event of the death of a serving governor, the Lt. Gov takes over.

Significant in terms of the Senate, the Lt. Gov. also serves as the third member on the powerful Committee on Committees. The three-member leadership Committee on Committees hand-picks senators to serve as chair-people on standing committees. The chairs in turn influence much of what gets a hearing in the legislative sessions. Currently the C of C’s is made up of alleged Democrats Dick Mazza (Grand Isle) and Senate President Pro Tem John Campbell (Windsor) and their BFF, Republican Lt. Gov. Phil Scott.

Although he may not be well known outside of the Northeast Kingdom, Senator Rodgers previously served in the State House for 8 years. He achieved some notoriety around the state in 2015 when he introduced legislation to designate the beagle the official state dog of Vermont.

In the Senate, his “Beagle bill” was called “a source of amusement if nothing else.” However PETA (People for Ethical Treatment of Animals) expressed concern over whether naming a specific breed was “a step backwards” and worried the designation would encourage the growth of “puppy mills.”

Senator Rogers defended the bill and explained how else he intends to spend his time in the Senate:

“the Beagle Bill” that I introduced for a constituent. I assure you that it literally took about two minutes. If you want to talk about a waste of time let’s talk about the new gun control proposal that I am busy trying to stop. […].

In addition to shouldering the burden of naming a state dog and stonewalling gun control, Senator Rodgers sits on the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Energy, as well as being vice chair of the Committee on Institutions. According to the American Conservative Union, Rodgers is one of two highest-rated Democrats on conservative issues. At 43% he is a top conservative dog compared to other Democratic senators, to whom the ACU inaccurately refers as a “coalition of the radical left.”

All the actual and potential candidates a for Lt. Governor stress the agenda-setting capacity of the job. If Rodgers chooses to run he might be the perfect boutique candidate for Democratic beagle fans with a strong conservative bent.

It’s not clear what kind of state dog might be favored by Committee on Committee heads Senators Mazza and Campbell. For now at least, there is a wide array of possible future Lt. Governors seeking to wear the collar.

Frankln County: Bernie decimates Hillary and GOP field

The front page table in today’s St. Albans Messenger tells it all: Bernie Sanders is the best candidate the Democrats can field in the general election.

As one of the most conservative counties in Vermont, Franklin County is a pretty good place to consider in an up-close examination of the primary results.

According to today’s table, here is how things shook out:

Donald Trump got a total of 1,782 votes.

Hillary got a total of 888 votes in all municipalities, roughly half of Trump’s total.

Of the other Republicans, only Ted Cruz got less votes than Hillary, at 508.

Bernie got a total of 7,060 votes!!  That is six times Trump’s total.

Bernie got more votes than all of the others together!

When voters really get to know Bernie, they are overwhelmingly drawn to his message.  For months now, Bernie’s strength against all of the Republicans (and Hillary’s relative weakness) has consistently shown up in all the polls.

Primaries are relatively poor tests of ultimate match-ups.

As we discovered in 2008, the super delegates are party loyalists above all.  When they began to see the groundswell of support for Obama toward the end of the primary season, they didn’t hesitate to throw-over Hillary for Obama.   I have to believe that they will eventually come around to recognizing where their best hope of winning lies.

Otherwise, we are in deep doo-doo.

Bernie vs. Hillary: duelling meme’s in the dead of night

Like many of our GMD readers, I was up late last night searching the intertubes for early
comments on Super Tuesday results.

If you are among our saner readers and simply went to bed, you might have missed a couple of contrasting blogposts that deserve greater attention.

The first, by Bernie supporter Cenk Uygur, appeared on HuffPost at 12:56 AM.

The piece focuses on a campaign narrative that I myself sensed was developing last night, but could not possibly have so well-articulated. It is well worth a read.

Hillary (predictably) won in all the deep southern states, but other than that, only Massachusetts went to her, and by the narrowest of margins.  Remember, despite all of her union endorsements, Hillary only scraped by in Nevada because the turnout was poor; and Iowa was a virtual tie.

This Tuesday, Bernie won in every state in which he actually spent some time letting people get to know him. The problem with Hillary’s southern wins is that in almost every case, Donald Trump outdrew her at the polls. . Those states aren’t even likely to be competitive; and when she lost to Bernie,  she lost big time.

In fact, in the states she won, Democratic turnout overall was down from the Obama years.

Her electoral delegate count looks impressive at this point, but so it did against Barack Obama.  The difference of course is that at this point in 2008, lots of super delegates were moving to Obama; but the super delegates are party loyalists like no others.  If they see that Hillary is not as likely as Bernie to win in the general, they will gradually begin to come around.

The second blogpost to consider is by Hillary supporter, Richard Wolffe, writing at 2:39 AM in the Guardian, presumably after reading Mr. Uygur’s earlier post.

I was not familiar with Mr. Wolffe’s reputation but was astonished by the ungracious tone. Mr. Wolffe seemed to have a major bug up his ass, making statements like

‘…it’s only a matter of time before Sanders stops perpetuating his own hoax and looks at the data of the delegate count.’

and

‘…“In Vermont,” Sanders explained, “billionaires don’t buy town meetings.” Well, they would be strange billionaires if they did.’

okay…

This is where all the dark energy goes in the really underground campaign…to seeding the ‘news’ shows, the blogosphere, Facebook and what-have-you with memes that favor your candidate. The Clinton’s are masters of that resource with an impressive network of seasoned operatives and powerful contacts.

What’s interesting is not so much the vitriolic and completely over-the-top attack Mr. Wolffe unleashes on Bernie, but the pushback in the comments section…all 3,282  of them!!   It’s a real reflection of those ‘unfavorable’ numbers we’ve seen for Clinton.

Somewhere in the first page of comments, I came across one that spelled out the connection of the writer to the Clinton campaign, something the casual reader wouldn’t know. Unlike Mr. Uygur, who wore his heart on his sleeve, Mr. Wolffe was not so transparent. Suddenly the angry tone of the article made perfect sense, and I read it in a new light.

Unfortunately, it would be a full time job spotting these things and where they come from.

VTGOP, Rubio flunk at Trump U.

Marco Rubio finished third yesterday behind Donald Trump and John Kasich. And thirty Vermont GOP leaders may be a little red in face today after deciding at the last minute to back Marco Rubio for President “because of his uplifting message”.havinalaugh

Phil Scott briefly seemed to wiggle toward Kasich but followed that with a barely visible, embarrassed nod from a distance to conservative Marco Rubio.

History could have guided them. Had they given it any thought beforehand they might have looked back in the state’s Republican past: “What would Calvin Coolidge do?” Vermont’s famous taciturn Republican  would likely have kept his mouth shut .

Rubio’s supposedly positive message the VTGOP thought they heard quickly proved an illusion.The endorsement risks alienating centrist Vermont voters in the general election due to Rubio’s conservative positions on women’s issue and climate change.

Today the New York Times describes Rubio (and Ted Cruz) in no uncertain terms:

Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio — are not only to the right of Mr. Trump on many issues, but are embracing the same game of exclusion, bigotry and character assassination. That Mr. Rubio would make double entendres about the size of Mr. Trump’s hands and talk about Mr. Trump wetting his pants shows how much his influence has permeated this race and how willingly his rivals are copying his tactics.

Coolidge once said, “I have noticed that nothing I have never said ever did me any harm.”  

Vermont’s gang of Rubio supporters might update Silent Cal’s observation : “No one we never endorsed could ever do us any harm.”   Phil Scott, Kurt Wright, and Randy Brock failed history at Trump U.