On a recent VPR radio commentary former Governor Jim Douglas laments the fate of Brian Dubie and worries over the future. Dubie, some may recall, is defending his 2010 gubernatorial campaign against alleged illicit coordination with the Republican Governors Association (RGA) on a campaign commercial. The complaint accuses the Dubie campaign of violating campaign regulations by sharing poll data and directly aiding in the production of an advertisement sponsored by the RGA. Douglas doesn’t say if, with his own years of experience, he personally reassured Dubie, but claims the RGA’s experienced, battle-hardened staff did.
The RGA lawyers had assured Brian that furnishing the information was perfectly legal; having been burned by Vermont’s campaign finance laws in the past, the Association had every reason not to run afoul of them, and Brian had every reason to rely on their advice.
He worries the cost of this ongoing legal tangle will have a chilling effect on those who want to run for office:
I've spoken with potential candidates who would have been great leaders, but are discouraged by the costs - both personally and of the campaign.
Maybe he didn’t have the time on radio or was just too modest to mention his significant role in the Dubie campaign events under question. When Douglas has these conversations with would-be candidates one has to hope he passes on details and some firsthand knowledge of the events he fails to make clear in his heartrending VPR piece.
Among other things he omitted was the problem his own 2004 campaign for governor had when the RGA ran afoul of Vermont’s campaign finance laws with $300,000 worth of ads in his support. Douglas should by all means not be so shy – he should give himself credit for expertly narrating the RGA Dubie ad now under a legal shadow. And he could further enlighten us with the information from the 2010 Dubie case charging that Douglas acted as an agent of both the Republican Governors Association and Friends of Brian Dubie (the Dubie campaign organization). More recently, he along with other influential Republicans formed Friends of Brian Dubie Legal Defense Fund to pay Dubie’s legal costs. Jim Douglas might consider a follow-up VPR piece that mentions he was much more than bystander.
Lamentations? Yes, the implicated often cry when caught.
Late yesterday we learned that Mike Bertrand had quit as Executive Director of the Vermont Republican Party after a mere five months on the job, and that for three of those five months, he apparently wasn't paid because the party's coffers were empty.
This prompted some reflection in GMD-land, a hearkening back to past predictions of a bleak future for the post-Jim Douglas VT GOP. In January 2011, when the party had (a) just lost the governorship and (b) completely missed a huge national Republican tidal wave, one of us wrote these words:
The Vermont Republican Party is in as bad shape as any major political party I've seen. There're no two ways about it.
... It was through Dougla's single-minded interest in his own re-election that the Vermont Republican Party withered under his watch, as it gave little support to legislative Republicans and candidates.
After the jump: Warnings against Democratic complacency, and portents of an ugly new VTGOP.
I heard him hard at work today carrying water for anti-union Wisconsin Governor Scott.
Bright and early on VPR Douglas was offering “useful lessons for Vermonters” regarding Wisconsin on the stations’ commentary feature.
He said:
The governor of Wisconsin made it quite clear during his campaign where he stood on the state's fiscal challenges.
The implication being that Walker’s policies toward crushing public unions and collective bargaining should also have been clear to voters before election day.
Douglas then praises this implied clarity
Frankly, I like an elected official who does what he says during the campaign. Many don't!
Many don't!
Certainly it wasn’t so clear to someone that was there. Wisconsin Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca, D-Kenosha, who said in February"Walker never talked about doing away with collective bargaining rights during the campaign."
John Tures Associate Professor of Political Science at LaGrange College checked Walkers campaign website
I went to Scott Walker’s 2010 campaign website. I searched his “issues” site, which did not contain a single detail about unions. I also tried looking in his press releases and news clips, without any luck. I read dozens of articles about his campaign appearances, but couldn’t find anything about unions. Unions aren’t mentioned on this site until after the bill is introduced last month. Regardless of how you feel about unions, it’s clear that GOP Governor Walker wasn’t candid with the Wisconsin voters about his plans.
Take a look here scottwalker.org candidate Walker’s issue webpage
Only a few days before the March 5th date Tom Salmon set to announce his plan to run against Senator Bernie Sanders some Vermont Republicans are fishing for other candidates.The Times Argus' David Delecore reports
According to Barre Mayor Tom Lauzon, officials in the Vermont Republican Party have suggested he consider running for governor or the U.S. Senate next year, and he hasn’t closed the door on either possibility.
“The answer is: ‘Yes, I am considering it,’” he said Monday when asked about the possibility he might run as a Republican alternative to Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.
Mayor Lauzon says he is considering the governor’s race too but makes it clear the senate is his choice.
“The Senate race attracts me because people say it can’t be won and I think it can,” he said
After mentioning the obligatory period of soul searching the Mayor sets a date of June 1st for his decision.
A little more subtle and from the sidelines but very much in the mix, our man Salmon might want to note the significance of new VPR commentator former Gov. Jim Douglas’ choice of the national deficit for his debut topic. He addresses the national budget, his association with the Domenici-Rivlin Commission from the Bipartisan Policy Center and speaks of the need for national leadership on this issue in the senate.Naturally he modestly reminds us of his leadership here in Vermont on this very issue.
The always sentimental Douglas shares his immediate thoughts upon first seeing his granddaughter in her crib:
Welcome to the world, I said; your share of the Federal debt is $50,000.
Sweet, but not what might immediately come to most people's minds.
Thanks to my intrepid colleague, BP, for alerting me to this development.
Just a month to the day since we talked about it here on Green Mountain Daily, the Times Argus (paywall alert!) reports that the infamous lamp is back on the Governor's desk.
I am, however, a bit puzzled by a statement apparently made on Friday by David Schultz, the Statehouse curator:
"I was kind of wondering why no one had inquired yet,"
Just call me "No One." I never did receive a response to my e-mailed query sent to the Friends of the Statehouse, who, in the course of statehouse renovations during the Dean administration, commissioned and paid the $2,500. cost of the lamp.
Anyway, she's back; and Civil War historian and author Howard Coffin said it best:
"Aside from being a symbol of human freedom and a protest against slavery, it's a beautiful depiction of the female body," Coffin said. "And that is not going to trouble the present governor, apparently."
Since there is a "new sheriff in town," l thought it would be fun to take a brief walk down memory lane to the earliest years of the Douglas administration.
How many folks remember the former governor banishing a certain lamp featuring the work of celebrated Vermont-born sculptor, Hiram Powers? The classical sculpture in question was created in the mid-nineteenth century and represents a nude Greek slavewoman in chains. Though it created something of a stir way back then, it has since become arguably the most popular example of American neo-classical sculpture. The figure of the Greek Slave was a fixture in the Vermont Statehouse for more than a century, prompting many lively discussions, as it had become a symbol of the anti-slavery movement in America. Vermont was rightly proud of it's native son.
Maybe its just me, but discussion of the Governor's travels while in office make me distinctly uncomfortable. Apparently, compared to some other states, Vermont taxpayers are not nearly so much on the hook for his ramblings as they might be; and I suppose that's all well and good. Nevertheless, one has to wonder what exactly he is saying when he wanders about the globe, presumably to carry a message about Vermont. What is he saying to China, to France and to Canada?
Set aside, for a moment, the ethical question of whether or not, as governor, he should ever be traveling at the expense of a foreign power. Is Governor Douglas truly the person we want representing the Vermont brand? The message he has consistently broadcast is that Vermont is a poor place to do business; that our taxes are burdensome; and that our young people are fleeing from the lack of opportunity here.
He seems to favor low-grade investments from out-of-state entities like box stores, but has paid little more than lip-service to the agricultural heritage of the state, to fostering green technology, and to achieving statewide broadband access; all of which offer our greatest opportunities for home-grown prosperity in Vermont. His nearsighted focus on the corporate interests of unreliable entities like Entergy and IBM betrays a deficit of imagination and a lack of confidence in Vermont's own potential for innovation.
As we approach the end of the Governor's final term of office, perhaps someone should give us an accounting of how productive his travels have been for Vermont. How much have our exports to specific countries increased, and how many more tourists are we receiving from Quebec? With this information, we might be better able to evaluate the prospect of a continuation of Governor Douglas' agenda of Vermont-bashing under a Dubie administration. After all, Dubie's opening salvo in his campaign was that infamous web-banner essentially proclaiming Vermont to be a failing state.
I think we've all heard that you catch more flies with honey. Perhaps it would be worth a try.
While everyone was busy watching the "meltdown" of Vermont Yankee, a potentially bigger natural disaster was shaping up on the House floor, aided and abetted by Shap Smith and the knee-jerk enablers of Jim Douglas' scorched earth agenda.
Among the smorgasboard of ritual guttings that are suggested in Douglas' "Challenge For Change" report, is a proposal that could effectively eliminate the permit process altogether. Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater!! Barely mentioned in the Free Press article were proposed changes to the regulatory process, as per the following excerpts from the "Challenges for Change Progress Report" (emphasis added):
Permitting and Licensing Efficiencies will be achieved through the expanded use of expedited Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) permitting methods such as general permits, permits by rule, conditional exemptions and acceptance of professional certifications.
.Give ANR authority to issue permits in various ways for categories of activities that are subject to the same regulatory requirements
.Authorize ANR to accept professional certifications that permit applications are complete and accurate and eliminate application review.
It is commonly recognized that one of the factors that prevented Vermont from sinking as low as most other states in this economic downturn is the existence in Vermont of a rigorous permit review process that regulates growth and development to ensure that it does not exceed sustainable levels. One of the best components of this rigorous permit review process is that it recognizes the value of public participation in the process and allows for input from all the stake-holders, including private citizens, whose rights and best interests might otherwise be ignored by decision-makers.
Allowing the ANR to implement a permits by rule system, as envisioned in this report, to replace the customary review process could ultimately mean that a developer might be obliged to do no more than complete an on-line permit application, simply identifying the rules that would apply and be awarded a permit more or less automatically, without review or opportunity for challenge. The developer might be allowed to "self-certify" that he was in compliance with the rules, or simply submit an affidavit from a professional certifying that he was in compliance.
Anyone who has participated in the Act 250 process (as I have) can tell you that developers have no difficulty finding paid "professionals" to select only the facts that would lead one to believe they are in compliance. It is only through the opportunity for challenge by other stake-holders, that the full facts may be discovered and disclosed so that an informed decision may be reached by the permitting body. It is not and should not be a perfunctory process when the permit decisions being rendered will permanently alter our living environments and the condition of our valuable natural resources.
On behalf of the State of Vermont, Governor Douglas is threatening to deny equal marriage opportunities to same gender couples. This will have at least one of the following results.
1. A long, drawn out, expensive, divisive, distracting, unnecessary, mean-spirited and painful for many Vermonters battle that he will eventually lose in the legislature, if not this year, then soon.
OR
2. A long, drawn out expensive, divisive, distracting, unnecessary, mean-spirited and painful for many Vermonters battle that he will eventually lose in the Supreme Court next door to the State House.
Or
3. The Governor will force "Number 1" which will lead to "Number 2" with the Vermont Courts, which will put us RIGHT BACK TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY and will require additional legislation to carry out the Court's order.
If the Governor goes through with his discrimination veto, he will inevitably force court and legislative battles. The Governor's pro-discrimination veto will send us -- in 2010/2011/2012 -- right back to the 2009 General Assembly. Right back to the 2009 General Assembly that is, today, proudly standing with all Vermonters and protecting their rights.
If the Governor chooses the path of division, delay, distraction and the disgrace of rejecting Vermonters' rights to marry -- all of our rights as Vermonters and as people -- to enjoy State created legal marriage benefits, then the following is a harbinger of what's to come.
You did not read it here first, but you will read something like it soon enough if the Governor chooses goes through with his discrimination veto.
Poking around this morning, I came across a good piece at the blog Dissenting Justice, a DC blog by Professor Darren Hutchinson. His post, Definite Candidate for Wimp of the Year Award: Vermont Governor Jim Douglas, is a good one, as it's taking on the lack of spine of our pathetic excuse for a governor in the way he's dealing with the marriage equality debate. He believes the governor is hiding behind the president, as Obama has also come out for civil unions as opposed to full-blown marriage, and that it's easier to do that than for Douglas to come up with his own coherent argument.
The latest talking point/strategy from GOP HQ seems to be to fight anything progressive with the argument that it's "distracting" from dealing with the economic crisis that they played a huge part in creating (you know, that whole "Reaganomics on steroids" thing). We're seeing it with all the Village-speak lately with this "Obama trying to do too much" garbage. Now, coming from Republicans, not the most adept, complexity-handling, agile subset of our species, this is understanding... sometimes I wonder how they're able to actually show up to work in the morning in DC with all those similar-looking big grey buildings everywhere; if it weren't for the obvious dome of the Capitol, I suspect some would probably show up at the Smithsonian for work.
And as Hutchinson points out, Douglas, in a bold stroke of originality, is using the same playbook as the mouthbreathing Eric Cantor, who recently criticized Obama's stem cell decision as a distraction, yet apparently found that a resolution congratulating the American Dental Association , a bill to declare English as the official language of the United States, and a beer tax reduction all vital, pressing issues that most of the country loses sleep over at night. I know I do; every time I go to the dentist, I ask him if he feels appreciated enough by the American people, and that he damn well better answer in English, because I'm feeling ornery because of those few extra cents I paid on my bottle of beer last night:
Why Aren't These Things "Distracting"? Here are some of the other things that Governor Douglas has done (or has planned for this year) that have not caused economic collapse in Vermont.
Vermont Quarter to get a Makeover>: "Governor Jim Douglas has nominated Vermont’s 150 miles of the Appalachian Trail to replace the scene of Camel’s Hump and sap buckets as part of the U.S. Mint’s new America’s Beautiful National Parks Quarter Dollar Coin Program."
Governor Douglas has time to hang out at a tree tapping, go on a tour of sugar houses and attend a poster contest banquet, but he thinks that debating civil rights is too distracting.
Maybe he's not distracted because they're all superficial campaign-like PR events, which is primarily what Douglas seems to think passes for governing, when he's not impeding progress in some form or another. Indeed.
I recently got word from some mumblings in the statehouse that the pave-the-state forces will be going full on this session, and lo and behold, what's in today's Argus/Herald? Act 250 reform also a target:
Governor James Douglas ensured yet another session-long debate over permit reform Thursday when he blamed Act 250 for impeding economic growth in the state.
Job creation and economic development were keystones last summer and fall in Douglas' re-election campaign. Delivering on promises to reduce unemployment, increase stagnant wages and bolster corporate revenues, Douglas said Thursday, will require wholesale changes to the state's sweeping land-use and development law.
"The current system remains a labyrinth, fraught with unpredictability, which threatens job creation for years ahead – unless we are prepared to make substantive changes that will modernize the system," Douglas said of Act 250 in his inaugural address.
Douglas' proposal seeks not only to expedite Act 250 proceedings but to fundamentally alter the criteria on which applications are judged. Rather than considering development proposals on their environmental impacts alone, Douglas wants the system to take into account their potential economic and social benefits as well.
Republicans... you can always count on 'em to exploit a crisis to do everything they can to manufacture a reason to undo good things, especially environmental protection. Like so much else they believe, it's a bunch of faith-based fiction. More below the jump.
(This is a lot more important than my hummingbird photos. - promoted by JulieWaters)
Overheard in Montpelier -- Jim Douglas to Anthony Pollina:"Tony, here's $28,000, don't spend it all in one Party."
Anthony Pollina's campaign is not handling his departure from the Vermont Progressive Party with the aplomb expected of a politician who has run in three statewide elections since 1984.The current campaign finance flap was a foreseeable distraction, but he apparently had no pre-determined solution nor did he take proactive steps to stave off the problem before allowing a confusing political/financial/legal narrative to take hold.
The most important aspect of this story is also the most overlooked. No one seems to be discussing the fact that:
1. Mr. Pollina has broken no campaign finance law.
3. Mr. Pollina may legally continue to collect contributions as an Independent in the same manner that he would have done as a Progressive.
Pretty crazy considering both his response to this affair and the press he has received as result.
My opinion (glad you asked) Mr. Pollina owes Governor Douglas a big fat sloppy wet kiss because, thanks to the Governor, Pollina is not legally obligated to return a single penny. In fact, Vermont law does nothing to prevent him from going back to his contributors (caveat, good luck trying!) for more $$ -- all thanks to Governor Douglas.
As the Douglas administration's escalated rhetoric regarding what to do about protecting Vermont's children reaches new, shameless heights in both pandering and finger pointing, with draconian legislative proposals that really don't solve the problem but throw red meat to the base, and even disingenuous push polling, there is yet another failure of the Douglas administration in that regard worth bringing attention to. Although Vermont hasn't led a military attack on New Hampshire yet under false pretenses, Douglas' damage to our fine state is reaching Bush-like levels of neglect and incompetency.
The state's Child Development Division is the agency responsible for ensuring that the state's child care providers are following the necessary procedures and safety standards, often dealing with simple matters such as numbers of fire extinguishers, property and facility inspection and such. The inspections are necessary to the initial licensing process, but unannounced inspections are also conducted to make sure regulations are being complied to.
That is all well and good, but there's a big problem here. Most of the child care providers are not being inspected, and the budget for the agency is getting cut. More below the jump.
A few weeks ago, I wrote here about outdoor writer Dennis Jensen's excellent blast of Jim Douglas' photo-op on the opening day of trout season, in which he couldn't even be troubled by baiting his own hook. Now, as I pointed out before, what I like about Jensen among other things, is his willingness to delve into political matters from time to time that go against the orthodoxy of his generally conservative-leaning audience. I was on the lookout for a backlash after that latest article. The only one to be seen came in the form of a letter to the editor from, who else but, Fish and Wildlife Commissioner Wayne Laroche, one of the few Douglas admins who haven't jumped ship lately. Laroche, the guy who baited Douglas' hook, offered up a defense of Douglas that illustrates exactly why Douglas continually seems to get a pass from voters: the illusion of doing something, as well as a rather selective airing of the accomplishments.
Part of what I attribute to Douglas' continuing electoral success (aside from his role as "The Great Preventer", who keeps the non-existent nefarious liberal-Marxist elements at bay) is that on the surface, if you're one who doesn't follow politics closely, he sure seems like a busy guy. Breaking ground at new constructions, cutting ribbons, singing the praises of McDonalds' "nutritious food" the day after appearing at an event to support the importance of buying local food, marching in parades, etc. For some people that really seems to be enough. And Laroche's letter to the editor appeals to that mindset.More below the jump.
It's been a frequent observation here on GMD and elsewhere about how much Jim Douglas is really one of the worst spokespeople we currently have to promote the state of Vermont, simply because he seems to never miss an opportunity to let everyone know how awful it is to live here. It seems that not a day goes by where he's complaining about the tax burden, the regulatory climate, and a plethora of other things. I often joke that even though things are pretty decent for me personally, I'm thinking of moving away just because Douglas' blather is rubbing off on me, and maybe things are pretty bad for me here and I just haven't figured it out yet. I can't think of a better way to attract businesses and skilled workers than to tell them how bad it is here, can you?
In yesterday's Seven Days, Jon Margolis took a look at this phenomenon echoed by Douglas and his allies, and came to the conclusion that it's a big lie. Go below the jump for more.
Fans of the early, early days of rock 'n roll might recall the Platters' 1955 hit, "The Great Pretender":
"Oh yes, I'm the Great Pretender, pretending that I'm doing well.
My need is such, I pretend too much. I'm lonely, but no one can tell..."
Well, it seems we've found a variation on this could be making the rounds as Gov. Whinin' Jim Douglas' new campaign song:
"Oh yes, I'm the Great Preventer, preventing what would do us well.
My need is such, I prevent too much. life in Vermont is hell..."
My apologies to the Platters there, but as you probably know by now, the Guv. vetoed the recent Instant Runoff Voting bill, as expected. Gotta keep those damn lib'ruls in check - it's his life's calling, you know (well, that and telling everyone else how miserable life in Vermont really is).
The Vermont Department of Public Service has asked the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to put a hold on the relicensure review of Vermont Yankee.
The Douglas administration has joined anti-nuclear groups from Vermont, New York, Massachusetts and New Jersey in an effort to stop the NRC's relicensing of four nuclear reactors until the commission overhauls its review program. Nuclear companies in those four states have renewal applications pending before the NRC.
As climate change continues to gather more steam as an issue both in Vermont and abroad, I'm continually and increasingly perplexed as to what neurons are misfiring in Whinin' Jim Douglas' brain cavity.
First, a bold and comprehensive energy bill gets shot down by Douglas so he can keep his VT Yankee buddies from paying their fair share of taxes. In Douglas' perpetual taxpayer funded campaign stops "Set The Agenda Tour", Jimbo says that he's not really hearing much about global warming. It's all about that that nasty, overtaxed, harsh business climate that Douglas seems intent on promoting Vermont with (the only "climate" he seems to be interested in). Then, the guv's Commission on Climate Change issued a report detailing the severity of the problem, seemingly contradicting the short shrift the guv' seems to be giving it.
This has been crossposted to Daily Kos. Note: I wrote the diary intended for both audiences, GMD and Kos, so I apologize if I spend too much time explaining Vermont politics or history, but wanted to be thorough enough for both audiences without having a radically different document from one to the other --julie
UPDATE: Based on confirmation from law enforcement sources, pharmacies that were approached by the State Police on Friday November 30th and from legal sources representing people affected by State Police conduct last Friday, GMD can add the following to the reporting that has occurred already.
The Department of Public Safety was planning last weeks pharmacy checks ("Fishing Derby Friday") for several weeks.
The State Police visited multiple pharmacies on Friday November 30th.
At least twothree pharmacies were told to by the State Police to turn over patient profiles for every patient who received a schedule II prescription from that pharmacy.
At least one pharmacy was told it would be required to update the patient profile information with the police every two weeks.
At several pharmacies the police merely introduced themselves to the pharmacist, gave their business cards and asked the pharmacist to call the police officer if they encountered any suspicious behavior such as indications of "Doctor shopping" or prescription fraud.
Late Friday, due to intense push back and complaints from pharmacists who were concerned about requests from the Vermont State Police that they reveal confidential and federally protected medical information about their customers, State Police management sent an email to all State Police involved with the pharmacy checks throughout the state instructing them to cease the pharmacy checks. After the email went out, Fish Derby Friday ceased (for now).
It's always good to start with the constitution, this time from Amendment IV:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Yesterday, Green Mountain Daily scooped all the Vermont news outlets by publishing a story about state police collecting pharmacy records across the state. You can find the original piece here.
Only a few days before the March 5th date Tom Salmon set to announce his plan to run against Senator Bernie Sanders some Vermont Republicans are fishing for other candidates.The 
Among the smorgasboard of ritual guttings that are suggested in Douglas' "Challenge For Change" report, is a proposal that could effectively eliminate the permit process altogether. Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater!! Barely mentioned in the 
