Imagine the reaction to this news report:

Over the past ten days, more than a dozen cities have moved to stop “Tea Party” protests from city parks and other public spaces. …according to one Justice official, each of those actions was coordinated with help from Homeland Security, the FBI and other federal police agencies.

Imagine for a moment the congressional hearings, fuming political observers, activists calling for Presidential impeachment on every channel, finger-wagging editorials from every major newspaper. A rebirth of the militia movement, and a political debate – still early in a presidential election season – drowning out discussions of every other issue.

That’d be big news, eh? Of course, this is the actual story:

Over the past ten days, more than a dozen cities have moved to evict “Occupy” protesters from city parks and other public spaces. As was the case in last night’s move in New York City, each of the police actions shares a number of characteristics. And according to one Justice official, each of those actions was coordinated with help from Homeland Security, the FBI and other federal police agencies.

The response to this story from the media and elected officials on the flip:

( – promoted by Sue Prent)

“What we have to remember is that the last three times the Democrats negotiated with the Republicans, in almost every instance, they gave the Republicans virtually everything that they wanted.” – Bernie Sanders

If only our entire delegation had the guts to tell the republicans to pound sand when it comes to inflicting austerity measures when there’s a simple solution to our problems:

• Raise the top marginal tax rate on the wealthiest 1% – many of whom, by the way, WANT their taxes raised!


Billionaires Asking Congress to Raise Their Taxes, Nov. 16, 2011, photo source: CNN Money

 

• Raise the maximum income to which social security tax applies.

 

• Implement a tiny transaction fee for financial trades – which will both increase revenues and even out the stock and commodities market, reducing the insane, destabilizing market swings caused by speculative trading.

[Edited to add formatting and the tid-bit about the billionaires who requested a tax increase yesterday.]

UPDATE: After hearing from Police Chief Tony Facos and about a dozen members of the public, the council voted to postpone consideration of the decision, probably to their December 7 meeting.

If you've been following the Taser story in Montpelier you'll want to be at City Hall tonight. That's because the Montpelier City Council is holding a public hearing on the proposed purchase of Tasers for the Montpelier Police Department.

 The Taser issue has been a contentious one in the capital city, with dozens of residents speaking out at previous public hearings, mostly opposed to the purchase. Last week the Council received the report of the committee it appointed to study and make recommendations on the issue. The report came out strongly against the purchase, with one dissenting voice.

Experience elsewhere indicates that police who are given Tasers tend to use them, sometimes with fatal results. If you're new to the issue, a good place to start is the report done by 60 Minutes last Sunday.

Come out tonight and let your Council representatives know your views on this important controversy.

Speaker John Boehner has failed to visit Rep. Gabrielle Giffords since she has been recovering from her injuries sustained in last January’s shooting. It's reported Giffords’ husband, Astronaut Mark Kelly takes Boehner to task in a new book he and Gabrielle have written together.  

Kelly noted that in April, Boehner was in Houston for the NCAA Final Four Tournament while Giffords was at a rehabilitation center there following the Jan. 8 attempt on her life.  

“Considering that she was a member of Congress and he was the highest-ranking member, we thought he’d ask to visit Gabby or at least give a call to see how she was doing,” Kelly writes in Gabby: A Story of Courage and Hope. “Our only contact with him had been a simple get-well card he’d sent a few days after Gabby was injured.”

“Maybe she scared him off” jokes Kelly. In the book he reportedly recounts an incident in the past when in the midst of difficult re-election campaign Giffords remarked jokingly to Boehner with

“a big smile on her face”: “You stay out of my district. OK. Remember. Stay out of my district.”

Boehner,who is often noted for sentimentality tears up at everything from commencement ceremonies to a speech defending his proposal to reinstate the District of Columbia's school voucher program has only sent “a simple get-well card”.

Classy fellow, that Speaker Boehner.  

(For Peter Welch and Peter Shumlin)

…a Republican, a serial killer,

a pedophile, a nuclear war

a Dem is better than your neighbor’s kid

who is off in Afghanistan

and who will be dead

before the ballots get there

a Dem is better than

a Nazi, a rabid dog, a hurricane,

a gay-basher, a fundamentalist Christian,

a batterer, a Wall St. CEO,

and the lying smarmy dildo dipshit

asshole who turned your daughter

into a zombie

a Dem is better than a dogturd

consider the alternatives

not to mention the Dem will

invite you to a dinner-forum

a serial killer would never do that

yes this is democracy

a Dem is better than celibacy (hmmm?)

so nice to have choices

Peter Buknatski

Montpelier, Vt.

I have to credit Al Norman of Sprawl Busters for alerting me and countless others to a story that may have slid past us in the crunch of front page news, but has far reaching implications for us all.  

Apparently healthcare is poised to be the next industry to be “Walmartised.”

We all know how Walmart has moved into offering deep discounts on a limited range of common medications.  

Some may be aware that this move, and corresponding promotions by other big box retailers, has further marginalized smaller pharmacies to the brink of extinction, as drug companies make-up their Walmart losses in pricing applied only to the little guys.  

With those dying independent pharmacies goes not only the traditional relationship of patient to trusted family pharmacist, but also some of the quality assurances that formed the basis for that trust.  

You may recall a bizarre story a couple of years ago, of a couple of undocumented drivers in southern Utah ferrying discount drugs from Walmart store to Walmart store in open packages and an unsecured vehicle.

Anyway, having gutted U.S. manufacturing in order to provide cheaper and cheaper goods to an underemployed and undercompensated America; and having strip-mined the poor both as consumers and labor, Walmart then turned its attention to gas and groceries, two of the three essential categories beyond shelter that remain when all other spending must be curtailed.  

Now Walmart is eyeing that third essential, healthcare.

Following the premature release of a 14-page request from Walmart to healthcare service and goods providers, seeking input to the planning of a major healthcare initiative, the company quickly back-pedaled:

Wal-Mart issued a statement Wednesday saying its request for partners to provide primary care services was “overwritten and incorrect.” The firm is “not building a national, integrated low-cost primary health care platform,” according to the statement by Dr. John Agwunobi, a senior vice president for health and wellness at the retailer.

Does Walmart not protest too full?  Could anyone now doubt where this is heading?

As Al Norman points out, the bitter irony is not wasted on Walmart workers who just last week learned that their healthcare benefits are on the chopping block.

The release of this internal document came roughly two weeks after The New York Times reported that Wal-Mart was “substantially rolling back coverage for part-time workers and significantly raising premiums for many full-time staff.” Wal-Mart informed its “associates” working less than 24 hours per week that they would no longer have health care coverage at all. Deductibles for many workers are rising steeply.

Walmart’s excuse for scrooging its “associates?  Not enough profits:

Wal-Mart had operating income of $25.5 billion in fiscal year 2011. They have been telling workers for years that giving them better health care would jeopardize the growth of the company. Meanwhile, the Walton family uses its vast wealth to open up a glitzy art museum this week near Wal-Mart’s headquarters. Health care? Let them eat art!

Could we be glimpsing a future in which care providers must compete to provide lower and lower cost care every year or be ejected from the rolls, a practice that already outsourced most U.S.manufacturing jobs?  

But what happens when those personal care jobs cannot be outsourced and all possible efficiencies have been achieved with a fully qualified staff?  Will quality healthcare and patient welfare be sacrificed, Walmart-stye, to the bottom line?

So, the next time you hear someone complain about the wait in a local emergency room, try imagining it run like the check-out at your nearby Walmart store.  Price-check on aisle nine!

( – promoted by Sue Prent)

(Pardon the lack of direct Vermont content here. But this drove me up a wall, and the best way to climb down is to write about it. Otherwise, I’ll grind my teeth to a fine powder while I sleep tonight.)

David Brooks, putative moderate conservative and Junior Wise Man of the New York Times op-ed pages, comes in for a lot of scorn on the left. I don’t always share that view; I often enjoy his weekly appearances with E.J. Dionne on NPR. They frequently manage to transcend the usual he-said/he-said of “balanced” punditry, and actually present some original thought.

However, this weekend Brooks said something I just couldn’t let pass.

He was on “Meet the Press” with Dionne, commenting on the week’s news. And, of course, the Penn State scandal came up. One key point of the scandal is that, in 2002, a graduate assistant at Penn State witnessed former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky committing a sex act on a young boy in the football program’s showers. Somehow, this didn’t result in Sandusky’s arrest — or even banishment from the premises. He continued to be closely associated with Penn State football for nine years.

Okay, back to Brooks. In his appearance on “Meet the Press,” he invoked one of the tiredest tropes of modern conservatism — that America’s moral and ethical decay is a product of the Sixties, when those dirty hippies undermined traditional values.*

We have lost our clear sense of what evil is, what sin is. And so when people see things like that, they don’t have categories to put it into. They vaguely know it’s wrong, but they’ve been raised in a morality that says, “If it feels all right for you, it’s probably okay.”  …  If you’re alert to the sense of what evil is, what the evil is within yourself, and what evil is in society, you have a script to follow. It’s not a vague sense, you have a script to follow.

See, we used to know what sin was. We used to have “scripts” that told us right from wrong.  But then the Sixties happened, and all that was good about America was irrevocably tarnished. Ever since, we have been “raised in a morality that says ‘If it feels all right for you, it’s probably okay.'” Which is a really clumsy rephrasing of the Sixties’ “If it feels good, do it.” Damn hippies! If it wasn’t for them, that graduate assistant would have had an infallible moral compass that would have automatically informed him that, yes, child rape is wrong.  

Here’s the thing, Bobo. You’ve got it exactly backwards. It’s the guys with the scripts who have been diddling America’s children. It’s the Catholic priests and bishops, who lead the world in peddling prefab moral scripts. It’s the most tradition-bound of football programs, Penn State, led by the famously old-school Joe Paterno.

“Scripts” do not, in fact, ensure standards of morality. Rather, they breed inertia and self-satisfaction. If you have a script and rely on it, you’re likely to see the world through the prism of that script (pardon mixed metaphor). And you’re more likely to reject new, incongruent information — e.g. that one of your script’s authority figures is raping a child in the shower.

The hippies didn’t make Jerry Sandusky into a pedophile, and they didn’t make the good men of Penn State Football into enablers of pedophilia. But David Brooks would rather blame the Sixties than face up to an unnerving reality: that our society’s heroes and leaders are as fallible as any of us. And perhaps even more so.

*Actually, our moral and ethical decay is the product, not of the Sixties, but of American capitalism co-opting and corrupting the values of the Sixties: “Do your own thing” transmuted into a consumerist call to unabashed self-interest. But that’s another story.

( – promoted by odum)

(cross-posted from Beyond Vermont State Hospital blog, here)

*Updated* (with the usual edits)

When it comes to the delivery of community mental health and developmental disability services across the state, there are ten (10) catchment areas and each of these are served by one of the ten (10) designated regional community mental health centers (CMHC’s).

Back in early September of this year, Art Woolf blogged a post to Vermont Tiger on the Department of Depressing Vermont Statistics, which regarded the state’s suicide rate (here):

In its annual compendium on Vital Statistics, the Centers for Disease Control reports that Vermont’s age-adjusted suicide rate was 13.8 per 100,000 population.  That translates into 89 suicides in 2007 and gave Vermont a number of dubious distinctions.

• The 16th highest suicide rate among the 50 states and well above the U.S. average of 11.3.  Most of the states with higher suicide rates are in the West.
• Only two states east of the Mississippi River, Kentucky and West Virginia, had higher rates than Vermont.
• Within New England, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts had rates well below Vermont and below the U.S. average while Maine’s rate was just under Vermont’s and New Hampshire’s rate was just below the U.S. average.

[…]

Read the entire blog post, here

As saddening as those statistics and facts might prove to be, even more disturbing are the recent regional and statewide data on resident suicides that has come to light of late. Apparently, however, this data has not been widely enough known or shared and, other than when individual suicides happen, also not widely known and reported on by the press or media as of yet either.

If there was any good news to be gleaned from the Vermont Resident Suicide Statistics provided by the Vermont Mental Health Performance Indicator Project (PIP) recently, which compared certain data over the last two twelve month periods (i.e., September 2009 through August 2010 and September 2010 through August 2011), four (4) of these ten (10) catchment areas experienced a decrease in suicides within the last twelve (12) month period reported in the statistics from what they were within the previous year.

That was the good news.

The bad news reported in these same statistics was how there has been an increase in suicides experienced within the six (6) other catchment areas.

Furthermore, based upon the data received thus far, although the number of overall suicides for the given time periods appear to indicate an increase of thirteen (13) additional suicides statewide between the two, when one wades through the different catchment areas of the state served by the different CMHC’s and, while as mentioned above there has been a decrease in four (4) of those catchment areas that then brings down the overall number as far as actual increases goes, some of the six (6) other catchment areas have seen noticeable increases or even a spike over last year’s number (the below areas and numbers are only those indicating increases in suicides over the previous twelve month period): i.e.,

Catchment area: 2009/2010 versus (vs) 2010/2011 = Increase

NCSS (Northwestern Counseling and Support Services): 7 vs 11 = 4

HC (Howard Center): 13 vs 18 = 5

HCRS (Health Care and Rehabilitation Services of Southeastern Vermont): 14 vs 22 = 8

RMHS (Rutland Mental Health Services): 5 vs 10 = 5

USC (United Counseling Service of Bennington County): 8 vs 9 = 1

WCMH (Washington County Mental Health): 9 vs 13 = 4

Total Increase (in the above six catchment areas alone, not counting the catchment areas that experienced actual decreases): Twenty-seven (27) suicides.

Thus the decreases elsewhere end up painting a picture that is somewhat misleading when these numbers are not looked at in terms of increases in each of the given local catchment areas that had experienced such as well as then added up as a whole in terms of overall increases over the numbers from the previous time period.

Therefore this is not merely a statistical increase of thirteen (13) suicides statewide, as would be the case when taking into account the decreases experienced elsewhere, but is actually an increase of twenty-seven (27) suicides above and beyond what transpired within those particular catchment areas as indicated during the previous time period.

It should also be understood how these numbers also do not take into account any suicides that might have occurred since the end of August of this year, which would also mean the increases in suicides indicated by the data occurred during a period of time mostly prior to Tropical Storm Irene and the closure of the Vermont State Hospital (VSH), save for a few days afterwards. That said, there is also deep concern over what has transpired since then, from September 1st of this year, as well.

In addition, the data also included statistics indicating how many of the suicides within each time period were by persons connected with the local CMHC within a given catchment area and both time periods illustrate how the majority of the reported suicides were committed by persons who had not been connected to CMHC services at the time.

However, due to its very limited scope in an attempt to answer the questions posed at the time, the statistical data does not provide information concerning whether or not any of these persons had attempted to connect with CMHC or other services and, if they had, if they were on waiting lists or were turned away for one reason or another. It would be important to have such data collected and analysed.

There is also a need to ascertain other general information and data concerning the persons and what might have led to their suicide that could indicate possible patterns and potential correlations to be assessed and learned from as well, which could help inform the state as well as community service providers about what needs to be done differently and better or otherwise be put in place.

That said, the state and its various community partners need not wait until all such information and statistical data is available in order to begin doing something meaningful to address these serious matters of concern in the time being either.

Beyond the above, the state and its various local community partners can also assess whether there is something beneficial to learn from the local catchment areas that have seen decreases as well.

They are as follows:

Catchment area: 2009/2010 versus (vs) 2010/2011 = Decrease

CSAS (Counseling Service of Addison County): 7 vs 2 = 5

LCC (Lamoille Community Connections): 5 vs 4 = 1

NKHS (Northeast Kingdom Human Services): 10 vs 7 = 3

CMC (Clara Martin Center): 8 vs 4 = 4

Unknown (no catchment area listed or known): 1 vs 0 = 1

Total Decrease (in the above four catchment areas — and one unknown — alone, not counting the catchment areas that experienced actual increases): Fourteen (14) less suicides between the two given time periods.

As the state moves forward in dealing with these matters and determines its priorities as well as funding choices for how to proceed, it would be crucial that it not make the mistake of robbing Peter to pay Paul however.

For example, by pouring additional resources to the six (6) catchment areas experiencing the increases in suicides of late and either not also equally supporting the other four (4) catchment areas as is also needed or providing less support to them in an effort to pay for additional services where they are sorely needed elsewhere.

The fact is we need to continue to support the other four catchment areas in their work or otherwise the consequences could make matters worse.

It should also be noted how none of this is to suggest the state did not have a problem with suicides prior to this either, because it of course still did (view statistical data for 1985 through 2006, here), however as the more recent data referred to earlier within this post appears to suggest (here), the problem appears to be getting even worse.

There will be those among the state’s political leaders and other policy makers who will not want to admit it, however it will not be a surprise if the successive cuts over the last several years — including those made during the former Challenges for Change process — to the CMHC’s as well as many other community service providers helping those most in need across the state have resulted in such a dire fraying of the social safety net as to make it harder and harder to meet the needs being experienced at the community level.

Such unmet basic human needs and the toll they take on persons, families and communities eventually show up in higher rates of usage of various types of emergency services, hospital emergency rooms, prison, other forms of costly and dehumanizing forms of institutionalization including VSH-type settings as well as also resulting in unemployment, homelessness as well as, when it seems like there is no hope and one has run out of viable options one would freely avail themselves of, suicide.

With all the above seemingly focused up to now on access or the lack of access to formal or traditional medical model mental health and related services, it should also be pointed out how it would be important to provide such services in a very different and also voluntary manner versus what has been the case up to this point in time with the mental health system having a heavy reliance or dependence on forced or coercive treatment and its negative focus as well as usually bad or poor outcomes.

This could be done in a variety of ways, including creating a more robust community services system that is much more proactive, holistic, recovery-based, trauma informed, person-centered as well as driven and, thereby, addressing basic human needs (including in areas of housing) far more upstream versus usually waiting for the worse to occur and when it is more costly to do so.

In doing this however, there should be a serious increase in funding various alternative services and supports, including those that are peer-run and operated.

If the state takes opportunity the current crisis affords to create and provide services and supports people actually need and want to use, then people would be more inclined to seek as well as access such and less inclined to avoid a system many now dread will take over their lives and make them career mental patients.

If, rather than continuing to focus the bulk of funding on forced or coercive treatment most people would rather not have foisted upon them if given an actual choice, the state instead shifted its focus and energy as well as greater funding toward voluntary services and supports needed, people who often seek out services would not be turned away or put on waiting lists due to a lack of adequate funding.

Although it appears the state is now headed in this direction, not only are there those who are pushing back against such needed change out of fear and possibly other motives as well, the increase in suicides being seen points out an obvious need how crucial such changes are needed and also how certain things need to be put in place sooner rather than later.

All this could be done if these matters remain a top priority, which it now seems to be the case and also if the political will to bring such about is exercised, not just while these matters have our attention for the moment, but also when they once again become too easily forgotten or otherwise taken for-granted and have fallen off the table.

*Note*: Made several, mostly minor, edits for the purposes of clarification and readability; last updated on Monday, November 28, 2011 at 9:45 AM (EST).

See previous diary for the details, but the long and the short is that, due to a final round closer even than the literal “50%+1” threshold, and apparent questions over the validity of another round given that so many voters have left, the Burlington mayoral candidate from the Democratic Party will not be named tonight.

Instead, the top-two vote-getters Tim Ashe and Miro Weinberger will return within a month (on a date to-be-decided), for a final head-to-head runoff. Howard is emphasizing repeatedly that both candidates are on board with this, probably to avoid any “rotten-Dems” style conspiracy theories (yawn).

Funny. Weird. Also kinda cool. Probably a good kumbaya move, but a one-on-one dynamic in the coming weeks will be very different than a four candidate free-for-all. The kumbayas may not last until the next vote.

A side note: there were voters who were turned away due to missing the 2:00 PM registration deadline laid out in the caucus rules. Bet some of those folks are kicking themselves now.

And along those lines, it’s not clear who will be deemed eligible for voting in the follow-up caucus. Party officials could limit it to people who had registered for today’s caucus, or they could throw it as wide open as they want.

LATEST-LATEST UPDATE: Oh lordy. Howard just came out and announced they’re going to recount the ballots, and if nothing changes, they will adjourn the caucus meeting and reconvene for a final vote later in the month.

Wow. What is going on behind the scenes? Somebody’s pissed they can’t their supporters back for another round of voting I guess.

LATEST UPDATE: Huh? Round 4? Burlington Chair Steve Howard just announced there will be a round 4, since nobody got a majority of the votes. I’m not sure what that means – there must have been some blank or weird write-in votes? because 540+541=1081, and 50% of 1081 is 540.5, so 50%+1 is actually 541.5 (I’m speculating the reasoning here).

Therefore, to truly meet the 50%+1 threshold, the winner with 1081 votes cast needed 542 (since 541.5 is not attainable).

SO the takeaway is: if Burlington can find a way to find the flaw in what seem to be straightforward election rule-language, they will. Ah well. Mental note: 50%+1 is stupid.

Looks like everybody else is embedding the CCTV live feed, so I guess I will too…

If you’re there, let us know (although I guess there’s probably no easy way to do that).

I stayed home, so I’ll repost results as they pop up online.

The first round amounts to little more than a pre-real-voting straw poll, but Lorber bowed to the inevitable and dropped out, according to reports.

ROUND 2 thought: Why did only 15 of Lorber’s 106 voters vote in the next round? What happened to the other 91? Geez. I guess democracy is for pouters, too. And what’s with Miro losing a vote? Somebody in the bathroom?

ROUND 3 voting thought: 7 Days tweeters say the room has been emptying. If a sizable number of Bram’s voters do what Jason’s voters did and just bail when their candidate comes up short, this is all Ashe – and will mean there is no meaningful anti-Prog force within the Democratic caucus, despite the assumptions of many long-time party insiders. Very interesting. We shall see…