So last week when RNC head Reince Priebus dropped by Vermont for a quick $300 lunch and optional $2,000 for a photo op with the chairman, the press was excluded. Maybe after his first visit as RNC chairman in 2011 someone wanted a quieter event. Then, members from half a dozen labor unions picketed outside the Hilton in Burlington objecting to Priebus’ anti-union action in Wisconsin.  

When asked by Seven Days who banned the press from the latest Priebus visit, VTGOP Chairman David Sunderland hemmed and hawed but eventually got around to taking credit for the decision.

"I need to refresh my memory and think if that was requested by them or by us. I don’t think that it was ever, I don’t want to misstate something. I guess you could say that the Vermont GOP decided it would be closed."

Scott Milne, the Republican candidate for governor, was there too and made clear he had little to do with the party event. “It's not my event” he said three times when asked repeatedly about the press ban. Poor Scott isn’t exactly up to speed in the practice of speaking to the press in political subtleties.  

According to Sunderland it was an informal gathering for Vermont Republicans to listen to the RNC chairman’s thoughts on national party strategy. With no reporters at the event we don’t know what was actually said but Priebus may very likely have repeated parts of a message he gave to another party gathering a short time ago.  

At an August RedState event in Texas the chairman said the RNC should be

"a national party that's permanent, on the ground, all the time."

Priebus denied doing so but it sounds as if he is halfheartedly channeling parts of Howard Dean’s fifty state strategy.

"You've got to be competent in all fifty states," Priebus told Townhall.com. "You've got to be spending a heck of a lot more money in Florida, Ohio, and Virginia, than we are in maybe Vermont. But that doesn't mean you totally ignore Vermont forever, because once in awhile, you've got a good shot at a governor's race." [added emphasis]

 

Well, it’s likely that Priebus tweaked his Texas remarks a little bit for his VTGOP $300 a plate luncheon/$2,000 per photo op audience. I can’t imagine his statement:“Once in while you get a good shot at a governor’s race” will make a very good Vermont slogan or rallying cry to inspire the Republican faithful this year.  

But like Scott Milne said “it isn’t my event.”

I noticed that the Vermont Department of Tourism will once again be providing their weekly fall foliage reports this year. Shortly after, I read about lawn painting in California and got to thinking about how much Vermont’s tourist economy and those of many other states are climate dependant.  

But painting your lawn emerald green? In California, lawn spraying businesses are having a field day. Due to the severe drought and imposition of water-use restrictions, lawn painters are in big demand. Spraying green paint on a dull and drying front yard is being touted as a solution to the water shortage for homeowners. You can have it all: a green lawn and less water use.

“Letting it go dead and brown might be an option for some people, but let’s face it, nobody really thinks brown is the new green,” said Mr. Sahbari [lawn paint entrepreneur]. “This lets you cut down on watering and still have a lawn that looks great.”  

 

Low-water-use options, although encouraged, aren’t being widely employed. Naturalized arid landscaping, known as xeriscaping and popular in drought-prone Arizona, isn’t catching on in suburban California.  

Lawn painting, mostly on golf courses and sports surfaces, has been common for years. Spraying green paint on golf fairways in the southern US is done during their mild winters, when the grass would otherwise be dormant, to keep the grass greener than green year round.  

The lawn paint is reported to be a safe, non-toxic water based latex formula of some kind. But exactly what it contains may vary from vendor to vendor. Each lawn paint manufacturer has its own proprietary formulation, a trade secret.

These paints are specially formulated latex-type paints. They are water-based, but they do not contain some of the elements potentially toxic to organisms that normal house paints might have in them.

 

Or so says George Sajner, technical director for Pioneer Athletics, the maker of Match Play Turf Colorants.    

In Vermont, as climate change becomes more evident, what changes will challenge our economy? Would anyone consider painting leaves yellow and orange if they failed to turn colors on their own?  Well, sure, this is all just farfetched climate change paranoia. But we do make our own snow. And 75 percent of the ski terrain in Vermont is “painted” with manufactured snow to keep the resorts running profitably.  

Well then, maybe a little red touch-up paint here and there on those apples wouldn't do any harm. Would it?

Here is a press release for an academic study titled “An Inconvenient Truth: Does Responsible Consumption Benefit Corporations More Than Society?”

The authors [Markus Giesler, Ela Veresiu] identified a process that shifts responsibility from the state and corporations to the individual consumer.

 That’s bound to spark interest.

When businesses convince politicians to encourage responsible consumption instead of implementing policy changes to solve environmental and social problems, business earns the license to create new markets while all of the pressure to solve the problem at hand falls on the individual consumer.

Like a shell game, responsibility is gently shifted to the individual rather than remaining with government and corporations. This shift leads to the belief that government can’t (or won’t, or perhaps even shouldn’t) manage the competing interests of economic and environmental players. The authors defined three steps in the process:

First, economic elites redefine the nature of the problem from political to one of individual consumption (for example, global warming stems from consumers failing to cultivate a sustainable lifestyle). Next, economic elites promote the idea that the only viable solution is for consumers to change their behavior. Third, new markets are created in order to turn this solution into a material reality (eco-friendly light bulbs, hybrid automobiles, energy efficient appliances). Finally, consumers must adopt this new ethical self-understanding.

And, of course, the corporations can greenwash their images while making money from the new “responsible” consumers' purchases.

Seems like close kin to socializing risk and privatizing profit. 

Co-author Ela Veresiu writes that responsible consumption (and this sure doesn’t sound like Vermont) is widely understood as being detached from governmental process. The opposite is true, she maintains. Responsible consumption requires its converse: the active management of consumers as moral entrepreneurs. Just from the press information available, the driving force they see for this “active management” process, whether market forces, government or 'groups' of individuals isn’t clear.

At an inconvenient price of $14.00 a download I am not going to see the study any time soon. This price at least shows that the study’s authors are skilled at monetizing their paper and creating a market to manage consumers.

The Windham County race for two state senate seats, if not thrilling, is at least lively this year. Four Democrats are running for two seats and there are two Liberty Union candidates but no Republicans stepped up to run.

One of the two seats is open due to Senator Peter Galbraith’s surprise announcement that he was leaving the senate. Galbraith left, he said, to take up private diplomatic peace efforts in support of Kurdistan where in the past he had interests in the local oil industry. The other Windham county seat is held by Jeannette White.

This week saw almost back-to-back endorsements from statewide players. Senate majority leader Philip Baruth made his dream team endorsement. And Vision to Action Vermont (V2AVT), the newest non-profit centrist PAC in what seems to a Vermont growth industry, made theirs.

Senator Baruth gave his enthusiastic approval to both Becca Balint and incumbent state senator Jeannette White.

Baruth further emphasized the need for a strong coalition from the County, stating: I think Jeanette and Becca complement one another beautifully. They will be a Democratic dream team for Windham County, and I fully plan to be the first to cross the floor to shake Becca’s hand when she’s sworn in come January.

With his senatorial endorsement in the Windham race it is worth noting that Baruth has remained remrkably quiet regarding the Lt. governor's race. In July he suggested the race between Republican Scott and Progressive Dean Corren,who is seeking democratic support, required more study.

And then there is Joan Bowman ,a health care navigator for Vermont Health connect at Brattleboro Memorial Hospital. She has focused her campaign around single payer. Although that issue is top of the list for most Democrats,her candidacy has attracted little attention and no public endorsements by the movers and shakers in the Senate.

One of the endorsed candidates former Republican, now running as a Democrat, Roger Albee received his from the policy PAC called Vision to Action Vermont (V2AVT). V2AVT was co-founded by Republican Rep. Heidi Schuerman who flirted with running for governor and former Rep. Paul Ralston (D). Both worked together on economic development issues in the Vermont House. Guess it’s like Lisman’s C for VT but less well funded. This appears to be V2AVT’s first official affirmation coming on the heels of its formation. If elected to the senate, I’d guess Albee, the former Jim Douglas Republican, may mesh well policy-wise with the three-man VIP Democratic support club for Lt. Gov. Scott's continuing re-election. Update: Turns out V2AVT also endorsed Becca Balint in a press release dated  August 18th. I found it on Vtdigger.com but can't find on the V2AVT webpage.

Even while exiting the stage, Senator Galbraith has managed to cast his shadow over this race. He anointed Albee as his assigned replacement early on, going so far as to accompany him while gathering the signatures to enter the race. Later he moderated a candidates’ debate. Senators Baruth and incumbent White were clearly not in Albee's entourage: both tangled spectacularly in the senate with Galbraith.

Windham County! Where big senatorial shadows are cast, endorsements are made and tiny centrist PACs can make their debut performance.

Get outta town,Scott Brown? A New Hampshire poll shows Scott Brown and incumbent NH Senator Jean Shaheen now in a “dead heat.”

The Granite State Poll, released Thursday evening, found Brown trailing Shaheen, 44 percent to 46 percent among likely voters, with 9 percent not knowing or undecided in a hypothetical general election matchup. […] The survey of likely voters on hypothetical ballot matchups has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.0 percentage points.

 Could Scott Brown be New Hampshire’s next US senator ,in a Republican controlled senate? Last time I read about Brown, the former Massachusetts Senator-turned-carpet-bagger was mocked by the former NH poet laureate in a short poem (almost like a Haiku). And in another campaign incident, Brown hid out in a men’s room to avoid a answering a reporter’s questions.

Yet races always tighten up. Besides, Scottie may have gotten a boost from the recent visit by Senator John McCain. The old maverick is still popular in the “Live free or die” license-plate state. Of course he still has his party primary to win or lose on September ninth too.

Helpfully the Huffington Post suggests: Stop Freaking Out Over The Results Of One Poll. The Huffpollster has a half dozen polling experts explaining why this poll and polls generally are so often unreliable predictors: this poll may be an outlier, it relies on more Republican voters than past polls, and for accuracy you should take the average of several polls etc. etc.

Let’s trust the Huffington Post to ease our minds — it’s a good reliable source. Yeah, no freak-out, move along to the story posted near the survey take-down: Secrets of Iceberg That Sank the Titanic Revealed in New Study

And at least Scott Brown is still within the margin of error.

Midway through the comments section on VtDigger.com, Republican state Senator Joe Benning made a comment worth noting concerning Lt. Gov. candidate Dean Corren’s campaign kick-off. Benning’s response was to Corren’s observation that the VTGOP is “long gone.” Specifically this bit raised his ire: 

“In case anyone is nostalgic about losing the last statewide Republican office, Vermont cannot afford to be a museum for moribund political parties,” Corren told his supporters. “The Republican Party that many of us knew had a whole different relationship with — that had a Dick Snelling, George Aiken and Jim Jeffords who was forced to leave the party because it left him — that party is long gone.”

That must sting, but it should amount to zero surprise. Senator Benning, who is not ready to surrender, quotes WWII’s Japanese Admiral Yamamoto.:

I am reminded of the words of Japanese Admiral Yamamoto as his fleet turned away from a successful attack on Pearl Harbor: “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.” Message to Corren: We’re still here and we’re waking up!

There is substantial doubt Yamamoto even said this. The “quote” in this form was made popular in the 1970’s action movie Tora, Tora, Tora about Pearl Harbor.

The VTGOP, taken by surprise? Did they just notice that they only have seven seats in the State Senate and that Phil Scott is the only Republican still standing in a statewide office? Sleeping? Maybe.

But go ahead, VTGOP, give us the elevator pitch: It’s a sneak attack! Pinned down in conservative foxholes, Vermont Republicans suddenly wake up to find the harbor full of sinking candidates.

Cast: Joe Benning, co-starring Ronald Reagan and Whit Bissell (‘cause it’s a ‘B’ movie). They turn off the alarm, put on coffee and madly search for their “terrible resolve.” Perhaps they shall return … or just hide out on their tiny little island.

No debating Scott Milne tonight. He is ducking out of a debate this evening sponsored by the Essex Town Republican Committee. He chose not to accept the Essex Republicans' invitation, and he questions the motivations of other candidates seeking the GOP nomination:

“They are going to be working against the Republican Party and the nominee after the primary so it didn't make sense to go.” 

Only a short month or two ago, when he was first considering running to be Republican candidate for governor, Scott Milne said he welcomed more “voices” in the race. He claimed to relish a hearty primary and open policy debate.

“I hope we have a competitive primary,” he said. “I think it is a hard, hard road to hoe in Vermont for a Republican to get elected anyway. But that path to victory is much better with an issue-orientated positively fought out primary.”

He said this back when many Republicans hoped Randy Brock might have nothing better to do than run in gubernatorial primary. But Randy took a primary pass. And now poor Scott Milne has to duck a debate with Steve Berry and Emily Peyton.

One of the two hopefuls, Republican Steve Berry, serves as financial chair of the Lamoille County Republican Party committee and reportedly organized arm wrestling tournaments all over the state with Monster Arm Wrestling.

Also attending will be  Emily Peyton,who has run twice for governor as an independent. But she is new to the Republicans and wants to be in a Party. Party affiliation, she says, is key to reaching a broader audience.

“If you don't have a party, you're treated like a political nudist. They don't really want you there. 

Libertarian candidate Dan Feliciano, who has launched a write-in campaign for the Republican nomination, was also invited to attend. Feliciano has received contributions from Mark Snelling, treasurer of the Vermont Republican Party.

 Wonder if Scott Milne now regrets his primary wish. Suddenly he doesn’t like the other voices he’s hearing.

A job opening for an executive chef with a TS/SCI (Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information) rating is causing some rumbles with those following the burgeoning industrial security clearance complex. Sodexho, the private food service, is advertising a government job opening for a chef with a top secret security clearance. The rapid growth in the number of security cleared government food service workers is inflating costs and causing job shortages. The wait-staff wait time for clearances has gone from less than a week to up to six weeks, according to one manager. 

In post-Edward Snowden Washington, hiring for official kitchens and dining halls is grinding to a crawl. Every busboy, dishwasher and cashier requires elaborate background checks, which include lengthy waits for fingerprinting, a credit check and sometimes even a polygraph.

And they are feeling the effects on the frontlines. The Washington Post reports that at the FDA’s latest farm-to-table, craft-cocktail, artisanal restaurant (… huh! The FDA has an artisanal restaurant? Sequester? Austerity?) the turkey carving station is shorthanded. According to The Secrecy blog, part of the Federation of American Scientists project on Government secrecy,

“[The] growth in the number of clearance-holders increases costs and exposes classified national security information, often at very sensitive levels, to an increasingly large population,” said the OMB review. 

And the inflated use of security clearances represents:

[…] a significant policy problem, namely the use of the security clearance process as an employee screening tool […] As of October 2013, the number of persons eligible for access to classified information had grown to 5.1 million persons, including over 1.5 million with Top Secret clearances. According to an ODNI [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] report, only 60% of those persons had access to classified information, suggesting that vastly more clearances are being requested and granted than are actually required. [added emphasis] 

Some security experts and company owners with profits on the line are seeing business boom. And one private placement firm CEO, a former US army Warrant officer, philosophically places his work in an historical, but somewhat undemocratic context:

“There’s a reason kings hired courtiers to taste their food,” said Bill Golden, the chief executive of intelligenceCareers.com and of USADefenseIndustryJobs.com. 

And it would poison business to be the private security company to clear-for-hire the next Snowden. At stake is $400 million a year the government spends on investigations into 2 million employees. So for now it's clearances for everybody: tinker, tailor, busboy, chef.

In January 2014, when a federal program extending unemployment benefits failed to be renewed in Congress, there was speculation about what might happen to those on unemployment. It is a popular idea with some that an unemployed individual isn’t motivated to seek out a job as long as a government check is coming in regularly. North Carolina Gov. Pat McCory (R) who ended extended benefits in his state, claimed the attitude among those collecting was to “hold that job until my unemployment benefits end.” Experts weren’t sure, and no reliable data was available.    

Now there is a report about some data. And the cut the benefits, up-by-yer bootstraps school have it mostly wrong.  

States that cut unemployment benefits following the Great Recession didn’t help the jobless or taxpayers, according to a recent report by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a left-leaning think tank. [emphasis added]

What we looked at was the employment-to-population ratio, specifically for prime-age workers. We wanted to see if these policies had a measurable effect on employment, the theory being that when people are cut off from benefits they become so desperate as to re-enter the job market and get a job right away. That did not occur. The employment-to-population ratio from before the policy change continued after the policy change.

Well, the EPI think tank who lean to the left now have some who lean to the right agreeing with them. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) has second thoughts about “bootstrapping”as a cure for unemployment. This from an AEI policy blog titled: Did cutting jobless benefits promote work? Not so much

[…] evidence suggest this “bootstraps” theory might be wrong. First, a new paper from the Boston Fed looking at the Not-So-Great Recovery finds that, yes, the unemployed tended to remain so until their UI benefits were exhausted. But their next move wasn’t into a job. Rather, they became “more likely to drop out of the labor force […]

Ending unemployed benefits, kicking people “off the dole,” can’t make jobs for them appear where none exist. The EPI concludes:

Whether or not unemployment benefits are available to you sort of has nothing to do with the labor market problems writ large.

So pull as hard as you want on your bootstraps, no harm, but that will never be a paid job.

“We have an inclination that, based on what the company has been telling us, there has been a spill…” a senior administration official  

No not oil, this time it’s a security “spill” the administration official is speaking about. For the second time since March computer security at USIS has been breached in what is thought to be a “state-sponsored” attack. It isn’t known what was accessed or how much information was taken.

But what is USIS? What’s USIS? Think for-profit security services company contracted by Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Members of its staff conduct individual background security clearance checks – thousands of them – for the federal government.  

The breach, discovered recently, prompted DHS to suspend all work with USIS as the FBI launches an investigation. It is unclear how many employees were affected, but officials said they believe the breach did not affect employees outside the department. Still, the Office of Personnel Management has also suspended work with the company “out of an abundance of caution,” a senior administration official said.    

Officials said that, although the DHS encrypts the employee data it sends USIS, it’s unclear whether the data remain encrypted.

Maybe the company hasen't tightened up its operations after checking and clearing both Edward Snowden and the employee shooter at the Washington Navy Yard. But whether it has or not, USIS has recently been awarded a contract for $190 million to provide security-related services for the DHS immigration system.  

Not unexpectedly, some members of Congress are making appropriate noises about launching an investigation. But while waiting (… and waiting …) for Congress to act, let’s see what background Google has on this for-profit business partner in our "homeland’s" security (call it quaint, but the term “homeland” still makes me cringe).

Along with two other security-screening-based companies, Koll and Hireright, USIS (formerly known as US Investigations Services, Inc.) is owned by Altegrity. That company is owned by a private equity firm, Providence Equity Partners. This self-described “family” of companies works to…

enable our customers to reduce risk, maximize opportunities, and make better decisions by gathering, processing, and analyzing information; sharing our subject matter expertise; and providing our proven training techniques.

And even though its “parent” company is a private equity firm, Altegrity is up to its assailable security clearance in debt – $2 billion worth, according to reports. The company does have a diabolically clever plan to get out of debt.

Paying off old debt with new, to give the company more time to turn things around, it appears. The company repaid $1.45 billion, taking out a new $1.16 billion bank credit, $60 million of which is due April 2019 and $1.1 billion due three months later. [emphasis added]

It also has another $22 million in debt due in 2015, $29 million due in 2016, $480 million due in 2020, and $61 million in 2021.

This debt profile is considered unsustainable by two business rating services – and Altegrity, they point out, is at the mercy of US government contracting decisions. On top of all that, USIS has been investigated for its security failures in the Snowden case. And in April the Justice Department sued them for fraud.  

With a record like this, should anyone be shocked that security “spills” from USIS follow one after another? The real question is, why do lucrative DHS contracts with such an ineptly run company follow, one after another ?