Somebody isn’t playing nice in Franklin County’s Republican race for Senate nominations.  

Two seats are up for grabs, and there are three Republican contenders: Norm McAllister, Dustin Degree and Joe Sinagra.  The two winners will face-off against Democrats Don Collins and Carolyn Bright in the general election.

Saturday afternoon, I discovered a folded paper under my windshield wiper. The car was in the driveway of my house, way up away from the street.  I didn’t see any other cars similarly leafletted, and the page appeared to be printed directly from a computer rather than photocopied.  So presumably, this was intended especially for me… and perhaps a few other selected recipients(?)

The page was headlined “Franklin County Values?”  with a subheading, “Sinagra Linked to Ballot Petition Forgery…Fired by Steve Forbes Campaign in 2000.”  This was followed by two quotes from news articles, contemporary to the 2000 presidential primary race,  including links to those articles.  One simply states that Mr. Sinagra was working on the Steve Forbes campaign at the time.  The other is about then-Secretary of State Deb Markowitz(D)  questioning some of the signatures on the Forbes petitions.  No mention was made of Mr. Sinagra.

Out of curiosity, I followed those links to find that there was absolutely nothing beyond what was quoted.   I’m not inclined to do dirty work for anonymous tipsters, especially not at the behest of GOP anonymous tipsters.

Since the bumper of my car is heavily stickered with liberal and progressive banners, only a fool would be attempting to sway my personal vote in the Republican primary.  

No; it must be assumed that whoever leafleted my car expected me to raise a stink in writing about Mr. Sinagra’s past.   Somehow, this would presumably disqualify him for a weird subset of voters who both listen to what I say and are inclined to vote in Republican primaries!

I know, I know…that sounds pretty screwy; but what other conclusion are we to draw from this set of circumstances?  The message certainly wasn’t left there by some Democrat, any of whom might just pick up the phone and call me; and any of whom would have absolutely no interest in knocking a Republican out of the primary race.

I don’t know all that much about Mr. Sinagra, other than that he has been a lobbyist for the housing industry; but if I were him, I’d be checking my back for knife-wounds.

Politics in Franklin County can be ugly, but it sounds like the FCGOP has a particular problem on its hands.

  There is still plenty of need for improvement but how could such a thing happen in Vermont, a state often claimed to be one of the most unfriendly business states?  Vt. has one of lowest jobless rates in nation

“While the survey of Vermont households reported some economic weakness, we were still encouraged by Vermont businesses reporting increases in the employment numbers,” Labor Commissioner Annie Noonan said in a statement.   With the state adding 2,500 jobs in July, Noonan said that points to the “strength and diversity of the state's economy.”

The national unemployment rate for July was 8.3 and Vermont at 5 percent unemployment is the fifth lowest in the country. Here in New England the average is 7.1. Vermont’s 5 percent unemployment rate was up .3 of a percent point from the last report but is the lowest in New England. Rhode Island can be found at the top with 10.8 percent, Connecticut 8.5 percent Maine at 7.6 percent and New Hampshire  

These rates have to improve soon but the Vermont rate appears to be at odds with the doom and gloomsters (I am thinking Randy Brock and Bruce Lisman) suggestions that Vermont is an unfriendly state for businesses.

Oh,by the way big ol’ Texas, the state that is often at thetop of the most business friendly lists – their unemployment rate isup for the second consecutive month at 7.2 percent.  

It looks as if Entergy’s undoing may come as a result of a Michigan holding rather than the redoubtable Vermont Yankee.

Palisades Nuclear Power Plant in Michigan, under Entergy’s stewardship, had already achieved the dubious distinction of being named one of the four worst-performing nuclear plants by the NRC.  After limboing that particularly low-bar in the wake of pesky leaks and employee criticism of the safety culture at the plant, new questions concerning the fitness of the Palisades operation have been raised by the revelation that, during a recent visit to Palisades by then NRC Chairman Gregory Jackzo, he was kept in the dark about an ongoing leak issue

The integrity of the Palisades facility was questioned at the time it was under consideration by the NRC for license renewal. Despite protests of concern for the deteriorated condition of the reactor, the NRC (which has never refused to renew a license) granted the 20 year extension in 2007.  

Since then embrittlement has resulted in persistent leaks, one of which was apparently flooding the control room at the end of May, even as Chairman Jackzo was  visiting the facility.

While Jaczko was touring the plant on May 31st, according to the sources, a significant leak of potentially radioactive water was pouring into the control room. Less than two weeks later, the plant was shut down to repair the leak. Yet Jaczko was never made aware of the issue while inspecting the plant.

Then-chairman Jackzo asked for an investigation of why the leak situation had been kept from him but was thwarted by (Republican appointed) Commissioner William Ostendorff, who is now under investigation himself for possible misconduct.

Commissioner William Ostendorff, however, wanted no such investigation to take place. Shortly after Jaczko ordered it, Ostendorff shouted at the top agency investigator, Cheryl McCrary, in front of several NRC employees. He told her that the inquiry should be halted and that it was a “waste of agency resources,”

Soon after, Jackzo stepped down as chair amid a firestorm of political hostility within the Commission; which revealed just how crippled it has become with regard to its mission to regulate safe operation of nuclear facilities.

A witness to the encounter reported it to the Office of the Inspector General, which launched a probe into Ostendorff’s action. McCrary did not halt her own inquiry, the sources said, despite the pressure from Ostendorff.

Now, both the NRC and Entergy are under the gun for hushing news of the leak; and it’s every man for himself.  

When Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R) of Michigan, a champion in Congress of Entergy’s Palisades operation, asked Mr. Ostendorff for reassurance that safe operation of the plant could be relied upon, he received only tepid return:

“So is it your understanding and belief that Entergy and the owners, the operators of this facility, that they are taking all the right actions at this point?” Upton asked.

“I think the final determination of that, Congressman, remains to be seen,” Ostendorff said.

Congratulations are in order for Democrats, Jim Condos (Sec. of State), Doug Hoffer (for Auditor) and Cassandra Gekas (for Lt. Gov.) who have all been endorsed by the Vermont Progressive Party in their bids for elected office.  

They join Martha Abbott (for Governor), Don Schramm (for Treasurer), and Ed Stanak (for Att. General)…and of course, Bernie Sanders, on the Progressive’s roster of endorsements.

It is a measure of the respect and credibility earned by JIm Condos as Secretary of State, that he is the only currently serving statewide elected official in Vermont who has won the Progressives’ endorsement this year.

We liberals are supposed to favor social equity. We don’t like the rising level of income inequality between America’s rich and poor. It’s unjust, it causes suffering, and it hamstrings our economy by throwing supply and demand fundamentally out of whack.

But this week’s campaign finance reports, while generally bearing good tidings for liberals and bad news for conservatives, revealed a massive income gap between Democratic haves and have-nots. And to make the situation even worse, the haves are highly unlikely to need their massive (and growing) warchests, while there are a couple of estimable have-nots who could use a helping hand.

The known “have” is Governor Shumlin, who’s rolling in dough while his opponent Randy Brock is spending more than he takes in. The presumed “haves” are Bernie Sanders and Peter Welch; at last report, they had huge bankrolls and they face opponents who are unknown and unfunded.

The worthy “have-nots” are Doug Hoffer and Cassandra Gekas.  

Hoffer is an eminently qualified candidate for Auditor who has the backing of the Dems and the Progs. But he’s fallen behind Republican Vince Illuzzi in the money race. This should be a no-brainer for the Dems; Hoffer actually wants to be Auditor and would be a really good one (plus he had the guts to take on Tom Salmon in 2010, a thoroughly commendable effort), while Illuzzi settled on the Auditor’s race at the last minute, apparently seeing it as his best shot at a steady paycheck. Hoffer should be getting more support from Vermont’s liberal donor class.

With Gekas, I can understand the reluctance to donate. She’s a political unknown challenging the most popular Republican in the state, Lt-Gov Phil Scott. Still, she was apparently recruited by Shumlin or his people, and the Dems ought to get behind her in tangible ways. If they don’t, they will have urged a talented young person to go out on a limb, and then left her to fend for herself.

In a filing-day post, I jokingly suggested that Shumlin should let Gekas rummage around in his sofa cushions for loose change. But really, it doesn’t look like the Governor will need most of that big pile of cash. Nor will Sanders or Welch. So why not turn back a few checks, and tell your donors to support Hoffer and/or Gekas instead?

It’d provide a measure of social justice on the Democratic ticket, which we supposedly believe in. It’d make for a stronger ticket in November. And it’d make for a stronger Democratic government in the next biennium.

 

 have a lot of respect for the folks at VTDigger. Due to the changing finances of mass media, there’s a growing gap between the quantity of serious journalism in Vermont, and the need for such reporting. Digger is doing what it can to fill that gap.

However…

They’re not perfect. And earlier this week, they served up a little clunker entitled

Statewide reform of payroll system won’t deal with fraud

Which sounds like a big story. Due to the apparent fraudulence of a state trooper, questions are being asked about the checks and balances on the payroll system. And the state’s new payroll reform won’t deal with that? Sounds like a problem!

Except, well, it’s not.

The $8.2 million Enterprise Resource Planning project, which has been in the works for two years, will streamline the timesheet system for state workers, as well as upgrade the state’s overall human resources software.

But top state officials say the upgraded system won’t prevent fraud, in spite of concerns raised by a recent Vermont State Police overtime scandal.

Okay, wait wait. The project “has been in the works for two years,” and yet somehow it won’t solve a problem that just arose?

Does Governor Shumlin have a time machine? If not, how could a two-year-old program be expected to address a concern that just arose?  

The payroll upgrade was undertaken because the current system is antiquated and inefficient. The state needs a new one. But a new payroll system can’t be expected to prevent the kind of over-the-top cheating allegedly conducted by Jim Deeghan.

Jim Reardon, commissioner of the Department of Finance and Management, said no system “can be 100 percent foolproof.” He emphasized that primary responsibility for internal controls remains with supervisors, who review and approve timesheets.

As it should be. And if Deeghan did manage to pad his time sheets so outrageously, his supervisor should have noticed. (I do hope the supervisor comes in for his share of responsibility, should the charges against Deeghan hold up in court.)

The story meanders on from there, trying to make chicken salad out of this little pile of chickenshit. And failing.

I can think of two possible explanations for this exercise in journalistic fluffery, and neither are very appealing. First, when you have limited resources and you spend some of them pursuing a story, you’re under a lot of pressure to get a story. Second, there’s a strong temptation to find ways to capitalize on a current controversy that’s got everyone’s attention.

But really, there’s no story here, and no excuse for trying to create one out of whole cloth.  

SPAM I AM.

SPAM I AM.

 Not too long ago VtDigger had a great piece on Bruce Lisman, and now they report on a wee bit o’puffery about him in Fortune Magazine. Appropriately enough the piece is a feature called Second Acts and titled: A moneyman goes from Wall Street to Main Street. Though, Main and 501(c)(4) Street might be a more accurate address.

Fortune outlines Lisman’s early career his return to Vermont, the start of the (so-called) ‘Campaign for Vermont,’ and the ongoing ‘informational advertising’ campaign. While the piece quotes his constantly repeated desire for "common sense ideas" to improve the state's economy, it offers few new insights into his real goals. So it’s basically same-old, same-old stuff to anyone familiar with the Campaign for Vermont.

A couple of new items do surface though.  

First, he tells Fortune that he’s writing a book about his ‘listening tour’ that will focus on Vermont entrepreneurs. Second, he is having fun.

Man, is this fun, engaging with people who want to engage in debate or ask why one thing works and one doesn't. In the world to come, which seems pretty unpredictable, citizens need to help each other.

So in an unpredictable world citizens can count on the ‘Campaign for Vermont’ ads. It is all his money (apparently) and we’re glad he’s having fun … but other than $200,000 worth of ad buys that boosted the local media outlets’ bottom lines, where’s this going, Bruce?  

The article links to CNN’s assertion that Vermont is now one of the top ten most entrepreneurial states. So then, what does Burlington lawyer Barbara O’Connor quoted by Fortune have in mind when she suggests:

"hopeful Lisman's private-sector experience will make Vermont a place where new businesses are welcome."

The ‘Campaign for Vermont’  ads have been critical of the (Democratic) status quo on property taxes, energy policy and the state health care plan. Thus it is hardly surprising that

Fortune reports: Some Vermonters question the group's true purpose, and local press has portrayed Lisman as a fiscal conservative looking to take on the state's incumbent Democrats. But Lisman insists CFV is nonpolitical (though its structure is the same one used by Karl Rove and others) [sure quacks like a duck] and that he does not plan to run for office.

So what’s this Wall Street moneyman’s 501 (c)(4) duck up to? Or What are the moneyman and his duck running for? No one is letting on,but “Man this is fun” says Bruce.

(In the interest of providing voters the wherewithal to make a more informed choice among Democrats running for office in Vermont. Trust Randolph06, aka Mike Abadi, to put his finger on one of the hotter political pulses in the state. – promoted by NanuqFC)

So the Orange County Democratic State Senate race is getting so interesting that even Burlington based media is Seeing Orange. Tig Tillinghast is challenging incumbent Mark McDonald for the seat and he is making internet access a centerpiece of his campaign. Tig learned from his time on the Thetford Selectboard that state law hinders communities from funding their own solutions and he wants to remedy that.  

Tig begins by discussing his early role as an advertiser shaping an embryonic internet. He then describes bringing Watershed Publishing to Vermont when he migrated back. The need for decent internet service in Vermont became quite obvious quite quickly.

So Tig discovered “the Map of Doom” at the Department of Public Service, which carves up the state for internet providers, and once an area is claimed by an entity, that area is “protected from help.”  More specifically, ECFiber.Net recently found itself apparently snubbed by the Vermont Telecommunications Authority when the VTA assigned Orange County towns to Fairpoint. Incredibly, the State waived $6.6 million in penalties Fairpoint earned for poor service and told them they could spend that money claiming more towns. Poor service? Let’s help you expand!

One solution Tig offers is to update Act 79 to allow towns to have bonding authority to raise funds for internet service.

Internet service is obviously vital if Vermonters are going to be able to offer their products globally, and Tig has experience with that at fresh maple syrup. But this isn’t just an exercise in international e-commerce, he has recognized the non-virtual (actual) community that forms around the practice of sugaring and has tried to capture that in his writing.

And much of the rest of the interview focuses on “the vitality of the villages.” Functioning towns, that are not just bedroom communities, provide services, jobs, make it possible to age in place, and create shared identity. The oddness of the Orange County seat (hint: it doesn’t include Orange) rounds out our discussion of communities, virtual, actual, and political.

[Note: No endorsement implied. Just continuing the VTblogosphereTV tradition of showcasing the qualities of the guest.]