The “I” word had been getting a lot of play, and its only going to snowball over the next few days. Newfane has a town meeting item requesting Rep. Sanders pursue the process in Washington. A Rockingham resident is attempting to call a special town election on the matter.

This week saw the issue enter the Party infrastructure. The Rutland County Democratic Committee passed a resolution calling for the President to be impeached last Tuesday, and a handful of Democrats associated with Democracy for Vermont is reportedly going to show up at the Democratic State Committee meeting Saturday (tomorrow) and surprise folks there with the same proposal. Still others — including some high profile Democratic names — are talking behind the scenes about pushing for a statement from the Vermont Legislature.

Is this all a show? Fluff? Blowing off steam? Irrelevent and impotent grandstanding? There may be some of that (you do have to wonder why the hubbub suggests a surprise motion at the meeting tomorrow — why would folks want to ambush unsuspecting Party officers and staff if they were really serious, as opposed to trying to make a big showy splash, after all?).

But this could be more than fluff. The scuttlebutt in the national blogosphere is that there may be a sound, legal basis for a State Legislature to begin an impeachment process — there are already organized attempts underway in Rhode Island and Maryland — and many here and elsewhere feel that Vermont should have been leading the charge all along. (More below…)

Here is the Rutland Committee language:

RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, Section 603 of the Manual of the Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives provides for impeachments to be initiated on a motion based on charges transmitted from a state legislature, and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has committed high crimes and misdemeanors as he has repeatedly and intentionally violated the United States Constitution and other laws of the United States, particularly the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Torture Convention, which under Article VI of the Constitution is a treaty as part of the “supreme law of the land”,

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has acted to strip Americans of their constitutional rights by ordering indefinite detention of citizens, without access to legal counsel, without charge and without opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention, based solely on the discretionary designation by the President of a U.S. citizen as an “enemy combatant”, all in subversion of law, and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has ordered and authorized the Attorney General to override judicial orders for the release of detainees under U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (formerly INS) jurisdiction, even though the judicial officer after full hearing has determined that a detainee is held wrongfully by the Government, and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has ordered at least thirty times the National Security Agency to intercept and otherwise record international telephone and other signals and communications by American citizens without warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, duly constituted by Congress in 1978, and designated certain U.S. citizens as “enemy combatants”, all in violation of constitutional guarantees of due process, and

WHEREAS George W. Bush has admitted that he willfully and repeatedly violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and boasted that he would continue to do so, each violation constituting a felony,

NOW THEREFORE the Rutland County Democratic Committee submits that his actions and admissions constitute ample grounds for his impeachment, and that the General Assembly of the State of Vermont has good cause for submitting charges to the U.S. House of Representatives under Section 603 as grounds for George W. Bush’s impeachment.

The County Committee further submits that Articles of Impeachment should charge that George W. Bush has violated his constitutional oath to execute faithfully the office of President and to the best of his ability to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

In all of this George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President, subversive of constitutional government to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the State of Vermont and of the United States.

WHEREFORE, George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any offices of honor, trust or profit under the United States.

February 28, 2006

Adopted: February 28, 2006

Ed Garcia has blogged about the issue. The House Rules for the 109th Congress reportedly say that impeachment proceedings can be initiated “by charges transmitted from the legislature of a State (III, 2469)” (I say “reportedly” because I can’t actually find the quote first hand, only the oft repeated line from other blogs. maybe someone can help me out…?) It should be stated that there seems to be no basis to conclude that either the Newfane resolution or any comparable resolutions from the Democratic Party infrastructure could be anything more than purely symbolic gestures.

But its the Legislative option that really has the netroots going, and as I said, some states are steaming ahead. Rhode Island already has draft language of a resolution. Here’s the tail end:

Resolved, by the General Assembly of this state, that our Senators and Representatives in the United States Congress be, and they are hereby, requested to cause to be instituted in the Congress of the United States proper proceedings for the investigation of the governance of the Executive Branch by George W. Bush as President of the United States, and of his acts and doings as such, to the end that he may be impeached and removed from such office; and be it further

Resolved, That the Secretary of State of Rhode Island be, and is hereby, instructed to certify to each Senator and Representative in the Congress of the United States, under the great seal of this state, a copy of this resolution and its adoption by its legislature

Exciting isn’t it? There’s no question that its an appealing idea, and there have been a lot of Vermonters talking it up.

Other bloggers have been tossing around the pros, cons, and ramifications:

But is the Legislature interested? They’ve clearly got a lot on their plate, and Health care has been sucking the air out of every room for miles of Montpelier. Would there be interest in pursuing a course of action that — in a best case scenario — would likely die on the US House floor?

Still…

From the wires:

Vermont National Guard specialist Christopher Merchant was killed in Iraq, the National Guard says.

He was the 21st U.S. service member with Vermont ties to be killed in action in Iraq.

Merchant was a member of C Company of the 1st Battalion of the 172nd Armor Regiment based in Morrisville.

Although its been said many times, it always bears repeating: however one may feel about this war — or even wars in general — the courage and committment it takes to put ones life on the line as Christopher Merchant did is the very definition of heroism. Although our state is unquestionably diminished by his passing, we are honored by his life and sacrifice. Our thoughts go to his family, friends, and community.

It was only last year that all the buzz around the Legislative Session was Health Care. In the 2004 gubernatorial contest, Peter Clavelle attempted to push the issue front and center but fumbled. House and Senate Democrats picked up the ball that was all but handed to them by the press (who seemed to want to make the point that they understood what a big deal it really was after ridiculing Clavelle for dwelling too much on it).

Democracy for Vermont blocked for the Dems, pushing the issue front and center in as many communities as possible. The House produced a good, progressive bill, the Senate a more stop-gap one. Governor Douglas suggested he might be willing to consider working with the Senate, and rather than make a doomed stand on pure principle, the Dems calculated, decided to call Douglas’ bluff and pushed forward with the Senate model. Douglas blinked, refused to be even vaguely constructive, and scuttled any progress, all the while whining that it was all the Democrats fault.

And yet, only a few weeks after the session ended, the Governor, remarkably, managed to take complete control of the issue.

But fate has handed the Dems a second chance. Something almost unheard of within the same election cycle (here’s Sarah Copeland Hanzas discussing the Dems plan on the Orange County Dems site). And while I hope to god they can take this blessing from on high and do something with it, I am admittedly dubious…

It truly is remarkable. To read the papers, you’d get the feeling that the slate was totally wiped clean, and the playing field completely reset. The only ones who seem to remember are disappointed progressives (of the Democratic and capital-P-Progressive variety) who saw the final product of the Democratic congress a complete wimp-out and — fairly or not — lay the blame squarely at the feet of Senate President Pro Tem and US Congessional hopeful Peter Welch for dropping the single-payer torch.

It doesn’t taker a genius to see that this is a Democratic issue, but Douglas’s handlers do the Karl Rove thing well — identifying your enemies advantage and defying conventional wisdom by playing on their advantage yourself, both by denigrating and undercutting the other side and presenting yourself as the new champion of the issue (no matter how ridiculous it would seem to be on its face). Douglas did that last summer after looking like a total obstructionist going into the Spring and it worked, largely because everyone in the press and the other side of the aisle let him get away with it.

Now it looks even worse for him. He’s got no new thinking on the table, and seems too bored to even pretend to have any interest in working with Democrats on the issue. He half-heartedly followed his previous formula of paying lip-service to the idea of at least considering what the Dems had to offer before slamming the door shut. Now all he seems to have is a shrill, canned assault on Democrats for daring to consider raising taxes, while his own proposals raise taxes at least as much as the Democrats (oh, SO sorry…they’re not “taxes” they’re “fees…” My bad…). I mean, the guy barely seems like he’s trying.

The problem is, if things go like last year, he doesn’t need to.

Why the Democrats lose control of issues in the media is a topic of much debate. In my view it comes down to one thing: the Democrats see policy and politics as distinct. the Governor doesn’t. Frankly, the Governor doesn’t seem to have much interest in policy. He seems to leave that to his lieutenants.

Now, you’ve got to feel for many of these Dems. In fact, I suspect they are not much different then most of the Republican congresspeople in this way (the difference of course being that the Republicans in the House and Senate do not have the responsibility of playing the role of opposition to the Governor). They share the public’s distaste for politicking, and they don’t really want to engage in it any more than they have to. What they want to do is make policy — you know, the cool stuff. And again, who can blame them? They do what they can to divorce the two by placing the politicking in a box marked “election season,” and they try not to think about it any more than necessary until then (and even then, they often try to create rationales for why they don’t really have to do it — rationales that often sound something like “in MY district we dont like that sort of thing” or, “I just dont think running elections right is the Vermont way”…but thats a topic for another diary…).

And because they dont like it and they want to avoid it, two things happen. ONE: They don’t accept (as Douglas does) that, like it or not, you are ALWAYS running for re-election, and so is the other side. Now, there are certainly plenty of organizational doings going on behind the scenes in Democrat land, but they are all primarily support work for Election Time. Candidate recruitment, research, checking in with your infrastructure, developing lists — great stuff, but its the prep work for politicking rather than the politicking itself. There is still — even with all this good behind the scenes stuff going on — a tendency to want to compartmentalize politicking into “election season,” and that just doesn’t work anymore.

TWO: When it comes time to really play politics, they get uncomfortable, stiff, long-winded and meandering. And it’s because they just don’t like it. Why was Peter Shumlin always so good with the press and on the stump? He really dug that stuff. Most of his Democratic compatriots really, really don’t. And you never get very good at something you don’t like to do.

A key moment where the Dems lost traction last year was also an incredibly illustrative example of what I’m talking about. When Douglas called the legislature back into session last year to address the VSC contract, the Democrats blinked. Obviously, that was going to play badly in the press, but both sides had the sense to realize this was a high tension, high-stakes moment, and the opportunity was there to set the tone for the post-legislative war in the press. Dueling press conferences ensued, with Douglas doing his usual song-and-dance, while a couple doors over, Speaker Gaye Symington and Peter Welch addressed the cameras.

It was hard to watch. Symington and Welch stammered, they squirmed. Even when they spoke with committment and authority, two things were evident: one, they really didn’t want to have to do this. Two:

They hadn’t prepared (or perhaps “they hadn’t been prepped” is fairer).

They were winging it, pure and simple. They were so clearly ad libbing that Welch allowed himself to get dragged into a bizarre digression with Peter Freyne of Seven Days about whether referring to a Dem officeholder as “Democratic” or “Democrat” was a key part of the grand right-wing conspiracy or not. Sure, I think the GOP-ers use “Democrat” as an epithet that rhymes with “bureacrat,” but was that really what they called a press conference for, and is it really a good idea to get into a back and forth argument with a reporter about it?

Within weeks, Douglas was around the state making his opponents issue into his issue. At the same time, the Speaker was making sure Democratic County committees had videotaped copies of her press conference to watch.

Do I think Rep. Symington thought she and Welch were so great that the legions of Dems assembled should bear witness? Not at all. I think the video dissemination just shows us once again that Symington, Welch, and most of the other Dems would rather think about policy that politics. Who cares about the style of the thing, the point is that she and Welch discussed policy.

The unspoken assumption here, is that politics are unnecessary — even unseemly — when you’re in the right. That intelligent people of good will, if they take a moment to listen to you, can’t help but agree. It’s a nice idea. It truly, truly is, and it’s an idea that honorably motivates many folks to run for office.

But it sure as hell doesn’t win these policy battles (or in the long run, elections).

So what am I suggesting? Replacing competent policy-makers in the state legislature because they dont get (and don’t want to get) politics? No. Obviously we need good policy makers…well…making policy.

But everytime they go out in front of a camera, they need to be prepared. Everytime they start a new session, they need to be prepared. The Governor practiced before his press conference. He practiced in front of his political people. No doubt when they told him to go back and do it right, or to change an intelligent monologue to a pithy one-liner when it was called for, he listened. When they told him to make it a simple message and stick to it, he listened.

The Democratic Leadership doesn’t have to like politicking, or be natural politicians. But they owe it to the state to:

a) Recognize their limitations, including how their distaste for politicking can create those limitiations.

b) Surround themselves with staffers and allies that don’t share those limitations and have a good sense of when and how to play politics, and most important…

c) Listen to those people…defer to those people when appropriate. They do exist in the state. Some damn good ones. They are resources.

Resources that will be squandered so long as the Democratic elected leadership considers themselves to be above what these human resources are good at — politics.

The polls are now closed, and the results of our utterly unscientific poll for the Democratic nomiee for President at this, GMD’s 1-week anniversary are as follows:

Click below to continue…

No small coincidence that the last two candidates who visited Vermont are two of the strongest finishers (Feingold and Edwards), but the strength of Feingold’s win (over 50%) sends a strong message. Also finishing well was new national Dem-darling, former Virginia governor Mark Warner. Not doing so well was Senator Clinton, while Senators Biden and Bayh received absolutely no love at all from readers.

Thankd for participating! We’ll wait a little while before doing this again, but by all means discuss your choices and pitch the other readers on your pick…

The Brattleboro Reformer reports today that Maya Costley of Saxtons River was inspired by Newfane’s Town Meeting Impeachment Resolution previously discussed by Ed, and is pushing for a similar measure to be placed on a special election ballot in Rockingham. This is turning into a movement, and there is likely to be more news in coming days. Stay tuned.

The multi-partisan Burlington City Council is expected to unanimously urge a “no” vote for a Town Meeting ballot item urging the council to work to keep the Vermont Air Guard from being deployed overseas from their base at the Burlington Airport.

Looks like Bush’s poll numbers are down to 39% approval in New Hampshire.

Mass Gov Mitt Romney is trying new flashy programs to cover his poor record of job creation in the state and salvage his presidential dreams (chuckle). It seems the only reason the unemployment rate has dropped is that 40,000 people have left.

New York AG and gubernatorial hopeful Eliot Spitzer comes out foursquare behind the “morning after pill.” (This as the new US Supreme Court is set to overturn precedent by taking a case that could limit or outlaw abortions as early as 12 weeks…here they go, folks)

This is a companion diary to the Presidential Primary straw poll at the left hand of the front column. The list is only of candidates who are actively “exploring” the race and doesn’t include any “dream” candidates. There is no “other” option, cuz I ran out of slots for poll answers…

Please use the diary to discuss your choice (or the lack of choices, depending on how you may feel about these folks).

Here are exploratory committee links (so far…I’ll keep updating):

Evan Bayh
Joseph Biden
Wesley Clark
Hillary Rodham Clinton
John Edwards
Russ Feingold
John Kerry
Bill Richardson
Tom Vilsack
Mark Warner

The Rich Tarrant “fake blog” story is generating a fair amount of hubbub. If you haven’t heard, Peter Freyne broke the story in the last issue of Seven Days. It seems the rarely-visited (we should talk, I know) and utterly irrelevant web site VermontSenateRace.com is a poorly hidden front for the Tarrant campaign, set up and maintained by a paid campaign staffer. The news will hardly shock visitors to the site, as it’s sole purpose has clearly been to beat up on Bernie Sanders and praise Mr. Tarrant. In other words, if it wasn’t sponsored by his campaign, it might as well have been…

The bite to the story, however, is the black eye it gives Tarrant. It makes him appear sleazy, underhanded and just plain tacky (and perhaps, none too bright to think this wouldn’t get noticed).

So what’s a gazzilionaire Republican candidate to do? Give no comment, take the sight down as quickly and quietly as possible, change the subject, and figure people will forget it in a few days. After all, it’s a pretty inside baseball issue. Move it out of sight, out of mind quickly and no harm done, right? Uhhhhh, well……

Richard Tarrant’s U.S. Senate campaign says it will do nothing about a neutral-looking political blog that is being operated by a paid campaign staffer….

…(campaign spokesman Tim )Lennon said it was a coincidence that Bartley started working for Tarrant and created the blog at about the same time.

Seriously — sneaky fake blogs, shifty tax returns around a question of state residency, and now having the ego to dig his heels in and leave up a public monument to his campaign’s shifty tactics for the world to see …I wonder at what point Bernie should have to report the actions of Tarrant and his campaign as an in-kind contribution?

This is a big deal. A proposal that passed the State House of Representatives is a major smackdown to Governor Douglas and the Republican caucus:

The proposal would limit the exemptions to state open records law that the executive branch of state government could claim when someone requested the release of documents.

The House voted 82-49 in favor of prohibiting the administration from claiming the so-called deliberative process privilege.

Click on the link for the scoop…

As a quick refresher: this whole issue stems from the refusal of the Douglas Administration to turn over documents relating to stormwater runoff regulations (as well as possible contamination at Jay Peak) that were requested by environmental groups under Vermont’s Open Records law. Under a novel interpretation of “deliberative process privilege,” Douglas simply ignored the lawful request. As a result, the Conservation Law Foundation went to court, and in the meantime, Congressional Democrats led by Rep. Tony Klein (D-East Montpelier) decided not to wait around. Klein’s bill followed, which leaves little room for either doubt or novel, self-serving interpretations. Nat Kinney at Vermonters First has been birdogging the issue, and Rep. Klein has posted on the issue at VF as well.

Republicans are twisting themselves into knots to try and scuttle the process while pretending to hold some semblance of moral high ground on the matter.

Rep. Peg Flory’s (R-Pittsford) strained objection:

“We are attempting to hold the executive branch to different standards — much different standards — than we are allowing ourselves to be held to,”

Rep. Klein responded:

“This is our deliberative process right here,” said Rep. Tony Klein, D-East Montpelier, as he gestured around the House chamber during Friday’s debate. “Our committee work is our deliberative process.”

Comments from the Governor’s office demonstrate where Flory’s line of defense originated, but coming from Douglas himself, the argument approached self-parody in what was a crude attempt to at once demand the right to ignore the law and keep whatever secrets he wants, while simultaneously casting himself as a champion of open government:

“If it’s uniform and applies to all levels and all branches, then I’ll support it,” Douglas said earlier in the week.

Of course, Douglas is the guy who created the problem by doing his best to emulate his national Party leader, President Bush — making up new “interpretations” of law virtually out of wholecloth — unilaterally giving himself permission to do what he wants.

The initial success of the measure is great news for several reasons. One, its a good law. It seems to me that it’s axiomatic that the more open government is, the better.

Two, it shows Vermonters that, not only is Jim Douglas’s style of governing looking more and more like that of his President’s, but the GOP caucus is showing itself willing to dutifully enable their chief even when he is clearly in the wrong — in other words, they are beginning to emulate their Washington counterparts as well.

Vermont Democrats’ “holy grail” of a way to tie Vermont Republicans to Republicans in Washington just got a lot more attainable.

UPDATED: The final bill went through today (Tuesday), with Democrats calling the Governor’s bluff and agreeing to apply the provisions to the legislature as well. We’ll see if he comes up with another excuse, or goes ahead and signs it into law.

Heavens. First they were Killington, then Sherburne, now Killington again, and now they really want to change the “Vermont” to “New Hampshire.” Maybe some counseling is in order. In any event, Killington’s secession plan has been in the news again. It started out as an interesting way to protest taxation under Act 60, and it was hard not to have sympathy at the time.

But this has gotten ridiculous, and its costing time and energy in two state legislatures. So, given that Vermont towns, as Secretary of State Deb Markowitz said ”exist at the pleasure of the legislature”, let me present a modest proposal:

Okay, okay….just kidding (but it did feel good…)

( – promoted by odum)

These two combine for the story of the week. Political newcomer and cafeteria-Republican Gen. Martha Rainville limps in bleeding from allegations of trying to have her cake and eat it too. As Baruth said a while back:

With the exception of a single, perceptive editorial in the Rutland Herald, almost every journalist in Vermont has ignored the ethical problems involved with campaigning while pretending to explore, and campaigning while pretending to explore in uniform — and campaigning while pretending to explore in uniform with a war raging overseas.

While David Zuckerman makes a decision thats not entirely surprising. From the Freeps:

Zuckerman, a Progressive from Burlington, has been exploring getting into the race for several months. But he announced at a crowded Statehouse news conference that he would bow out.

So its probably Rainville v Welch, in a race that — despite how many Vermonters feel — is not, in my opinion, a sure thing. We’ll keep an eye on the polls here and post them as we find ’em.
UPDATE: …and lest we forget, Adam over at Vermonters First brought up Rainville’s possible misuse of National Guard rolls for political gain. Still waiting for more info on that one.