This is breaking, and significant news. How this plays over the next few days could go a long way to determine which party has the upper hand in local elections this year.

Whether the Governor vetoes it or not, this will be a controversial piece of legislation. Single-payer advocates such as Deb Richter are opposed to any non-radical fix as they fear it will continue to prop up a bad system and soften public support for a drastic overhaul. They fear it will negatively impact future hopes for more systemic reform.

While I can’t help but sympathize with this fear as a gung ho single-payer advocate myself, for my part I see a bill that — warts and all — will help many people, and I am loathe to make “strategic” long-term decisions that eschew bringing needed help to some now in the hopes that it will lead to bringing help to everyone later. That strikes me as dangerously close to offering up those this bill will help now as “acceptable casualties” in the quest for a more comprehensive solution. As such, I therefore encourage folks to call the Governor’s office in support. I realize by taking this stance, I (and others like me) take on an added burden of responsibility to push for a true systemic overhaul over the coming years if this bill passes, as Richter’s concerns (particularly about the long-term financial viability of the proposal) are very serious.

I am also concerned that the long-term viability of health care as an issue (at least for the next 4-6 years) may rise and fall on at least the appearence of progress on the issue. And I take the legislators on their word that this is only the beginning. This is from the summation on the press release I received from the Speaker’s office:

This is the beginning, not the end, of health care reform in Vermont. It sets a foundation for future reforms. We remain determined to make health care progress that moves us steadily toward affordable health care for all Vermonters. This bill focuses our first step where costs are greatest the care of Vermonters with chronic conditions and where the need is greatest the uninsured

The full press release contains details on the plan. It is a quite comprehensive piece, and rather than try to sum it at this point, I encourage you to click on the link below and read the whole thing (minus the last paragraph excepted above):

(The) Bill reins in health care costs by offering affordable coverage to uninsured Vermonters and establishing an outstanding chronic care system

Montpelier (VT)-House and Senate conferees have come together to sign the 2006 Health Care Affordability Act, a bill that is a first step toward achieving the goal of quality, affordable health care for all Vermonters.  This legislation has one overriding goal: controlling the steeply rising costs of health care.  It accomplishes this in two ways: by better managing chronic care and making health care affordable and accessible for all Vermonters. 

This bill is the culmination of two years of intense work by the House and Senate.  We listened carefully to the concerns and hopes of Vermonters through last year’s public engagement process, and we worked hard to address the concerns of the Douglas administration.  The final bill maintains the principles established last year * a commitment to universal access, comprehensive coverage, and a fair system of financing where everybody pays.  It builds on these principles by creating Catamount Health and an outstanding system of chronic care management.  This is a bill that Governor Douglas should be proud to sign. 

THE HEALTH CARE AFFORDABILITY ACT WILL CONTAIN COSTS BY:

MAKING HEALTH INSURANCE AFFORDABLE AND ACCESSIBLE TO THE UNINSURED
*  The bill establishes a health insurance program called Catamount Health.  Under this plan, everyone who is uninsured for 12 months will have access to – and will help pay for – a comprehensive health insurance package. The benefits will be administered through the private market and premiums will be based on income. Under the plan, everyone pays their fair share through an affordable premium structure. In addition, employers will pay an assessment based on the number of their employees who are uninsured. We estimate that at least 25,000 Vermonters who are now uninsured will obtain health coverage. 

*  Benefits of Catamount Health include:
  o  Primary care, preventive and chronic care, acute episodic care, and hospital services.
  o  Reimbursement for medical services equal to ten percent above cost.
  o  25,000 estimated to enroll, including new Medicaid enrollment.
  o  Chronic care management.

*  The financing of Catamount Health is fair and fiscally responsible. 
  o  Based on the principle that everybody is covered and everybody pays
  o  Individuals pay sliding scale premiums based on income
  o  Employers pay an assessment based on the number of their employees (measured as full  time equivalents) who are uninsured, exempting the first four FTEs
  o  Other revenues from increases in tobacco taxes and through matching federal dollars
  o  State fiscal obligations protected through caps on enrollment

IMPROVING HOW WE DELIVER HEALTH CARE
*  H.861 helps deliver the right care at the right time to the most expensive health care consumers * those with chronic conditions.  It makes chronic care management available to every Vermonter, whether privately insured, covered under a public program, or currently uninsured.  Chronic conditions consume 70 percent of the cost of health care in Vermont. Chronic conditions are what Vermonters worry about most.
*  The plan will establish an outstanding system of chronic care management.  This system – available to all Vermonters – will provide:
  o  Early and coordinated screening for chronic conditions like diabetes or asthma.
  o  Better management of chronic care.
  o  Emphasis on patient self-management.
  o  Payment to providers that rewards quality and disease management, not just quantity. The system will reimburse providers for doing what we want them to do for those with chronic conditions — manage their care.  For example, calling patients and reminding them to come in for regular check-ups, visiting patients in their home, and doing the necessary follow up.
*  Codifying the Vermont “Blueprint for Health” prevention and chronic disease management plan and directs chronic care management in Medicaid and Catamount Health that will save an estimated 5-10 percent in health care costs.
###

(if you have formating proplems please let us know)

DETAILS ABOUT THE 2006 HEALTH CARE AFFORDABILITY ACT

Who is eligible for Catamount Health?
*  Only uninsured Vermonters are eligible for Catamount Health.  An uninsured person is defined as someone who:
Ø Does not qualify for Medicare, Medicaid, VHAP, Dr. Dynasaur
Ø Has not had private or employer-sponsored insurance that includes both hospital and physician services for the last 12 months
§ If a person has only catastrophic coverage for hospital care, for example, s/he is defined as uninsured for purposes of Catamount Health and does not need to wait 12 months
Ø Has lost private or employer-sponsored coverage during the last 12 months because of: loss of employment, death of the principal insurance policyholder, divorce or dissolution of a civil union, no longer qualifying as a dependent under the plan of a parent or caretaker relative, no longer qualifying for COBRA, VIPER or other state continuation coverage.
Ø Lost college or university-sponsored health insurance because of graduation, leave of absence or otherwise termination of studies.
* An individual 18 or older who is claimed on a tax return as a dependent of a resident of another state is not eligible for Catamount Health. 

Why are the enrollment figures not higher?  What about requiring that everyone have insurance?
* Catamount Health is voluntary.  It offers an affordable and comprehensive benefit plan to every uninsured Vermonter.  However, we know that only a portion of uninsured will actually enroll in the plan.  Based on data from other states and Dr. Thorpe’s economic modeling, we estimate that approximately 25,000 currently uninsured Vermonters will sign up.
* This bill takes a step-by-step approach to increasing enrollments, preferring to establish a successful track record before adding more people over time.
* A number of possible expansions will be evaluated by January 2009 (18 months after initial implementation), including:
Ø eliminating some or all of the 12-month waiting period
Ø allowing the underinsured to buy into the plan
Ø allowing employers to buy into the plan
* Mandatory insurance will be considered if the goal of 96 percent coverage is not achieved by 2010. 

How is Catamount Health financed?
* The financing of Catamount Health is fair and fiscally responsible and is based on the principle that everybody is covered and everybody pays.
* Individuals pay sliding scale premiums based on income.
* Employers pay an assessment based on the number of their employees who are uninsured, exempting four employees.
* Other new revenues come from increases in tobacco taxes and through matching federal dollars
Ø Increase of $0.60 per pack on July 1, 2006
Ø Increased $0.20 for a total addition of $0.80 per pack on July 1, 2008
Ø Little cigars, roll-your-own tobacco will be taxed as cigarettes
Ø Snuff * changing tax to a per-ounce tax
* State fiscal obligations protected through caps on enrollment.

How will the employer assessment work?
* Assessment is on three groups of employees:
o All employees of employers who do not offer insurance to anyone.
o Employees of employers who offer insurance to some employees, but who are not eligible themselves.
o Employees who are eligible for coverage through their employer plans, but choose not to enroll, and are uninsured.
* The assessment is calculated quarterly, and is based on Full Time Equivalents (FTEs).  An FTE is an employee who works 40 hours a week for 13 weeks. Employees who work part time, or not for the entire quarter, are converted by dividing their actual hours worked by 520 (40 hours X 13 weeks.)
* The first four FTEs are excluded from the calculation of the assessment.  For example, if a firm has 10 FTEs who are not covered coverage, the assessment is based on 6 employee
* The assessment is $365 per FTE in the first year, and will increase at the same rate as the premiums in Catamount Health (estimated at 5% per year). 

How will the new chronic condition management system work?
* This year’s bill will re-engineer our health care delivery system to better deliver the right care at the right time.  More people with diabetes, for example, will receive their eye and extremity exams and fewer will end up blind or with leg amputations.  We also will focus more on prevention and early treatment.  Dr. Kenneth Thorpe, our health care consultant, estimates that these system changes will result in system-wide savings of $550 million over the next ten years relative to what we would otherwise experience.
* Key to the success of such a system is working closely with primary care providers and paying them to coordinate care for those with chronic conditions.  We have to change the focus from treating episodic illness to managing chronic conditions.  For example, a successful system will make sure that cancer survivors get the periodic tests they need to make sure their cancer has not recurred.
* The new chronic care model will be available to every Vermonter with any type of health plan, not just to people in Catamount Health and Medicaid.

How is a chronic condition defined?
* A chronic condition is defined as an established clinical condition that is expected to last a year or more and that requires ongoing clinical management. 
* Examples include: diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, cancer, asthma, pulmonary disease, substance abuse, mental illness, hyperlipidemia, and spinal cord injury.

What’s wrong with chronic care now?
*  Our current health care system was designed decades ago to treat acute health situations.  We would go to the doctor only when we were sick and doctors would treat or prescribe or operate, and then send us home.  Except for children and pregnant women, our health care system rarely focused on prevention or actively promoting and managing health. 
*  Approximately 75% of all health care spending today is for people with chronic conditions.  In general, our medical system does a poor job with these people.  Well documented and accepted national studies indicate that people with chronic conditions receive the right care at the right time only about 55% of the time.  These people are suffering for it and we are all paying for it. 

What about people who currently have insurance?  What does this bill do for them?
*  People who have insurance currently pay extra in their premiums to cover the health care costs for the uninsured.  This bill will begin to reduce this cost shift. 
* Through H.861, health care premiums will grow more slowly:
  Ø A significantly improved chronic care management program for all Vermonters will reduce spending by $550 million over 10 years.
  Ø  By covering the uninsured, we will cut into the current 7% added costs that are built into private insurance premiums to cover the health care costs of the uninsured.
  Ø Administrative simplifications will save money.
* Reimbursements for hospitals will increase, reducing the effect of the cost shift.

How can we be sure savings will pass through to our premiums?
*  BISHCA has significant authority to review and approve both hospital budgets and insurance rates.
*  H.861 directs BISHCA to set up a task force to report on the best ways to ensure that savings due to reductions in the cost shift will be reflected in hospital budgets and insurance rates.
*  Increased payments to doctors are needed to strengthen primary care practices and are not expected to reduce premiums by very much.

How will H.861 strengthen primary care?
*  We have learned that Vermont’s primary care system is in distress.  Doctors are working harder and harder to make ends meet, some regions of the state have shortages, recruitment and retention are problems everywhere, and medical students are choosing specialty areas over primary care.
*  Stable and expanded primary care capacity will be needed for chronic care services
*  The bill includes several provisions that will strengthen our primary care practices:
  Øincreases Medicaid reimbursements for primary care services * increased to Medicare rates
  Ø pays in new, innovative, and more appropriate ways for chronic care services
  Ø expanded loan repayment program (included in the budget)

What about the Medicaid deficit?  Will passing this bill make it worse?
*  H.861 will not make the looming Medicaid deficit worse.  In fact, it will reduce the deficit by:
  o Delivering chronic care in a better and more cost-effective manner
  o Raising funds for items currently in the Governor’s budget request, such as the Vermont blueprint for health
*  All of the state costs related to H.861 will be paid for with new revenues.
*  The new “global commitment” Medicaid waiver specifically allows for new federal matching dollars for programs for the uninsured, though a waiver amendment will be required. 
*  There is sufficient room within the global commitment “cap” to pay for H.861, with about $100 million left over.

How is H.861 different from last year’s bill?
* Last year’s health care reform bill set out a staged plan for affordable health care for all Vermonters, focusing in the first step on primary and preventive care for the uninsured.  This year, we are offering a bill that covers the uninsured with both in-hospital and out-of-hospital care, a more comprehensive first step than last year’s bill.  The bill also establishes a high-quality system for delivering care to all Vermonters with chronic conditions.

(…and another important action alert from the diaries! Things like this I just have to promote to the front! – promoted by odum)

Did anyone say it could never get any worse than Medicare Part D (for disaster)?  Hang onto your wallet, folks, and have a good supply of nitro pills handy for your heart.  Look what may be coming so the Republicans can promote health cost savings on their campaign trail.

Bernie and Peter Welch would never vote for this — we can’t say the same for Martha Rainville and Rich Tarrant.  But we can stop it in it’s tracks if we mobilize!

I wouldn’t put it past them to sneak in another vote at 2 a.m. or to hold the vote open another three hours to twist some arms — it’s worked before!

Call Leahy, Jeffords and Sanders and ask them to reject this bill and call your local papers and ask them to help publicize this threat.  I hadn’t read about it anywhere else, and didn’t want to believe it, so I looked it up in Thomas:

S.1955
Title: A bill to amend title I of the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974 and the Public Health Service Act to expand health care access and reduce costs through the creation of small business health plans and through modernization of the health insurance marketplace.

Sponsor: Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY] (introduced 11/2/2005)  Cosponsors (7)
Latest Major Action: 4/27/2006 Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 417.

Sounds fairly inocuous, doesn’t it?  Further research shows this bill would override state laws that guarantee coverage of such crucial services as cervical, prostate, and colorectal cancer screenings, as well as mammograms, mental health, and well-child care.  It would not only put consumers at risk but cut back on states’ rights to regulate insurance company behavior;  rules that limit premium discrimination based on health status, age, and sex; prohibitions of huge premium increases when people get sick; and prohibitions of misleading insurance company marketing practices.

Read more:  http://www.familiesusa.org/assets/pdfs/enzi-bill/Enzi-bill_national_1.pdf

Ignore this if you like paying more for less coverage!  This is yet another giveaway of our money to the insurance companies.

Peace,

Barbara

Cross-posted at www.DailyKos.com

I’ve been reading, both with bemusement and a little frustration, several recent articles urging restraint or denouncing the proposed censure and potential impeachment of George W. Bush.  And to this Vermonter, it looks like a microcosm of the troubles of the Democratic party.  Simply, if you oppose bringing impeachment or censure into the national discussion, no matter the reason, then don’t complain about the Appeasement Democrats. You are one.

Because making this an election issue is the right thing to do.

Way more on the flip

Before I go any further, a little background;  I’m no politico, I never had a job where even finding Washington DC on a map was necessary, never ran for office, and until 2004, had never donated money to a political campaign.  But I gave my time going door to door for Robert Drinan in the seventies, was present (at the tender age of 5) when the National Guard rolled through the streets of Chicago, and have never missed a voting day since my eighteenth birthday. I was also scared shitless of Bush before he stole the Oval Office. So I’m what you might call aware, but certainly no expert. 

  More to the point, I have been a New Englander all my life, and a Vermonter for the last sixteen years. Our small population and grassroots style helps keep it simple.  Helps me see the forest through the trees, while so many better heads than mine are lost in the multitude of details. Details that obscure the larger truth. Wonks tell me it’s a matter of political calculus. I never took calculus, but I got a chainsaw. So let me get it started…

The rationales I’ve seen for opposing impeachment/censure discussions are as follows:
  1) It will never happen with the Republican Congress.
  2) It will put Cheney/Condi/Freddy Kreuger  in the #1 spot.
  3) It will be compared to the Clinton impeachment
  4) It will mobilize the Troglodyte base
  5) Bush is a lame duck, so it’s moot.
  6) It will backfire on the Democrats in `08
  7) It’s a distraction. Win the `06 election first.

These are excellent Republican talking points, folks.  And like all Republican talking points, they are easily cut down, even with my little chainsaw. 

  To all of these, I offer one simple response: It’s the right thing to do for America. 

  I knew this for sure when my Repub nemesis from college came up for a ski trip. I tried to avoid politics, but he must’ve seen my “Impeach” car window signs. He amazed me by agreeing, “`cuz it’s the right thing for America.”  If the Democratic Party still cannot embrace the idea of stopping this administration’s assault on its people, and force the issue with all the ferocity of the anti-Clinton Republicans, because it is the right thing for America, it truly has no courage, no message, no hope of victory in this or future “elections”.
  So let’s cut some wood.

  Reason #1 above would be far more accurate if it said “it will never happen with a Republican Congress that is not held accountable for their dereliction of duty over the last five years.”  Then I would agree. There is a solid repub majority in both houses of Congress, and the media has spun all accountability away from their total lack of oversight of a blatantly criminal administration.
And this line of argument essentially says “don’t rock the boat.”
  How’s that approach working for us so far?  An opposition party is supposed to oppose.  Does that mean offering amendments to appropriations bills that get whitewashed in Republican committees? Making bold statements in their fundraising emails to me, then running from Feingold’s and Conyers’ resolutions?  No. Never did. Really doesn’t in the GOP golden age of homicidal politics. Opposing this conspiracy means spitting in the face of the traitors. It means calling them out. It’s the right thing to do. Playing by the rules of public decorum and observing parliamentary good manners went out the window when the sitting vice president told  Senator Leahy to go fuck himself. And was lauded on Faux News for his forthrightness.
I can’t recall any (D) national officeholder even calling Bush a liar, much less a criminal.
But. He. Is.  Make impeachment/censure an election issue.
ALL democratic candidates should issue a joint statement declaring their support for robust and timely investigations of the myriad mischief of the last five years. Focus on the discussion, not horseracing it with polls and pundits. It’s a strong stand, and it’s the right thing to do.

  #2 is the most obvious straw man of all. Cheney is way more guilty on all counts than Bushie. And the conspiracies behind covering up the NSA business and Iraq weapons intel hits just about everybody else. Hastert would sit impotent in office until removed with the rest of the cabal at the newly scrutinized ballot box.
  I must admit I was stunned and disappointed to hear this bogus argument being proferred by Bernie Sanders in response to my letter to him urging investigation and impeachment. But Bernie is Bernie, and for now I will reluctantly cut him some slack during this campaign. But not much. Vermont is perfectly situated to be ground zero for State Based Impeachment.

  #3 is put forth as a negative, but is in my view a positive. Dig this: The impeachment of two presidents in a row would be a wake up call to Americans that something has gone terribly wrong in our government, in a way that affects them. This can only serve to increase citizen involvement in politics. That has never been a bad thing for the Left. Never. Witness GOP voter suppression, swift boat, and myriad other ways the peddlers of the failed ideology of the Right have tried to pare down public involvement and awareness. 
  Furthermore, Clinton was never a media darling. From Hillarycare to Filegate, every manufactured “scandal” was given weight by the manure-spreaders on TV and in Congress, whereas every violation of law under this beast has been tempered with “supposed” or “some say”.  The media hasn’t given any of this fair play, but swearing witnesses has a way of cutting through spin. I welcome the comparison. Hell, I DEMAND the comparison, and so should every American who thinks a) Clinton got shafted by the GOP’s abuse of impeachment power, and/or b) Bushco deserves to be tried for these crimes. 
  In short, BRING IT ON, because it’s the right thing to do.

  #4 is another positive. By all means, trot that troglodyte base right out for everyone to see. They now represent less than one third of America, and are growing more shrill with every self-inflicted embarrassment of the GOP. This, in my view, is the best way to tie the GOP to Bushco. Put Dobson, Robertson, Mehlman, and DeLay on TV 24/7 defending King George in their usual way, by smearing an ever-growing number of Americans. Hell, throw McCain and Frist on, too. Pandering to their base is NOT going to result in a groundswell of support for their criminality. That bandwagon swerved to avoid Terry Shiavo, broke down during Katrina, and got totaled by Dubai Ports World.

  #5; King George is a lame duck. More like a duck with mutated bird flu. Somebody show me how he’s been stopped.  They’re fixin to go after Iran, fer cryin’ out loud. Those fuckers are nothing if not tireless. Political hacks are STILL driving career experts out of federal agencies from the CIA to NASA to the Forest Service. Halliburton is STILL getting no-bid contracts and is immune from investigation. New Orleans is STILL waiting for help. Bushco is STILL raising the debt limit (think this was the last time? puh-leeze). Oh, and we’re STILL in Iraq with no exit plan. Basically, he’s STILL running amok in our country and the world, and must be stopped. It’s the right thing for America.

  #6; “It will backfire”. Yeah. Like the BS impeachment of Clinton backfired. Or the pending impeachment of Nixon backfired. Poor GOP. After that `98 fishing expedition (not to mention petulantly shutting down the government), how they paid for it at the polls. Sure taught them restraint, huh?…It was an early abuse of power that, unchecked, has since become SOP in the GOP. Or how about the Democrats back in `74. Too bad they stood up to Nixon. Voters punished them by electing one of only two Democratic presidents in the last thirty years. Mainly `cuz he kept it simple.  Yup.  It’s surely political suicide to take a strong stand.  Never works. Except every time it’s done.

  And finally, my favorite; “it’s a distraction”.
  Without a discussion of censure and/or impeachment, none of the crimes of the GOP will enter the national discussion surrounding the `06 elections. We will once again allow the GOP to frame the issues and maximize their smear potential. The Republican Party is the default choice of millions of Americans because it successfully lies to them.  And the entire GOP power structure is involved in a conspiracy to hide vital  truth from the American people. Pretending that it is not is to be complicit.

  If Americans never hear the charges and the evidence, will they have any reason to doubt their electronic paperless votes have been counted correctly? Will they believe that torture is policy if they never see the evidence of its ongoing and widespread use? Will they believe 9/11 could have been prevented if there is no investigation into why the warning signs were ignored? Will they be skeptical of claims about Iran and Syria without investigation into intelligence manipulation, past and present? Will they have reason to wonder if it’s their phone or email being watched, if nobody checks on the watchers? Will the further amassing and abuse of power stop at some point all on its own? Will we ever be anything but a cowed minority if we play the same strategy that has lost us three very important elections in a row?

  Distraction? No.  It’s the focusing lens of the comeback of law and sanity.
  Unrealistic? Not if you shift stategies from DLC-inspired Repub-lite to true opposition. 

  None of the naysayers I’ve been reading can base their positions on anything other than political tea leaf reading, and recent history shows that Democrats suck at tea leaf reading. Leave the supernatural crap to the other side. We all know impeachment is the Constitutional option, the right thing to do. Hell, most of us feel it’s necessary to save our country from dictatorship, but we dither. And fret. About even bringing it up. It’s not exactly inspiring.

  Triangulation and politesse are DEAD. It didn’t work with King George III or the Confederacy and it will not work against the neofascists.  They made great strides powerwise by shouting and screaming about every little thing, even many made-up things. They have been so successful at it they’ve managed to sweep all three branches of government and dominate national discourse with an agenda that actually hurts the vast majority of those who back it.

  We can take back power by taking it to the opposition. Adopt their tactics, but not their philosophy. We have the truth and the law (what’s left of it) on our side. Imagine what we can do. We can do what’s right.

 Loading ...

( – promoted by odum)

The Vermont Guardian has a good piece covering the presentation in Washington of the Vermont town impeachment resolutions to House Speaker Dennis Hastert. Their coverage was inaccurate in one significant way, though:

An effort that began in March culminated Monday when three Vermont communities delivered a message to House Speaker Dennis Hastert: Start the process to impeach Pres. George Bush.

“Culminated?”

Not by a long shot…

Click on “theres more” for the “Statement from Dan DeWalt on the delivery of Vermont’s petitions to impeach Pres. George W. Bush”

Mrs. Tenney went to Washington, and the speaker of the House ran for cover

By Dan DeWalt

Three years ago, Pres. George W. Bush stuffed some padding in his pants, flew dramatically onto an aircraft carrier anchored a few hundred yards offshore, and declared “mission accomplished.”

Today, in memory of the thousands who have since died in Iraq, and fulfilling their obligations as citizens to protect the U.S. Constitution, Ellen Tenney and Julia DeWalt presented the first three Vermont town resolutions calling for Congress to impeach the president to the U.S. speaker of the House. Except the speaker was afraid to meet them.

He was afraid to face the naked truth that Congress will now have to be dealing with the wrath and determination of forthright U.S. citizens who are calling their government to accountability. Congress now has to answer to a public that does not rely on timid political advisors, repeating the same outdated and losing conventional wisdom, worrying about potential “backlash” to ideas that are true and to demands that are just.

The night before her scheduled meeting with the speaker, Tenney went to the Jefferson Memorial and laid the petitions at his feet. It is, after all, section 603 of Jefferson’s manual that gives towns the right to bring impeachment resolutions to Congress. From the memorial, Jefferson looks directly at the White House, and we can be assured that he doesn’t like what he sees. Section 603 is a natural outcome of his distrust of an all-powerful executive branch of government. America had just freed itself from the tyranny of King George, and Mr. Jefferson was determined to prevent another one from taking his place.

We see that the so-called opposition politicians, as well as their supporters in the popular and news media, are unwilling to take seriously their duty to uphold the Constitution.

Therefore, we must step into the breach and take action before the nation sinks under the weight of corruption, corporate domination and creeping fascism. Some nations have proud histories of “peoples’ revolutions” wresting power from corrupt governments from the Philippines to South America to Eastern Europe. Tens of thousands would take to the streets and stay there. Or most of the nation would go on strike, or as www.therudeguy.com puts it, they all call in “well,” saying I’m not sick, but I’m not working until you and your lousy government are out of here.

For whatever reason, America today is not ready for those sorts of mass actions. When massive protests greeted the Iraq war, they were met with a collective yawn and a few dismissive jokes by the government and the media. Protests just aren’t seen as part of the process.

Impeachment however, is absolutely part of the process. Correctly worded impeachment resolutions must be passed from the speaker to the Judiciary Committee. If only one member of the House brings one of these resolutions to the floor, the House must debate it. Thanks to Jefferson we have the power to force this conversation. The time for a constitutional People’s Revolution is at hand.

The March town meetings followed by The May 1 delivery of the petitions/resolutions are our declaration of independence and battle of Bunker Hill. If the Speaker of the House is on the run, let’s give him something to run from and keep a barrage of resolutions and declarations coming his way.

Now is the time to take your senators and House representatives to task for not upholding their obligations to the country and its Constitution. Now is the time to write letters to the editor demanding that we begin a national conversation about the rule of law. Now is the time that we demand that morality and truth take center stage in our governance.

Thomas Jefferson said that the tree of liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of tyrants. Charlie Parker said, “Now’s the Time.”

Last year, a non-binding resolution was overwhelmingly passed in the Vermont Senate calling for Vermont to join Illinois, New Jersey and Oregon in divesting it’s state pension funds from corporations doing business with, and therefore economically enabling, the genocidal Sudanese government. Nearly a year later, Vermont still has holdings of nearly $3,000,000 in Schlumberger Ltd, a powerhouse Austrian-based multinational that runs oilfields in Sudan, as well as several other countries.

UVM voted a few days ago to divest it’s holdings in such companies. Other states and universities are joining (or have joined) the divestment movement. The counter argument, as we heard in the debate on divestment from apartheid, is that divestment will economically impact the poor, and bring more suffering to those who are already hurting. It is a reasonable argument that would seem to make the situation ambiguous. However, as with apartheid, when the correct next step is ambiguous, rather than paternalistically attempt to judge from afar what is best for the victims in Sudan’s Darfur province, we should instead turn to the survivors and activists from that region to ask how they would have us aid in their plight.

And they say divest.

For some background, if you’re not aware (from Salon):

For more than three years, the Janjaweed, backed by the Sudanese government, have waged a brutal war against two rebel groups, the Sudanese Liberation Army and the Justice and Equality Movement. In a vicious campaign, labeled genocide by the U.S. in 2004, they have murdered tens of thousands of civilians who belong to the same ethnic groups as the rebels…

…Yet the U.N., the U.S. and the European Union have consistently failed to take any serious punitive actions against the Sudanese government. The U.S. has pushed for a stronger world response to the crisis, but its diplomatic efforts have continued to flounder…

…The Bush administration may be talking tough on Darfur, but critics say its war on terror has caused it to act with trepidation. Since the ’90s, when it harbored Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida, Sudan has been designated a terror state by the U.S., meaning American companies, with few exceptions, have not been allowed to operate there. But in recent years, U.S. intelligence has turned to Sudanese officials, including some considered architects of the Darfur genocide, for information on suspects in the global war on terror. Critics charge that the U.S. has been reluctant to take tough action because of the Sudanese government’s strategic importance in the fight against al-Qaida.

The divestment movement has been assisted in recent weeks by a dramatic ratcheting up of coverage in the popular media. Hollywood stars like George Clooney have become very active on the issue, and his television alma mater ‘ER’ has been showcasing the situation there in it’s current story arc. Last week, five Democratic US Representatives were arrested during a protest of the Sudanese government’s policy of genocide — including the Congress’s lone holocaust survivor, Rep. Tom Lantos.

It is as if something has collectively popped among the general US public, which has offered little recognition and outrage up to this point. As if this was a back page story that was supposed to have passed into history by now, and the amazement that it is still being allowed to continue in the face of 400,000 dead (through the most horrific means) and millions more displaced, is finally giving way to shock and rage.

Reading about a sociopathic corporation like Schlumberger brings up disturbing reminiscences of Syriana, but it is one of several foreign companies on watch lists like this one, which include Royal Dutch Shell — a familiar name not only to US drivers, but for international Human Rights watchdogs. In fact, Schlumberger was one of the companies at the table with Dick Cheney discussing how the spoils of the Iraq War were to be divided (according to this piece from the Wall Street Journal), while all the while the administration was insisting the Iraq invasion had nothing to do with oil.

US companies are currently not legally able to do business in Sudan because it’s on terrorist watch lists at the State Department. This makes the economic card a bit more complicated. China, Russia and India (the former two having UN Security Council veto power) have consistently blocked action against Khartoum (Salon again):

Putting pressure on Chinese companies like PetroChina and Sinopec means that those companies wouldn’t have to actually withdraw from the country for the divestment to have an effect. John Prendergast, senior advisor for theInternational Crisis Group, explains: “The likelihood of the Chinese withdrawing investment in the Sudan is nil. One of the objectives of divestment would be to reduce the share price of publicly traded Chinese oil companies, raising alarm bells in Beijing, and forcing the Chinese in its own interest to go to the Sudanese government and say: ‘Enough is enough.’ There has to be a cost, and the cost has to be reducing their share price, reducing the value of their company, because investors would, in mass, head for the exits.”

Currently, Treasurer Spaulding is (from Seven Days):

participating in a working group with other state treasurers’ offices and public pension funds to try to be “agents of positive change” in Sudan. Their approach appears to be more one of “constructive engagement” with companies that do business in Sudan, rather than blanket divestment,

Spaulding is a very good guy, but this sort of engagement is not what is called for here, and in fact activists have put together a “targeted divestment” strategy that goes after companies supporting the regime, rather than supporting the populace. In fact, the case for divestment is probably stronger than it was for South Africa, given the immediacy of a full-blown, officially sanctioned campaign of human extermination.

And, as Salon again says:

Jerry Fowler, staff director of the Committee on Conscience at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, sees such efforts as important for raising awareness in the U.S., as much as putting economic pressure on the Sudanese government: “It helps alert a wider audience to the issue, and the seriousness of the issue. That is its primary benefit. In terms of an actual effect on the Sudanese government itself, any effect it will have, I think, will be in the long term.” …

…Yet the activists say that the only way to put economic pressure on the country is to take on the companies doing business there. “The U.S. is left without its biggest economic stick now,” says Miller. “What are we going to do? We can’t do anything more from a government standpoint on the economic side. So far, the Sudanese government has felt nada, zip, zero economic pressure.

So, the Treasurer’s office should do the right thing and dump this stock immediately. If Spaulding still feels hesitant, the legislature should return to this issue now – before the session is over. We should in no way shape or form allow ourselves to become even remotely morally complicit in this:

… for a moment.

Here is the contact information for the Treasurer’s office:

Vermont State Treasurer • 109 State Street • Montpelier, Vermont 05609 • 802-828-2301

And you can find your Representative and Senators contact info here.

Throughout our history we’ve always been provided an enemy to cover up government mismanagement — including immigrants  (remember when IRISH NEED NOT APPLY) for jobs?  With the exception of Native Americans, weren’t we all born of immigrants?  We thrived for over 200 years as a melting pot, taking the best from ‘the huddled masses yearning to be free’ .. and forging a democracy we could be proud of.

Let’s take all that negative Republican energy focussed on wedge issues that seek to divide us, turn it around and work for solutions to problems that affect us all.  For the people that think that problems would be solved by outlawing basic civil rights for gays, that would force women to bear unwanted children, that would deny immigrants the same choices their own families had …… grow up!  We’ve got BIG problems here not served by the ‘blame game’.

We won’t forget about wars to steal oil, or the thousands of brave troops who were killed or permanently maimed, or the treaties (NAFTA, GATT) that continue to send thousands of our jobs overseas permanently.

We need universal health care and anti-trust laws …… and we don’t want the threat of nuclear war hanging over our heads with the idiot we have with his shaky finger on the trigger.  We want the prescription drug problem sorted out so seniors can get the medication they need at an affordable price.  A hand up is not a handout!

I marched in NYC again yesterday with Bread and Puppet — (one of the Iraqi women all in black carrying a dead child) and came home convinced that we can change our government, and go back to the basic policies of ‘to the people, for the people and by the people’ .. No more imperial Presidencies, Congressional representatives who serve the people instead of the corporations .. and campaign finance laws that will ensure that money can’t buy elections.

We have the power at the ballot box, and we need to take it back.

Keep your eye on the prize and don’t be diverted by blame, fear and paranoia, and be proud to be a Vermonter!

Peace,

Barbara

Hello GMDers:

I’d like you to meet a friend of mine.

Bob Mills was hired to write for Bob Hope in August, 1977. He spent the next seventeen years writing jokes, routines, parody songs, speeches and television scripts for the legendary performer, in the process logging over half a million miles “on the road” with Hope, visiting all corners of the globe from Peking to London, Stockholm to Bora Bora with plenty of stops in between. HOPE WRITER: “My Life Inside Bob Hope’s Comedy Factory” was written between 1993 and 1995 and is dedicated to all the wonderful people who shared a golden age in the history of entertainment, and were privileged to work for one of the most legendary performers of all time. Since 1998, Bob has sailed thousands of miles with Crystal, Princess and Celebrity cruise lines, sharing his TV experiences. He is an Emeritus member of the Writers Guild of America, West.

Crossposted from Bereft on the Left, with graphics and links added.
Bob’s biography, “Hope Writer” is a fascinating read and linked here.

All original material by Bob Mills.
Links and graphic support by kestrel9000.

Keith Richards was injured when he fell out of a palm tree in Fiji. The Mick has told him a hundred times “Never try to trash a palm tree.”…

Rush Limbaugh is off the hook. He pleads to one count of doctor shopping and walks. The Broward County Sheriff’s Office has even removed the yellow tape from around his medicine chest….

And I’ll see you below the fold…

Continuing the revelry…..

The Ku Klux Klan will hold a June rally at Antietam National Battlefield in Maryland. It was supposed to be a secret but, authorities uncovered the plan when the Bed Bath & Beyond in Sharpsburg sold out their entire supply of king size white sheets….

Harvard student Kaavya Viswanathan’s first novel “How Opal Metha Got Kissed, Got Wild and Got a Life” was pulled from the shelves when “similarities” to two novels by Megan McCafferty were discovered. Publisher Little Brown says the book will be retitled “How Opal Metha Got Kissed, Got Wild, Got a Life and Got Caught.”…..

Organizers of the May 1 mass walkout call it “Gran Paro”—-a day without immigrants. It’s estimated that the idle leaf-blowers in Southern California alone will save $1.3 million in gas……

Bush said at a Rose Garden news conference, “Im not a supporter of boycotts.” May not mean much to you, but Fidel Castro is ecstatic….

The Iraq war has stalled the housing market which had flourished briefly after the downfall of Saddam. To compound the sluggish sales, the insurgents keep shooting down the Re/Max hot air balloon….

Incoming Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi vows that U.S.-Italy ties will remain strong. Even though he disapproves of the war in Iraq, the U.S. presence in Afghanistan and the Sopranos…..

Justice Antonin Scalia suggested that if condemned inmates are allowed to object to the method used to kill them, they’ll all appeal. Which Tony refers to as “Mary Queen of Scots Bellyaching.”……

The Pentagon maintains a database of 12 million youths available for military service. At www.cannon-fodder.com…..

Seagate, the world’s largest disc drive maker, is beefing up its drives to 750 gigabytes.Or, enough memory to store all the rap sheets of crooked congressmen, convicted rappers, jailed athletes, defrocked priest pedophiles and disgraced CEO’s with enough left over for all of the Bush administration’s excuses for failing to capture Osama Bin Laden.

Wartime presidents Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt never served in the military. Unfortunately, that’s their only legitimate comparison to Bush….

According to Catholic Digest,73% of Catholics say the “Da Vinci Code” has had no effect on their faith and 43% of them plan to see the movie. Proving yet again that science fiction is science fiction, whether told by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John or Tom Cruise……

Veteran C.I.A. analyst Mary McCarthy was fired for leaking sensitive information to the press. Mary’s mistake wasn’t releasing the info, but failing to give Bob Novak first dibs on it……

Hasbro will market a modernized version of “Monopoly” with non-Atlantic City Streets, more currency and airports instead of railroads. The familiar “Mr. Monopoly” will be replaced by Kenneth Lay…..

The M.G.M. Mirage will partner with the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation to build a $700 million hotel-casino in New Haven, Connecticut. Which will be called the “White Man Speak With Forked Tongue—-Grand.”

That’s about it for this week, sportsfans. If you like this kind of stuff, check out my blog!

* When I heard some of “Nuestro Himno” — the Spanish language version of the Star Spangled Banner getting airplay in a few markets, I thought it was an extremely cool, uplifting, patriotic statement from the hispanic community. Apparently a great many feel otherwise (Bush: “I think people who want to be a citizen of this country ought to learn English. And they ought to learn to sing the national anthem in English.”). Carpetbagger has coverage. Vermont Radio Guy says

Now, I am as liberal as anyone, but this crap has to stop. Where do we draw the line here?

“Liberal as anyone.” Yeah, right. How about you “draw the line” by listening to something else? This upsurge in xenophobic whining really makes we want to learn Spanish. If someone can possibly come up with a reason why Nuestro Himno is in any way disrepectful, unpatriotic, or “crap” to be “stopped,” please share. I dare you.

* Libby Sternberg has left the anti-NEA Vermonters For Better Education, continuing the deterioration of Vermont’s old-guard right-wing internet set. McLaughry produces less and less (and his website looks like it hasn’t been reviewed in years), and Dwinell has been reduced to bizarre rants about Bernie being a secret agent of international communism. Perhaps the new VT right-wing blogosphere (with the likes of Cool Blue and She’s Right) is the next wave. Maybe there won’t be a next wave (a guy can dream, can’t he?)

* Vermont Yankee has once again halted its relentless upward creep to 120% power output. Everytime they restart the creep, little problems pop up. Sorta like seams popping out.

* Peasants With Pitchforks is doing what I wished I could’ve done — giving us a run-down of the media panel at UVM this week that featured (among others) Howard Dean, and his ofttime nemesis Howard Fineman. Very entertaining posts. Here’s part 1 and part 2 with the promise of more to come.

* Finally, at VTGOP.org, the local Bushies are trying to do that Karl-Rove-thing of making your candidate’s weaknesses into strengths just by relentlessly pegging the other team with your own shortcomings, despite any and all evidence to the contrary. Unfortunately for them, they just look a little…confused? Pathetic? Delusional? They’ve launched a Where’s Welch campaign attempting to highlight what they claim is Peter Welch’s unwillingness to be forthcoming on issues (and of course they picked their pet issue of the day, despite the fact that Welch has an established opinion in print on the matter). Now just think about this strategy for a second. Then spend another second trying to think of a single issue that Republican candidate Martha Rainville has clearly stated an actual opinion on. Just one. C’mon…

There are some very different must-see video clips making the rounds that have come to my attention over the last day. They’re as different as they could be, but they all evoke strong emotion.

First, PoliticsTV has footage of five Democratic US Representatives being arrested in DC while protesting the Darfur genocide. Two of the US Reps are from across the border in Massachusetts. Another is Congressman Lantos, a genocide survivor himself. Powerful stuff. (Quicktime / Windows Media)

Second is this animation, called “What Would Jesus Do” juxtaposing the words of Christ against some truly horrific images of children in Iraq. Being dubbed “the video the religious right doesn’t want you to see,” it should only be viewed after serious mental preparation. (Link (html))

Finally, there is the absolute carnage on display from the much-discussed vivisection of leading neo-con pundit and ideological force of nature Bill Kristol by Stephen Colbert of The Colbert Report (Colbert, of course, essentially plays a character that is a knock off of Bill O’Reilly on his faux-fox “news” program). It is indescribable. (Quicktime / Windows Media)

A recent statement by Republican Senatorial candidate Richard Tarrant is downright axiomatic. From Freyne in Seven Days:

[Tarrant:] “Everybody has a right to express their views, but I think politicians, it says something about themselves based on who they ask to help them. That’s just the way it is.”

I couldn’t agree more. As we reported, last year Tarrant “made a good impression” looking for support at the Center For American Cultural Renewal/Vermont Renewal (formerly the anti Civil Union Who Would Have Thought, Inc), a homegrown, reactionary, religious right organization. Their president is Stephen Cable, and as reported by the controversial counter-website Blier Watch, Cable is:

a registrant (Officer 5) of a corporation described as “Religious” that went by the name New Hope Ministries, Inc. The corporate status terminated on June 23, 1989.

Similarly, New Hope Ministries was registered as an corporation in California as early as 1981. Today, New Hope Ministries is a so-called “ex-gay” ministry with ties to the discredited groups Exodus International and Love In Action dating back to the 1970’s. The “ex-gay” ministries have been widely rejected by professional organizations such as the American Psychological Association and are considered to be harmful to lesbians, gays and, in particular, youth.

Yup, you sure can tell “something about [politicians] based on who they ask to help them.”

“That’s just the way it is”