“Privatize the school system, put in school vouchers and push out the NEA”

– Paul Beaudry, host of True North Radio on WDEV, in response to a caller last week

Despite the Democratic Control of Vermont’s legislature, the overwhelming stranglehold on all three branches of government currently enjoyed by the GOP at the federal level has made right wing activists feel empowered. As of a result of that feeling, we are witnessing a refreshing, yet disturbing honesty from more and more of the right wing base. Hard-core republicans feel less and less obliged to couch their true goals in the rhetoric of moderation, as demonstrated by the quote above. Any who’ve listened to Beaudry knows that he is a veritable font of these kinds of sentiments.

And the above sentiment does us all the favor of removing the fig leaf of moderate pretense behind much of the perennial school and teacher bashing that goes on – rhetoric that is blossoming in light of the excessive property tax burdens homeowners are struggling under. It reminds us of the true goals of many on the right – that is, the elimination of the public school system.

When this crowd attacks, it usually starts with a consensus, emotional point that gets heads wagging before they go nuclear – and nuclear they go. A case-in-point is the recent war of words launched against Chittenden County Democratic Senator Jim Condos by our old reliable favorite, the Caledonian (Broken) Record. Check the link for the exchange…

This is a bit old now – from back in July, actually. But it was brought to my attention. Interestingly, it doesn’t seem to be on the Broken Record’s site anymore, so here’s a generic link to the website before I reprint the copy saved by Sen. Condos (and remember, this is the Caledonian Broken Record we’re talking about – no mere “conservatives” like WCAX or the Randolph Herald – this is the flagship paper of the angry right – the Take-Back-Vermontists):

Recently, Sen. James Condos, D-Chittenden, wrote an op-ed article that assured us all that we had nothing to fear from higher property taxes, despite the alarming rise in the cost of education, even in the face of declining student populations. Condos’ piece was a textbook example of political double-talk. He talked all about the furniture in the education living room, but not at all about the bear, in fact, two bears * no, three bears standing in the middle of the room.

Condos cited the small reduction in tax rates accomplished by the Democratic-controlled legislature as a time to celebrate lower taxes. He didn’t say a word about the huge increase in property assessments all over Vermont. That’s the first bear in the living room. Do the math. A $100,000 house with a tax rate of $2 will be taxed $2,000. The same house whose new assessment is $150,000, taxed at a ten-cent lower rate of $1.90 will produce a tax bill of $2,850. Same house, lower tax rate, higher assessment, $850 more bucks.

Condos goes on to, though, to state that most taxpayers’ bills won’t go up, because everybody whose household income is under $75,000 will get a prebate large enough to absorb any increase in property taxes. That’s the second bear in the living room. Prebates remove any sense of responsibility for higher taxes from the people who get them. That’s what Condos and his
Democratic colleagues call “income sensitivity.” If getting a tax rebate when you’re making up to $75,000 a year is income sensitivity, a bull in a china store is a ballet dancer.

Condos and his ideological soul mate, Sen. Don Collins, D-Franklin, are pushing hard to add two more grades to the public school roles, 4 and 5
year-olds in pre-kindergarten. That’s the third bear in the living room. That expansion of the public school system will cost tens of millions of dollars every year, yet, wherever it has been tried, it has failed to improve kids’ performance. In fact, of the ten highest scoring states on national assessment tests, none offers universal pre-school, while two of the lowest scoring states both have long-standing pre-school programs.

So, why is Condos pushing his line of blather? Quite simply, his most important constituency is the Vermont NEA, the teachers union. They wear him like a lapel pin, and when they say, “Jump!” he asks, “How high?” All three bears, if Vermonters are convinced by Condos, guarantee job security and continuing dues to unions.

Condos response, which was printed in the paper (and does still appear on their site…odd):

Your recent editorial, the title of which might as well have been “Jim Condos and the Three Bears,” repeats the same tired misstatements that right wing ideologues have been making about me, and about public education, for some time now. You would do your readers a service if, before printing as your own, work off of misleading websites, you would at least have a conversation with me about these important issues – which, by the way, you have never done!

First, about property taxes. You almost got this right – please remember, the changes to Act 60 which evolved into Act 68 were the brainchild of the 2003 GOP-controlled House and Governor Douglas. And, frankly, I also believe property taxes are too high and we need to develop a better method of funding.  It is true that Democratic majorities in both House/Senate supported the Governor’s December 2005 recommend, implementing a decrease in the statewide property tax rate. That should be greeted well b in his budget to INCREASE property taxes on Vermonters with his $+17 million  proposal to raid the Ed Fund for transportation dollars and a bailout of the state’s failure to properly fund the teacher’s retirement fund. Also, in your editorial, you make up a 50% increase in the assessment of a mythical house. While there probably are rare examples of house values spiking like that, this is hardly a common example. As the real estate market cools down – and that is happening even as I write – it will become apparent that tax bills will also moderate as well. The fact is, though, that property tax bills WILL be some 10% lower as a result of the Legislature’s work than they otherwise would be.

Next, you moan on, inaccurately, about “income sensitivity” and “prebates.” How can you not know that the amount all school tax payers pay, whether on the basis of their income or property value, is related directly to how much they and their neighbors choose to spend in their own school district? It is basic to the law’s arithmetic: the more a district chooses to spend, the more every taxpayer pays – if school district spending is higher than what the state provides per pupil, as is the case virtually everywhere in the state. Please try to get a handle on this basic aspect of Vermont’s law: everyone pays in proportion to spending, but those below certain household income levels have the choice of paying on the basis of their property value or their income, whichever results in a lower tax bill. By the way, you and the Governor rail on about an expansion of the income sensitivity (a law the Governor signed in a previous year) – the percentage of Vermonters receiving income sensitivity is roughly the same as when Act 60 was first implemented.

And, you’ve bought into the gibberish about my support for “two more grades to the public schools.” Wrong, plain wrong. Current law, unchanged in the years since I’ve been a Senator, in fact, enables school districts to make use of education funds to provide early education for 3 and 4 year olds, either in the school or with private providers. This policy pays for only 10 hours per week of pre-school services either in a school or with a private provider – hardly adding grades.  I have no idea what – or whose – statistics you’re using purporting to attach low test scores to states offering “long-standing pre-school programs.” Vermont has long-standing pre-school programs. Sound and truly scientific research over the past several decades tells us the critical importance to student achievement of greater attention to brain development during what are now pre-school years. That’s why almost every state is discussing this very important issue and why we, in the House/Senate Education Committees, continue doing so on behalf of all Vermonters. Alarmist rhetoric, and plain, purposefully bad math by some who just don’t like the fact that we offer education as a fundamental public service have misled some providers and, apparently, you into believing there is a conspiracy to raid the taxpayers and shut down existing private providers of early education.

Just plain nonsense!

Finally, I don’t “jump” at the behest of any group in the state. I suggest that, someday anyway, you actually engage in a conversation with the folks at Vermont-NEA – they represent working Vermonters. You might find some mutual interest in the welfare of our kids, our communities, and our state.

Senator Condos does a good job of shining a light on all the nonsense, while acknowledging that the only salient point in there – that property taxes are too damn high – is valid.

But that’s the point – that it is nonsense – nonsense built around an emotional truism: the property taxes are just too much of a burden. But this is the strategy of the Take-Back-Vermontists these days. You press an emotional button to get a sympathetic response, and then you just start saying everything and anything that will build you to your ultimate thesis. And that thesis is inevitable a purely reactionary and radically conservative one.

In this instance, the CBR gets emotional resonance with property taxes, and then its off to the races to get to their real point – that the teachers’ union (which is, of course to say, the teachers) is evil, and the Democrats are their willing slaves, out to destroy and corrupt our children and gleefully prey on Vermont taxpayers. How they get from point A to point B hardly matters. So what if the steps of their so-called “reasoning” aren’t sound (such as, you know, misrepresenting the law, or conveniently leaving out the Republicans that must also be in the thrall of their union masters) – there’s just too much rhetorical ground to cover to get all the way to crazyland in just three paragraphs to spend much time sweating the details.

Senator Condos does a good job in refusing to let the matter go unchallenged (presumably the CBR fingered Senators on the other side of the state as to stay under their target’s radar…nice try), but we should never forget that the CBR and the Take-Back-Vermontists are not interested in debate. If they were, they’d get their facts straight. What they are interested in is a crude sort of arch-right thuggish orthodoxy that – among other things – demands (not simply advocates – demands) we “privatize the school system, put in school vouchers and push out the NEA.”

I strongly recommend a few minutes of True North from time to time for anyone who needs a reminder of that.

Click on the link for the full transcript. I apologize for the delay. The transcript log format was goofy, so I had to put a little time into it.

odum: Welcome Gentlemen…and thanks to Neil (Vermonter) and Jack McCullough for playing the role of proctor. I’ve gone over the debate rules with each of your campaigns, but just to repeat: I’ll ask only 9 questions that you’ll both have a chance to answer (we’ll alternate who goes first). I ask that you try to keep your responses to 90 seconds. If you exceed that, I’ll sneak in a “time” comment… it’ll be my way of slowly turning up the music at the end of an Oscar acceptance speech that goes on too long.

odum: If either of you in your responses characterizes the views of the other, you will trigger a 30 second rebuttal for your opponent in addition to their own allotted time for answering the question. First, though, you can each have a brief opening introduction of up to 60 seconds apiece. My coin flip landed Matt-side up, so Senator Dunne, you get to start us off with an introductory statement.

odum: I think we’re all getting the hang of this system folks…stand by

matt_dunne: Thank you so much for hosting such an exciting forum. I am running for Lt. Governor, because we need to have someone in all of our offices in VT whose values are in line with Vermonters. I believe we need to use the power of the net roots to beat someone like Dubie. www.mattdunne.com

odum: Thanks Senator. Representative Tracy, you have up to 60 seconds for an intro.

john_patrick_tracy: Thanks for having this forum, this should be interesting…..I believe we are at a crossroads as a state and we have to engage Vermonters both inside the state house and in the towns and cities of Vermont. We as states are providing leadership on issues where the federal government has been unable to do so. I am running for Lt. Gov. because I feel Vermonters need experienced, tested leadership to deal with the issues that face us as a state and a nation.

odum: The first question goes first to Rep. Tracy: Let’s get right to health care, yes? Youve both remarked that Catamount is the first step – what then is the next step and how urgent is in in light of the questions raised about Catamount’s fiscal sustainability?

odum: …time…

john_patrick_tracy: I have stepped out of my Health Care Reform Commission meeting as we speak and I am anxious to get back. Catamount Health is a meaningful first step in the path to health care reform. The system we have now is certainly not sustainable and until we deal with access, quality and cost we will just be shifting money around. With Catamount we are gettiing Vermonters the right care at the right time and at the right place-more than an ounce of prevention. We have to get Catamount up and running and continue to engage Vermonters in how we are going to make sure Vermonters signup for Catamount and how we as citizens want of finance qualtiy health care.

odum: Sen. Dunne – your turn: Next step in health care and is the fiscal clock ticking? 

matt_dunne: I believe the bill we passed was only a first step. Having served on the Approps Committee, I know how healthcare costs are eating away at the priorities of Vermonters. I do not believe there were enought cost containment measures in the first bill and I want to work, starting in January, to move us towards universal coverage as fast as possible to save costs. I will not wait for 2 years or 2011 to work on covering all Vermonters.

odum: Sen. Dunne gets question 2 first: Matt, my property taxes are kicking my butt. Any thoughts?

matt_dunne: Having grown up in the home town of Herb Ogden, I have always fought for basing the way we pay for education on ability to pay. The relationship between land value and income is further apart than ever and we need to make sure that we strive for basing the way we pay for education on ability to pay. I also believe we can reduce education costs without hurting kids through green schools, consolidating supervisory unions and using distance learning tools.

odum: John – help an overextended taxpayer out? Property taxes? Throw me a bone, here?

odum: …time…

john_patrick_tracy: As I have been traveling across Vermont I am hearing from all Vermonters the pressure they are feeling about the overall burden on them. First we need to continue the work we are doing on health care in a responsible and practical manner. Property taxes are paying for health care and energy and housing and the war in Irag and on and on. I will continue to work and support paying for education based on ability to pay and work to change federal tax policy coming out of D.C.

odum: Rep. Tracy: Livable wage. In what ways could you use the office of Lt Governor to get us toward a livable wage state (the question assumes you consider that a goal).

odum: …time…

john_patrick_tracy: I do consider obtaining a livable wage to be a priority and I commend the Peace and Justice Center on the work they have done to educate Vermonters on the issue but we need to do more. We have to let Vermonters know that when employers do not pay decent wages that we as taxpayers are providing a susidy to them, not to the employees. I will continue to push for better wages, prevailing wages with state contracts and more work force training to train Vermonter for better paying jobs.

odum: Sen. Dunne: Livable Wage? What can you do to get us there?

odum: …time…

matt_dunne: I am proud to have been on the Senate Committee that passed the increase in the minimum wage and the first legislatively passed COLA to keep us from falling behind, but we can and must do more to strive for a living wage. A critical part is to create jobs that can compete in the global marketplace through investing in entrepreneurs, bringing broadband to the last mile and investing through microfinance programs to help low income Vermonters escape poverty by starting their own businesses.

odum: Sen. Dunne: Iraq. It’s foreign policy, but I’m still sure you’ve been hearing about it everywhere and from everybody, so it’s tough to avoid. We know what we can do, as we’ve been burning up the web with comments and newspapers with letters and federal officeholders with calls. But what – if anything – could YOU do as Lt. Governor?

matt_dunne: I believe we need a Lt. Governor that will continue the long Vermont tradition of standing up to Washington when the country is heading in the wrong direction. I would be outspoken in my opposition to the war and work with our incredible Congressional delegation to ensure we bring our troops home as quickly as possible. I would also continue my work to make sure we are doing everything we can for our veterans and the families of those serving so we do not ever confuse opposition to a war with lack of support for our troops.

odum: Rep. Tracy: Iraq? Any relevance to the Lt. Gov race, and if so how can you use the office to have an effect?

john_patrick_tracy: Once again Vermont has to lead the way. I was one of the folks who held a press conference before we went into Iraq asking our government to give the U>N> more time. As Lt. Governor I will encourage other Lt. Gov’s to stand with me and state loud and clear that it is time to bring our troops home. I havbe been outspoken from the start and will be until our troops are home.

odum: Rep. Tracy: A question regarding your role if elected as President of the Senate. A lot of us lefties out here were pretty discouraged that many of the more progressive legislative proposals found themselves sidelined last session. What could (or would) you do to make sure bills associated with progressive priorities receive a full opportunity for consideration and action?

odum: …time…

john_patrick_tracy: I would continue to lead as I have in my years as Democratic Leader in the House. The role of Lt. Gov. will be to establish the committees and that will help determine the type of legislation that will prevail. I have worked and will continue to work with both chambers and the administration in a respectful way but will push for legislation that makes life better for people. I have never been shy about working for social progress and I will contine to lead as the presiding officer in the Senate, both in the halls and in the committee rooms.

odum: Sen. Dunne: To restate – A question regarding your role if elected as President of the Senate. A lot of us lefties out here were pretty discouraged that many of the more progressive legislative proposals found themselves sidelined last session. What could (or would) you do to make sure bills associated with progressive priorities receive a full opportunity for consideration and action?

odum: …time… (im giving you guys 2 minutes, as I can see 90 secs is ridiculous)

matt_dunne: Having served as a part time legislator for 11 years who needed to have a job outside of the chamber to pay the mortgage, I would love nothing more than to get up every day to work on behalf of Vermonters. I would use the office to bring Vermonters together to develop the ideas and planning documents to tackle the difficult problems we face. To do that I would certainly work with groups like Democracy for Vermont like we did with the John Edwards poverty conference last winter to reach out and get the best ideas Vermonters can offer to move our state forward.

odum: Sen Dunne: The Governor’s got his “promise scholarship” notion to try and close the gap of college affordability and keep students here. What are your thoughts on the matter, and how do they contrast with the Governors?

odum: …time…

matt_dunne: We must tackle the problem of college debt. It hurts young people’s chances of staying in Vermont and taking the risks to create new businesses and job opportunities. I proposed the Green Mountain Service Scholarship that would match the AmeriCorps Education award (www.americorps.org) for Vermonters who want to go to Vermont Schools after service. This would allow someone who serves 2 years in AmeriCorps to graduate from one of our state colleges essentially debt-free.

odum: Rep. Tracy: Again – The Governor’s got his “promise scholarship” notion to try and close the gap of college affordability and keep students here. What are your thoughts on the matter, and how do they contrast with the Governors? 

odum: …time…

john_patrick_tracy: I believe the legislative proposal was more meaningful than that put forth by the Douglas-Dubie administration. I have two in college right now and two more in high school, I feel the pain and will for some time to come. We need to make sure that college and techinical training is available at a reasonable cost to Vermonters. We also have to make sure we have jobs for our kids when they graduate. We must work with employers to have the jobs for our kids when they graduate.

odum: …since tech problems started us late… are you guys good to go til about 1:15?

matt_dunne: Yup!

john_patrick_tracy: My Health Care Reform Commission will start at 1:15 so let us move along. Thanks

odum: Rep. Tracy: Climate change, the economy, utility rates, pollution…. Its all energy energy energy. Give us your broad perspective on the energy issue and how you can use the Lt. Governor office to move the issue (and all in 2 mins of typing! Even I think that’s a little ridiculous…sorry…)

john_patrick_tracy:

john_patrick_tracy: We need to engage Vermonter in what Tom Clynes calls Negawatts- use less energy. We need to show Vermonters that green buildings are here, Omega Optical in Brattleboro, NRG in Hinesburg, and that they work. We need to give incentives for factory-based enegry such as hydro in many of our towns which is how they used to do it. We need to have the discussion now.

odum: Sen. Dunne: Can’t go a week without wind power in the headlines. Give us your energy thoughts in 120 seconds (I know , I know… cure AIDS and bring world peace while your at it…).

matt_dunne: I believe Vermont needs to lead the nation in moving towards independence from foreign and dangerous energy sources. We can replace, by 2012, 1/3 of our current energy demand by investing in efficiency measures (like green schools and co-generation) and investing directly into instate, clean renewable energy systems. I would work with organizations like the Apollo Alliance to achieve these goals with business, progressive energy users and unions interested in developing quality jobs for the next century.

odum: Sen. Dunne: Let’s say I consider myself a Republican, but I’m not thrilled with George Bush. I’ve always voted for Brian Dubie as he seems like a good guy, and its pretty cool that he’s a pilot. Don’t know if he’d make a good governor or not, but he seems like a pretty good choice for Lite Gov. So why should I break the habit and vote for you in November?

matt_dunne: Vermonters will always support the person they believe will work hardest on their behalf regardless of party. That is why Bernie has been so successful even in conservative areas of the state. Ever since I ran for office I have always offered voters my committment to work hard. I will make my commitment and vision for the office clear for Vermonters, and I believe they will see a strong contrast with Dubie’s approach. I also believe that Vermonters will not tolerate, with this Surpeme Court and the South Dakota law just passed, a candidate that will openly oppose Roe v. Wade.

odum: Rep. Tracy: Your turn – I consider myself a Republican, but I’m not thrilled with George Bush. I’ve always voted for Brian Dubie as he seems like a good guy, and its pretty cool that he’s a pilot. Don’t know if he’d make a good governor or not, but he seems like a pretty good choice for Lt Gov. So why should I break the habit and vote for you in November?

john_patrick_tracy: Brian is a good guy. He has also been the Governor’s copilot and I do not think Vermonters care for the direction this adminstration if flying. I notice recently that Brian broke with the Gov. on wind, notice I did not say broke wind, and I think that shows that he is responding to our leadership in tha t area. Vermonters want experienced leadership in difficult times and I will provide that. I will fight against the tax policy coming out of Washington and to bring our troops home-he has been silent.

odum: Finally, so we can genuinely call this a “debate,” I’m going to give you each an opportunity to contrast and compare. Rather than ask a specific question, I’m just going to ask right up front, not simply why you’d make an excellent Lt. Governor (as I think you both would), but why you’d make a better choice for Lt. Governor than your opponent. After your answer, your opponent will get 30 seconds (a few sentences) to rebut any of the specific content that they will undoubtedly take some issue with. Rep. Tracy, you get to go first.

matt_dunne: Hey Odem, not clear on question or who goes first.

odum: Question is first for John – why would he be a better Lt Gov than you – and you get a 30 sec reaponse before asked the reciprocal

john_patrick_tracy: What I bring to the table is legislative leadership experience and life experience. Having been born and raised in Vermont, serving in the military in a foreign conflict, staying home with my kids and working a couple of jobs to help pay the bills, I believe I can relate to regular Vermonters. I have led in difficult times and will continue to do so in a responsible, respectful manner.

odum: Sen Dunne – 30 second rebuttal?

matt_dunne: I too grew up in Vermont and have represented all Vermonters in a rural, more conservative part of the state.

odum: Now Sen. Dunne – Why would you make a better Lt. Governor than your opponent?

odum: you guys are just so nice to each other, here…

matt_dunne: I believe have the experience outside of the legislature and the campaign team ready win in November. My experience includes work in a Vermont based technology company that grew to 200 employees, my work as the Director of AmeriCorps*VISTA and as the Assoc. Director of the Rockefeller Center at Dartmouth. I have a great team, including Gov. Hoff and Kunin suporting my campaign, have used technology to reach out (including google video), and have the incredible young team to knock on doors and do service projects around the state to engage Vermonters in a new, fresh and winning way.

odum: Rep. Tracy – 30 second rebuttal?

john_patrick_tracy: Again I look at the legislative leadership experience, respect from my peers regardless of the political party and life experience. I do not dodge difficult issues and rise to the challenge. I have led and will continue to lead.

odum: Those sounded like closing statements, so we’ll skip the closing statements — instead, why dont you guys just throw out the name of your favorite book and your personal hero (if you have one) and we’ll call it a wrap

john_patrick_tracy: Sometimes a Great Notion by Ken Kesey. Anwar Sadat-there was someone who put his life on the line to try to bring peace to the Middle East and he paid with his life. He was a pretty cool customer and I respect him greatly.

odum: …and Matt?

odum: I think we lost Matt…

odum: Thanks again to both of you for coming, and thanks to all the frontpagers at GMD who helped brainstorm questions (Jack McCullough, Vermonter (Neil Jensen), Ed Garcia, Brattlerouser, Nat Kinney and mataliandy – double thanks to Vermonter and Jack for being onsite with the candidates). Information on getting involved with or financially supporting these candidates can be found at their respective websites – http://johnpatricktr… and http://mattdunne.com. Check them out. The transcript will be posted shortly along with a reader poll. Have a great afternoon…!

john_patrick_tracy: Gotta go back to health care. Thanks and see ya!

odum: Sen. Dunne is typing as I type…

odum: I guess Matt is having internet problems. I’ll make sure his answer is posted on the transcript I’ll post shortly.

odum: Thanks for coming everybody, and please comment on the transcript thread. Love to hear feedback. Bye…

[Matt Dunne’s answer to the final question:]

My heroes are my parents. My father at the age of 20 joined the civil

rights movement and went to jail defending what was right before returning

to Vermont to help found the Vermont Land Trust and Upper Valley Youth

Services. He died too young (when I was 13) but I think of his work every

day in public office. My mother spent her career, as an early woman faculty

member at Dartmouth, training a new generation of public school teachers.

I love John Adams (by McCullough) and A Day No Pigs Would Die from my

childhood. I also, of course, love the mysteries my wife (Sarah Stewart

Taylor) writes. That last one is for Darrin Allen 🙂

[ end of transcript ]

( – promoted by odum)

UPDATE: The debate has concluded. Thanks to the candidates for participating, and thanks to viewers for being a part of it.

The thread below contains some live blogged comments, but continue to consider it a debate thread. A transcript will be posted later today.

I’m going to go ahead and post a poll on the debate, with the caveat that internet polls are only so reliable or indicative of anything. Still, they are fun, aren’t they?

Please keep checking this site, as it looks like the online debate scheduled for noon may start a few minutes late. We will be waiting until the candidates are prepared before opening up a link for the public.

Any minute now…

[filmgeek83 gave me permission to reprint this diary he posted on a couple of the big national blogs in its entirety. Thanks fg and good luck – odum]

Today, at this moment, I can’t sleep.  There is a cloud that hangs over me, one whcih I am trying to explain away but won’t completley leave my conscious.  Today, the military said I might have to go back to Iraq.

I’m trying to tell myself that the odds are slim I’ll be called back, and yet sleep still escapes me.  There is a nagging, lingering doubt in the back of my mind that I’ll get called.  No matter how I try to comfort myself, I can’t quite ignore my fears.

I can’t go back to that life.

Yahoo has a good rundown of the story.

Some of the more promising points for my odds of being shanghaid.

Up to 2,500 Marines will be brought back at a time, and there is no cap on the total number who may be forced back into service as the military helps fight the war on terror. The call-ups will begin in the next several months.

I hate the fact that they equate this callback to the “War on Terror,” but that’s for another diary.

According to Stratton, there are about 59,000 Marines in the IRR, but the Corps has decided to exempt from the call-up those who are either in their first year or last year of the reserve status. As a result, the pool of available Marines is about 35,000.

I am in my second year of IRR service.  I won’t be done until January ’09, the deadline set forth by Bush today.  That puts me in that 35,000.  Still, they’re talking about pulling less than ten percent back to service.  Them’s some pretty good odds.

Still, I can’t sleep.

I’m telling myself now that I don’t have the Military Occupation Specialty (MOS) they need.  In a long story I may one day tell here about the evils of recruiters and a strange military career, I am officially a 5534, a basic bandsmen.  I joined the military to play the clarinet.  They don’t need me right now, they need grunts and intel guys.  I should be OK.

Still, I can’t sleep. 

I can’t sleep because I know the possibility is greater now than it was this morning that I will be called back to that hellhole.  That I might be called back into a cause I only participated in because I felt it was my duty to fulfill a contract I began on August 20th, 2001.

9/11 happened while I was in bootcamp, and the whole dynamic of my service shifted. 

I regret to this day that I didn’t have the courage to stand up from within the system and find some small way to speak my mind.  I did not claim consciencous objector then.  I was afraid they would take away my GI bill, a check that today provides me a comfortable college life.  I wish to this day I had stood on my principles, on my gut feeling that this war was wrong.  I managed to justify my involvement by the “WMD”.  If the military said Iraq had them, they must.  We had the best intel in the world, after all. 

The second time I went to spell the people already over there.  I knew they were somebody was counting on me to fill his space, and he had already done enough.  I couldn’t look myself in the mirror and know that I had failed someone who was suffering in this catastrophic fuck-up.

I don’t feel that way anymore.

Now I feel the best way to help the Marines over there is to sit this out.  This conflict is eating our resources, and costing not only us, but Iraqi civilians too, thousands of lives.  I can no longer be an active part of that.  I would not be able to look myself in the eye if I did go.

I refuse to fight for people who have sanctioned torture as a viable intel gathering tool.  I refuse to fight for a cause that obviously has no goal except a presence there.  I refuse to be a duck in a fucking shooting gallery, and it’s not alright that they ask anybody to.  In saying I won’t go, I’m saying I don’t think anybody should.  Not anymore.

I’m not frightened for my life.  I’m not saying these things based on a sense of self-preservation.  Most of who lives and who dies over there is totally beyond their control.  There is no sense worrying about that which I cannot control, so I try not to.

I am worried about being activated though.  I suppose I must live with the anxeity, and just cross this burning bridge when I get to it.

I was just putting in the links, when I noticed B’Rouser’s linkdump appear just below. Sheesh! Oh well, why not. I’ll take out the one duplication… but make sure you keep scrolling down to his more southern-Vermont oriented piece. There’s enough news for all…

Bush’s FDA has finally, grudgingly agreed to allow Plan B emergency contraception to be available without a prescription – but not to minors. Thankfully, Vermont is a bit more enlightened than the Oval Office crowd. Minors in the Green Mountain State will be able to obtain Plan B without a prescription under a law passed by the State legislature earlier this year. So there, Dubya.

Middlebury and Dartmouth Colleges both made the list of the top 100 LGBT-friendly colleges in the country, according to a new publication from The Advocate. Something to proud of, to be sure.

Speaking of LGBT issues, lesbian mom Cathy Resmer (of 802online) and donor Jules Fishelman discuss their relationship as part of NPR’s Storycorps project. It’s a great exchange (although granted, as such a donor myself, I’m probably more enthusiastic about the piece than most…) Here’s the podcast.

Pluto is now an ex-planet. Read Pluto’s concession speech.

For those of you…(okay, for everyone who reads or writes in this blog, most likely)… concerned that the rest of the Country will sadlle us with pro-war, pro-school prayer, pro-flag-burning-amendment Senator Hillary Clinton as the next Dem pres nominee, the trends are not looking good. According to this compilation of polls over the last year, her belated overtures to the left – such as her decision to campaign for Ned Lamont – may be having an effect. Hopefully this poll will prove more telling (minus the really nasty stuff that seems downright mysoginist).

Finally, I promise I’ll update the DorianGrays this weekend. I’m way behind. As outrageously nasty as Tarrant has gotten, his picture may already be a pile of dust by Monday.

Here’s the format for GMD’s Monday, 12:00 noon online debate between Democratic Lieutenant Governor candidates Rep. John Tracy and Sen. Matt Dunne. As always, it’s subject to some tweaking. As it stands, it doesn’t look like there will be opportunities for questions from viewers, but that *may* not be set in stone depending on how the software looks and how much time the candidates have. This will be a short debate, as myself and the other GMD bloggers working  on this will be on our lunch breaks…

To view, return to this site a few minutes before noon and follow the directions. You will need to enter a user name to view the chat, but without any password (and you will not be able to write into the chat room). Obscene or insulting chat names will filtered and blocked or ejected from the room.

There will be only 9 questions. Approximately 5 will be issue-based. In terms of policy, these guys are nearly indistinguishable, so these questions will attempt to show some daylight between the two without delving into too much minutiae. Another couple questions will be on leadership-slash-character topics. There will be a “philosophy of governance” question, and also a question that will invite each candidate to contrast themselves with the other. For this contrast question, each candidate will be given a 30 second rebuttal. In the case of the other questions, a 30 second rebuttal will only be triggered if a candidate characterizes their opponent in the course of their normally allotted 90 second answer. Candidates will be given a brief opportunity for opening and closing remarks.

These time limits are not hard and fast – that is, there wont be a buzzer if they’re a little off. There will also be a parallel “live blogging thread” on GMD proper for folks who want to make comments.

Jack McCullough and Vermonter will be onsite with each of the candidates to verify they (or their appointed typist, if they don’t type very quickly) are indeed answering the questions themselves and aren’t doing any cutting-and-pasting from crib sheets.

This should be a lot of fun! If it goes as well as I think it will, it opens up the possibility of more (and longer) debates down the road, that may not have to be so “low tech” (at the very least we could graduate to webcams!). If you have any questions/comments, email me via the contact button atop the page.

What you are looking at is a massive yellowjacket nest that has consumed the inside of a 1955 Chevrolet in Alabama (serious hat tip to Bill at Candleblog for finding this). From the Montgomery (Ala) Advertiser:

That nest was about the size of a tire in the rear floor seven weeks ago, but quickly spread to fill the entire vehicle, the property owner, Harry Coker, said. Four satellite nests around it have gotten into the eaves of the barn, about 300 yards from his home.

“I’m kind of afraid for the grandkids. I had to sneak down there at dark and get my tractor out of the barn,” Coker said. “It’s been a disruption.”

And it’s not a fluke:

Auburn University entomologists, who say they’ve never seen the nests so large, have been fielding calls about the huge nests from property owners from Dothan up to Sylacauga and over into west-central Alabama’s Black Belt.

At one site in Barbour County, the nest was as large as a Volkswagen Beetle, said Andy McLean, an Orkin pesticide service manager in Dothan who helped remove it from an abandoned barn about a month ago…

…In previous years, a yellow jacket nest was no larger than a basketball, Ray said. It would contain about 3,000 workers and one queen. These gigantic nests may have as many as 100,000 workers and multiple queens.

Yellowjackets, of course, are among the nastiest and peskiest of stinging insects as they are carnivorous and therefore drawn to anything from carrion to your picnic lunch.

So what’s behind the giant nest phenomenon? Entymologists are still somewhat mystified, but there does seem to be this consensus:

Specialists say it could be the result of a mild winter and drought conditions, or multiple queens forcing worker yellow jackets to enlarge their quarters so the queens will be in separate areas… Without a cold winter to kill them this year, the yellow jackets continued feeding in January and February — and layering their nests

The article doesn’t mention it specifically, but against the above quote, it’s certainly the elephant in the room. Mild winters? Drought conditions? No winter freeze?

Welcome to a particularly creepy footnote in that inconvenient truth we keep hearing about…

I get a lot of press releases (I suppose I should call them “blog releases” since I aint the press). They come in from both sides, and I tend not to use them or borrow too much from them when they come from “my side” as doing so would feel icky – like I was getting marching orders or something. But it’s a testament to just how good Dem Communications Director Andy Bouska is that sometimes they’re just so good that I have to pass them on.

In the case of the most recent one, he has digested this morning’s radio debate between GOP Congressional hopefuls Martha Rainville and Mark Shepard quite masterfully. From his ensuing press release, I am now pleased to – at long last – present for your consideration, Martha Rainville on the Issues (gasp!):

On Iraq:

“A very important element has been missing, and that is good communication on what’s going on there… It’s very difficult for citizens to have an accurate perspective of the war of our successes… Part of that is, I believe, the fault of all of those involved for not communicating more openly with Americans, or not telling the story of what’s going on in Iraq.

War is not a steady state – it does not march toward victory on a steady line.”

On energy:

“The only way that we can reasonably lessen our dependence on foreign oil while continuing to maintain a strong and dynamic economy is to increase our domestic production and, uh, refining capacity. So I have come out with an energy proposal that advocates for increased offshore drilling.”

[the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is] “a resource we have there to use”… “Those oil reserves are there, they’re not going anywhere, if we do need them in the future we can address that.”

On the mess that is Medicare Part D:

“I’m glad they did it. I support Medicare Part D.”

On abortion rights:

“We need to have parental notification to protect our young women – 16 and under – I support a ban on partial birth abortion, late-term abortion…”

On supporting the Republican Congressional leadership:

“I don’t know what you mean by saying I’ve agreed to support the leadership. I won’t really answer that because I don’t know what you’re talking about. I doubt [I’d support Democratic leadership] because I don’t see supporting Nancy Pelosi, who might be the obvious candidate as something that would be in Vermont’s best interest.”

…and on President Bush and his handling of the war:

“I think his weakness all along has been communicating with people. I wish so much that he would tell more of the good news that’s there.  There are some positive things happening… We tend to hear the bad news which is a function of how we cover news I think the help to the Iraqi people that the war has given – I think that needs to be better understood. Those stories get lost, and I think it’s important for our nation as a whole to understand all that’s going in so that we can judge the strengths and weaknesses better of our president or our congress or our foreign policy.”

After all, if Bush could just explain what a nice civil war it is, maybe two thirds of Americans wouldn’t feel so strongly about getting our soldiers out of there and moving towards a strategy that, you know, might actually work.

So, I know Rainville is supposed to be a different kind of Republican, but danged if I can tell from this list what that “different kind” is. Maybe she’s left handed or something.

With Rich Tarrant going, as Haik puts it, “nuclear negative” in his war against Bernie, now employing an operative in a Chicken suit to follow him around, it seems that the story of Dr. Mauricio Leon – formerly the Senior Director of Informatics at Tarrant’s IDX Corporation –  may be coming around again. If you missed it the first time, dont be surprised, as it has received shockingly little coverage in the Green Mountain State. As iHealth Beat reported back in May of 2003 (obviously when Tarrant was still top dog at IDX):

A former employee and head physician for electronic medical records vendor IDX Systems’ federally funded clinical decision support program said the company retaliated against him for his attempted whistleblowing suit charging IDX with fraud and concealment in the project, Modern Physician reports. Dr. Mauricio Leon filed a law suit against IDX yesterday in federal court in Seattle; Leon has also filed a HIPAA privacy complaint and a wrongful termination complaint against the company.

Leon’s lawsuit filed yesterday alleges that IDX, in its $18 million contract with the Commerce Department, submitted false documents to the department and defrauded the company’s joint-venture partners. Leon alleges that the company covered up and falsified evidence and billing, and then removed him from the project after he complained.

Investors took the charges (which include an Americans with Disabilities Act complaint) seriously, as IDX stock took a big hit. The Feds took it seriously too, again according to iHealth Beat in November of 2003:

Health care IT company IDX Systems this week disclosed that it is the subject of a federal fraud investigation surrounding its application for an $18 million clinical decision support system contract from the Department of Commerce’s National Institute of Standards and Technology, Modern Physician reports. The company also faces a civil suit filed in May by a physician executive alleging that IDX falsified documents in the bidding for the contract.

In its recent quarterly Security and Exchange Commission filing, IDX said a federal prosecutor is investigating the company and that it intends to cooperate with the investigation.

Intense stuff, eh? On April 25, 2003 IDX asked the U.S. District Court in Seattle to hold that it could fire Dr. Leon without violating the False Claims Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act or any other applicable whistleblower protections. As Dr. Leon said at the time:

“The IDX lawsuit against me is a smokescreen. It is with great sadness that I witness how IDX management would rather increase the company’s liability and consume shareholders equity in attorneys’ fees in attacks against me, rather than solve the problems with the federally funded SAGE project.”

Leon’s request for whistleblower protection was denied, and the saga seemed to be over – except that it’s not. The case was appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which heard oral argument about six months ago. At least one legal expert familiar with the case expressed to me an expectation that the decision against Leon will be reversed.

Background: False Claims Act Cases (“Qui Tam” or “Federal Whistleblower actions”) require that the complainant (whistleblower) present the action to the Department of Justice and then they have the option of filing their own action and proceeding with or without the backing of the DOJ.  Most complainants (whistle-blowers) who proceed without DOJ backing are almost certainly doomed to fail. The reason is obvious: if Justice takes a pass then there is smoke but no fire. The process for selecting a case to proceed is complicated by a number of factors:  the Federal prosecutor assigned to the case, his boss, the agency’s reputation (which will suffer from embarrassing disclosures); agency counsel, politics — in every sense and at every level — the Executive Branch (of which the DOJ is a part) can squelch an investigation.  If the case stinks then Justice is not shy about telling you so.

Now, this is where it gets difficult as I am neither a journalist or a lawyer, and am limited by the information available to me through clever uses of the web and online public records. The news reports linked above refer to a federal investigation, and IDX’s own pleadings strongly allude to such a qui tam filing. So the question is, what’s its status? If such an action had been rejected by DOJ, IDX would have issued press releases and trumpeted that fact to the world.  I couldn’t find such an announcement from IDX (now GE) since the retaliation action on Dr. Leon’s behalf. What’s to be concluded, therefore?

If you think DOJ is sitting on a negative report that could impact Rich Tarrant’s Senate campaign, that’d certainly be an opinion you’d be entitled to – and you’d probably find others who share that view if you started asking around.

I’ve been looking at this case for some time, and am only posting on it now because it took me this long to find sources close to the whole business who were willing to share some limited, but I believe reliable insights.

So, was Tarrant really directly involved in any of this?

The story really ran in two parts: the underlying bad actions leading to Dr. Leon’s charges, followed by IDX’s attempt to discredit him personally – what my source referred to as “dirty tricks.”  As to the former, it clearly reached the highest levels of IDX’s Seattle operations. As to the latter, it reached the highest levels of IDX in Vermont (Tarrant). Although there were all kinds of protective orders put in place by IDX to assure that minimal information was made public, one source believes this can be confirmed through public documents such as this one.

Still, I can find no evidence of a decision yet rendered by the Ninth Circuit. It may be there and I couldn’t turn it up, or it may be coming anytime. As such, if you’ll pardon the expression, the “jury is still out.” It is entirely possible that the whole business is as baseless as IDX has claimed. In my own investigations, I attempted to call Dr. Leon’s attorney in the original filing but the listed number was no longer valid, and internet records indicate that his license has been suspended.  Once could conclude from this that it was a drive-by lawsuit. One could also conclude that the only reason it was therefore dismissed initially was due to inadequate representation. It’s also possible to conclude that that the original lawyer’s difficulties made him a target of IDX’s retaliation campaign, and therefore a legal liability. Or it may mean nothing. In any case, Leon’s original counsel was clearly targeted by IDX, and Leon is currently being represented by Gordon, Thomas, Honeywell & Malanca out of Tacoma.

Still, I mentioned previously a legal expert I did communicate with who expressed the opinion that the case will be reversed in Dr. Leon’s favor. Why? Because one well-placed source opined that that the Federal Judge (Pechman) who presided over the case had a very warm spot for IDX attorney Angelo Calfo. In the opinion of this source, Calfo and his crew brought up a specious “fraud” offense against Leon and ultimately convinced the judge to kick out the case on grounds that Dr. Leon had destroyed evidence. The source used terms such as “home-cooked” evidence, and referred to IDX as “dirty.”

Strong opinions, to be sure.

So what’s the real story?

Well, at this point we just don’t know, and we in the public have received little help in piecing it together. Once the initial legal machinations worked out in IDX and Tarrant’s favor, so vanished any media coverage. Is this truly a frivolous, unfounded charge, or is there something to it? Without question, the last six years of Bush rule have been profoundly unfriendly for whistleblowers. Certainly, without clear media coverage available for review there is reason to question. And the charges of HIPAA privacy violations are disturbingly timely, with privacy rights so under attack these days. Still, I’m just an obsessive blogger with a soapbox, rather than a professional journalist with the time and skills to delve deeper.

It just, once again, makes me wonder where the professional journalists were on this one three years ago, and where they are now…