Tag Archives: Matt Dunne

The Primary Election Blows (or “insert wind joke here”)

local/regional, ,
It sure got windy all of a sudden.

It’s been a challenging political season to sit on the sidelines. It’s now only two days before the primary election, and while I’m not about to get involved, there’s a lot worth commenting on, especially in this last week. One could argue that the Democratic contest finally got interesting.

One could also say that the Democratic arena has proven itself vulnerable to the same frothing-at-the-mouth zeitgeist that seems to pass for political discourse in this nation at late. And no, I’m not even talking about professional Diplomat and Gubernatorial Candidate Peter Galbraith referring to one of his opponents as a “fucker” on the record.

So let’s talk about wind power. Not the issue itself, but the meta-issue. Because a funny thing happened on the way to Tuesday’s exercise in democracy.

Gubernatorial candidate Matt Dunne did something you don’t do on the wind debate. He fleshed out his position, bringing in a little more specificity to the vague catch-all platitudes that most Vermont politicians use on the subject. The result has been full-on rhetorical hysteria… or perhaps more accurately, a public window into the roiling hysteria which was already underway, as also witnessed in the full-on self-sabotaging snub of Chittenden Senator Philip Baruth by the VCV I discussed previously.

Now, full disclosure part one here; Matt Dunne is a friend, and I hate seeing friends get beat up on. I really hate it. I’ve been hiding from a lot of the news this week for that reason.

Full disclosure part two; I’m all for wind power. I grew up in eastern Kentucky where whole mountains are razed, pulverized, mixed with toxic chemicals, and dumped into local streams in the name of the fossil fuel industry. A few small roads to industrial sites with relatively modest footprints really doesn’t bug me if it helps choke the life out of the coal companies and save a few hundred miles of Appalachian ecosystems and water tables. As long as the science is our guide for siting (and the science says there’s very little ridgeline acreage in the state that is appropriate), and accommodations are made for critical habitat (so we don’t burn down the village in order to save it), it’s one piece of doing our part to convert to a robust electric grid powered by renewables to enable our transition off of carbon-spewing as soon as possible. I’m the kind of person whose teeth hurt everytime I hear the made up word “viewshed.” I couldn’t care less about the fleeting fickleness of anthropomorphic and anthropocentric cultural aesthetics when we are all responsible for the collective damage being done to the planet. “With great power….” and all.

But I also believe strongly that the ends do not justify the means. And the just means in our society is called democracy. Obviously in a representative government, citizens cede their rights to have say over every single decision – and in a Constitutional Republic, there are limits on democracy to prevent mobs from running roughshod over the less powerful.

But still, I see democracy as an unquestionable ethic. I see environmentalism as one too. And given the reality of climate change, it’s worth mentioning that I am also very pro self-preservation.

And I’d have been willing to bet this is where most people would say they land as well. It’s why all the politicians – no matter which “side” of the wind debate they are associated with – always give vague answers about needing to confront climate change, but needing to respect local communities when asked about wind power. Seriously, who wants to be openly anti-environment or anti-democracy? C’mon.

So Mr. Dunne made a political decision (and sure, I have no doubt it was political). Basically, that being more specific would be helpful in his quest for the Democratic nomination. So he was. He said he felt that siting towns should get a binding vote on wind power plant siting.

Now, is that where I would’ve drawn that line…?… ouch…hmmm…ugh… You see, even I don’t want to answer that specifically. I want somebody else to handle it and let me know when its all worked out so I can open my eyes. But if I’m going to be honest with myself, I probably wouldn’t have drawn the line where Dunne did. And obviously, drawing any line was going to create controversy.

But what has followed looks less like a reinvigorated public debate, and more like electoral rabies. It took me, and a lot of folks I’ve spoken with, by surprise.

It clearly took the campaign by surprise. Dunne’s initial remarks in response to the visceral fury unleashed upon him within the Montpelier/Burlington capital bubble belied a staggered candidate. It was another day before he got his rhetorical feet back under him, and the raw energy released seems to be spilling over into other controversies, and spiking early voting. Right out of the gate, Dunne lost the endorsement of Bill McKibben and others – and was broadsided with an attack from the Governor’s office by Mr. Shumlin himself, all but calling Dunne a liar and a fool (a very measured assessment of the fallout – including a calling out of Mr. Shumlin’s hypocritical hissyfit – can be found in today’s Times Argus editorial page).

So all this sturm und drang raises two questions for me. One; who are the winners and losers in this campaign? Folks like my friend John have all but declared Dunne politically friendless and dead for that one policy offering, and in rather animated terms. The truth is harder to tell. It has certainly hurt Dunne in the aforementioned bubble, but it’s true that bubble was already Minter turf. It’s also true that it may boost him in the rural – albeit less populated – regions. The timing is also harder to read. On the one hand, it could read as desperation from Team Dunne, which never looks good to the undecided set. On the other hand,  it could look gutsy (and the announcement so close to the election could prove to steal away enough support from Galbraith to enhance his (grouchy) left flank). Shumlin’s impulsive attack also could arguably hurt Dunne by virtue of its content, or hurt Minter from association (I’m not sure that it pro-actively “helps” anybody).

All of which is to say, anybody who isn’t looking at current poll numbers, but tells you the whole kerfuffle definitely helps or hurts one candidate or another is likely giving you their own parochial reaction. I feel like I’m pretty good at this stuff, and I’m honestly not sure how it plays out in the final analysis.

The other question it raises is trickier; are we capable as a society, in Vermont, of having a reasoned, thoughtful debate on wind power?

Sadly, I think there is a clear answer to this, and the answer – for the present – is “no.” I wouldn’t have thought it possible, but the dynamics of this debate look disturbingly familiar… they look like the dynamics of the gun debate. “Gun debate” is of course a misnomer, as there is no “debate” allowed. There is only screaming, threatening, rage and hysteric myopia.

For now, I think, calling it a “wind debate” is equally oxymoronic. Hopefully we can find our way past that – and soon. Because it’s really about a lot more than us.

Gubernatorial forum on a bleak and bloody Sunday

local/regional, , , , ,

It was a polite crowd of about sixty Franklin County voters who braved the terrible morning news, cold and rain to shuffle into folding chairs and listen to four gubernatorial candidates discuss the issues.

The candidate forum at St. Paul’s in St. Albans was hardly a partisan pitchfork convention, as Phil Scott, noteworthy for his absence, might have expected. An empty chair at the table was the only reference to the missing Lieutenant Governor.

Once the rules of engagement were laid out by representatives of “Rights & Democracy” (organizers of the event), the candidates were invited to give a three minute introduction of themselves.

To his credit, Matt Dunne, who was first to speak, used his three minutes to remember the 50 individuals who were gunned down overnight in Orlando.

After the other candidates had been given their opportunity for a stump speech, the candidates were each in turn asked to answer the same set of questions about jobs and economic opportunity, healthcare, affordable housing, education, energy and the environment. Each response was limited to two minutes and most of the candidates respected the time limits.

Those questions were followed by audience questions, submitted earlier on pieces of paper, with only one-minute allowed to each candidate for a response. There still wasn’t enough time left for all of the audience questions.

In light of the news of the day, I had submitted a question on assault weapons and I know that one other person had asked about efforts to address the dangerous climate of hate and bullying that has recently been in the news. Neither question made the cut.

Of the four candidates, Sue Minter and Matt Dunne made by far the best impression, giving clear and well considered responses that demonstrated their personal strengths as candidates.
Sue Minter is the candidate of greatest public service experience and Matt Dunne projects the dynamism of a quick and entrepreneurial mind. Both came across as capable, comfortable and socially adept.

Peter Galbraith projected passion and determination, and most of his ideas appeared to differ minimally from those of the other Democratic candidates.

The thing that fired him up the most and drew considerable applause from the audience, though,  was the issue of industrial scale wind, to which he is vehemently opposed.  In fact, his energy policy has a great deal more to do with curbing consumption than replacing it with renewables. I have to say, I see a lot to like in that perspective, since there is almost no national effort toward reducing consumption, and emphasis in that area is badly needed.

Bruce Lisman, as well, is opposed to industrial scale wind. He may in fact be opposed to even small scale wind projects, but I am not at all sure. Many of his responses were a little vague, as I remembered from the last time I heard him speak a couple of years ago. He tended to go off question a bit in order to address topics that were of more interest to him, but that left some listeners, like myself, struggling to follow his train of thought.
I believe that, unlike the other three, he does not support increasing the minimum wage even to $12.; but again, he didn’t really say so.
On the subject of marijuana legalization, Mr. Lisman is opposed while the other three support it with some variation in roll-out and management.

All of the candidates were eager to answer the last question the afternoon, “What would you have done differently from the current governor?’  Sue Minter replied that she would not have promised something she couldn’t deliver, and Matt Dunne also said that he would have handled the health care rollout very differently; drawing on his own experience to avoid the software disaster that plagued the Governor’s efforts.  Mr. Galbraith would have given a better account of what the Governor’s healthcare plan would  cost and how he would have paid for it.

Mr. Lisman said there were many things he would have done differently from Governor Shumlin, but pressed with just a minute of response time, he settled for saying that he would have been “truthful.”

I thought it was too bad, given the implications of the day’s headline tragedy, that no opportunity was taken to discuss Vermont’s singularly lax gun regulations, or the growth of hate crimes and bigotry throughout the nation.

I keep hearing that we don’t have a gun problem in Vermont; and many would argue that we don’t have a hate crime problem here, either; but bullying is very real even in Vermont, and we are not an island. Sooner or later, gun ‘problems’ will be visited on Vermont as surely as on our neighbor states.

…But I guess we’ll have to save those issues for another election cycle.

Does this make me look small?

local/regional, , , , , ,

Republican Phil Scott is leaving a trail of empty chairs at candidate forums around the state.

poor fitToday, he is racing away from a forum in St. Albans. All the Democratic candidates, Sue Minter, Matt Dunne and Peter “devoted American” Galbraith, are attending. Even Phil Scott’s Republican challenger, Bruce Lisman, took a risk and is attending.

The Phil-Bus mobile campaign vehicle is all over the state but he won’t sit down for a few hours with the other candidates.

How is he ever going to fill the BIG chair he is campaigning for when he can’t sit down in a little chair and debate the issues?

Could be jitters -it’s his first BIG campaign after all.

 

Matt Dunne picks up key endorsements

local/regional, , , ,

As Bernie’s campaign considers the way forward, our Vermont contests are just getting interesting.

Democratic candidate for governor, Matt Dunne has announced two huge endorsements from organized labor that should significantly bolster his campaign.  Both the Vermont Labor Council of the AFL-CIO and the Vermont Service Employee’s Association VSEA have come out for Dunne.

Dunne was a strong contender in the 2010 election cycle that ultimately delivered the governorship to Peter Shumin. I remember his enthusiastic young canvassers from that race, and was delighted to see them out in force this time, as well.  I had a very pleasant visit from two of his youthful squad a couple of days ago, the first canvassers to come to my door this year.

Sunday’s forum in St. Albans at St. Paul’s Methodist Church will be my first opportunity to hear from all of the Democratic candidates…and Bruce Lisman…on one stage and I am really looking forward to the experience.

It’s unusual to have a forum including members of both parties during the primary, but I am most eager to hear Lisman’s response to the inevitable question as to whether or not he will be a Donald Trump supporter.

I suppose, since Lisman played coy about his political affiliation for a number of years after launching “Campaign for Vermont,” he thinks maybe he still has a chance to pick up some votes from the Blue Dogs in Franklin County.

With Matt Dunne, Sue Minter and Peter Galbraith to contend with, all strong policy veterans with progressive chops, Lisman will have his work cut out for him just to look relevant. He may have cut a figure on Wall Street, but in Vermont, he’s just a carpetbagger without the good sense to try putting in some lesser public service before reaching for the governor’s mansion.

In any case, it should be an interesting evening.

Gubernatorial Candidates’ Forum Sunday

local/regional, , , , ,

Thank you to Paula Schramm who provided the following information for anyone who would like to attend a Gubernatorial Candidates Panel in Franklin County:

St. Albans Gubernatorial Candidates Panel – Sunday June 12th

When: Sunday June 12th 2:00-4:00pm
Where: St. Paul’s United Methodist Church (11 Church St. St Albans, VT)
Featuring: Matt Dunne, Sue Minter, Peter Galbraith, Bruce Lisman

RSVP here or at www.radvt.org/june12
or on Facebook at – https://www.facebook.com/events/1082285081828401/
Pose questions for the candidates at radvt.org/june12questions

The next Governor of Vermont will have to make critical decisions that will shape the lives of our communities for decades. Our next governor could be the leader who will help grow a vibrant, stable, open Vermont for all families. Who are the people who want to take on this role? Where do they stand on the issues that will most affect our lives and families in Franklin County? We have invited all current candidates and have confirmations already from Matt Dunne, Sue Minter, Peter Galbraith and Bruce Lisman. Join us and spread the word!

The Candidates Panel is hosted by Rights & Democracy, a new statewide grassroots organization geared to bring people together to take action to build healthy communities and make the values of our communities guide the policies of our government. We work in partnership with community groups, progressive unions, faith communities, organizations fighting for human and civil rights, and environmental and climate action groups. Co-sponsors include Main Street Alliance, Voices for Vermont’s Children, and the Vermont Center for Independent Living.

Interesting, isn’t it that notably absent from he lineup is Phil Scott, who apparently prefers to keep his head down and hope no one notices.

Skipping such events suggests a certain entitlement on the part of Scott, which national voters in this election cycle do not seem to find at all attractive.

If Franklin County voters get the impression that Scott thinks the Republican nomination is in-the-bag for him, they just might not show up at the ballot boxes.

‘Just sayin’…

 

Matt Dunne wants a little Bernie buzz?

local/regional, , , ,

As of now, Matt Dunne is the one to beat, at least in terms of money raised. Vermont News Bureau’s Neal Goswami reports that Dunne now has more than $430,000 in cash-on-hand — the most of any gubernatorial candidate — for the remainder of the primary season and into the general election if he wins the nomination. Dunne’s Democratic primary opponent, Sue Minter,  currently has $328,500 cash on hand which is nothing to sneeze at, either. So this current advantage may not make Dunne a front-runner, but he can hang his hat on it for now.

Right now, it looks like the Dunne campaign hopes to piggy-back on turnout and fund raising among the Bernie Sanders voters. Should Sanders win or lose the nomination the enthusiasm for change he fueled is likely to spill over to some degree into November.newbuzzmenu

Dunne had already moved to mark out a share of that territory with his refusal of corporate donations. Said Dunne when he gave back about $16,000.00 in corporate donations “inspired by Bernie Sanders and his ability to compete with a people-powered campaign.” 

Good strategy, but the announcement likely produced fewer bangs for his bucks thanks to the scene-stealing skills of Peter Galbraith. At the news conference called by Dunne, Galbraith ‘reluctantly’ commented on whether he may or may not enter the gubernatorial primary race.

The other day Dunne’s campaign manager pitched or those voters again  – linking Bernie’s enthusiastic voter base with Dunne’s fundraising philosophy:

“There’s a wide mix, including a great deal of in-state Vermonters who have made small-dollar contributions,” Nick Charyk said. “We have contributions from Vermonters in every county in the state and a lot of Vermonters who have never made a contribution before who have said, ‘my first contribution was to Bernie [Sanders] and now I’m donating to Matt.’”

Whoever wins the gubernatorial primary – Dunne or Minter – better build a good turnout firewall: Republican Phil Scott not only has excellent statewide name recognition with all voters but can also count on support from some Democrats even in a presidential year. Senator Dick Mazza (D, alleged) is already fundraising for his favorite Republican friend. And Senator John Campbell, Scott’s other Democratic BFF may even be counted on to help out the Republican in a pinch.

And former state senator Peter Galbraith has warned us he is waiting in the wings and may enter the primary race – joining the performance already underway.

Finding a Governor in the VPR Tea Leaves

local/regional, , , ,

2016: the year of surprises. Donald Trump sweeping to victory in Nevada and South Carolina this week has every pundit in the game eating crow. Bernie’s huge win in New Hampshire was unthinkable a few months back. That said, we’re going to have to wait a while longer to be surprised when it comes to the Vermont governor’s race.

The VPR poll didn’t say anything shocking on the subject of who will occupy Vermont’s top office next year. First of all- Vermonters aren’t paying attention yet, and that’s good news for the Democrats. Fully 2/3 of Vermonters are either not following the race closely or not following it at all.

It’s no surprise that Lt. Governor Phil Scott polls well. He is the only candidate in the race who occupies statewide office. He has the best name recognition. The casual reader might say that it looks like he has a huge lead. Only one-third of respondents said they could tell whom they favored in the Governor’s race so far. So, you can throw out the question that tries to stack all of the four candidates against each other. Democrats and Independents aren’t yet ready to say which candidate they support.

Republicans are clear about their choice for Governor. Phil Scott is the solid favorite on the Republican side. Bruce Lisman couldn’t hit double digits no matter how the question was asked. After all of the time, effort and (of course) money that Bruce Lisman put into Campaign for Vermont and his race the VPR poll must be a big disappointment.

Matt Dunne has a solid lead against Sue Minter across regions and demographics. Still, those who are not sure who to vote for make up the majority of Democrats, so it’s still anyone’s game. A friend reminded me today that Brian Dubie had a 20 point lead all summer long in 2010 as the Democrats were battling it out. Dubie’s poll numbers dropped quickly once the race was head-to-head.

My money says that Scott’s numbers will dive like Brian Dubie’s if one of the Democrats surges and becomes the presumptive nominee, and will definitely do so once the primary happens. August is a long way away at this point though, and a lot can happen in six months.

If Donald Trump or another wild candidate like Senator Ted Cruz wins the Republican nomination it won’t help Lt. Governor Scott’s chances of winning in November. While the conventional wisdom says Scott will be our next Governor, I think 2016 is the year of the unconventional.

Matt Dunne must be looking at this poll and seeing the opportunity. He has the early advantage among Democrats and if he can introduce himself to the 2/3 of Vermonters who aren’t paying much attention yet he may be able to do the unbelievable and beat Phil Scott in November.

Tales from the Trail: Bernie NH Canvass

local/regional, , ,

I went down I89 and crossed over into the full swing of primary election GOTV insanity today. I rode into Claremont with my friend Nick, who happens to be managing Matt Dunne’s campaign for Guv. I’m proud of Matt for being one of the few Vermont pols to endorse our hometown hero. He’s walking the walk too, knocking on doors during the last push before the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday.

I teamed up with a Claremont local volunteer and went to work. At this stage the campaign is totally focused on turning out likely Sanders supporters, so the doors we were hitting were almost entirely friendly, if not enthusiastic.

One guy I spoke with was reluctant to tell me who he was supporting, but by the end he admitted he would be voting for Bernie in this, his first, primary. I guess there’s some truth to the notion that Bernie has the millennial vote locked up.

There were more than a few voters who would qualify for a senior citizens discount on my list, and many of them shook my hand and thanked me for helping Bernie win. One guy sent me across the street to talk with his son, and they both said that the primary was “serious business” and they’d be voting for Bernie on Tuesday.

At the field office, Franklin county native Lindsay Hunn and her sister Claire were  checking in volunteers and cutting turf for canvassers. It’s not surprising that  Bernie is doing so well in NH when some of the best field organizers from Vermont are staffing the campaign. Great to see them rocking it.

I’m hoping to take Tuesday off to hit the doors again on Election Day. Ain’t democracy beautiful?

 

 

 

 

Syrian Refugees and Scar(e)city

International, local/regional, , , , ,

I’ve had occasion to spend some time driving around the state for work and I’ve been listening to reports on VPR about Syrian refugees- and our politicians responding to the situation. It’s been a divisive issue, with a few leaders stepping up to welcome refugees- like Governor Shumlin and President Obama– and a few leaders fanning the flames of fear- like Sen. Lindsey Graham, Gov. Bobby Jindhal, and our own Vermont Republican gubernatorial candidates.

The UN estimates there are over 4 million refugees from the civil war in Syria. Most of them are in Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon. In recent months tens of thousands of Syrian refugees have left crowded camps in the region and struck out for Europe- often paying smugglers to guide them on dangerous journeys across the Mediterranean. Many have died just trying to make the trip.

So what is our response? Many politicians have engaged in disgusting pandering and fear-mongering- including gubernatorial candidates Bruce Lisman and Lt. Governor Phil Scott. I applaud Gov. Shumlin for his leadership on this issue, and I was glad to see Matt Dunne making a strong statement of support for Vermont hosting Syrian refugees.

“I would have hoped that Phil [Scott] would be someone who would not just fall in line with the right-wing Republicans in Congress.”- Matt Dunne

President Obama has been making the case for welcoming Syrian refugees to the United States, but he was defied by 47 Democrats in the House who sided with Republicans in an effort to halt refugee resettlement in the wake of the attacks in Paris last week. It turns out the “Syrian” in the group of attackers probably wasn’t Syrian at all and was in the possession of a forged passport.

Over the last few weeks in my church, our pastor has been talking about moving out of an attitude of Scar(e)city into an attitude of Abundance. Is it good for us to protect what we have at the expense of our neighbors? Are we really willing to reject our obligations to other human beings when we have been blessed with so much? I can’t imagine that our free society, with all of its diversity, could be diminished by including a few thousand people who are fleeing a war-ravaged land. With all of the abundance in the United States of America, and here in Vermont, can we really turn away these refugees with a clear conscience?

My answer is emphatically no. We’ll all benefit from having open doors and open hearts in a world that has seen so much violence. If we turn our backs on Syrian refugees, like we did so many Jewish refugees fleeing the rise of the Third Reich in the late 1930s, we sacrifice all of the moral high ground and good will that we so often claim in the world.

I hope compassion wins out, and that we do take in a good number of Syrians who want safety and freedom and have had to wait, fight and sometimes die to have a chance to get it. We have so much to be thankful for in America, and in Vermont. How dare we pretend to live in a world of scarcity when our freedom, compassion and opportunities are so abundant?