New DNC Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) made remarks today at the Netroots Nation gathering praising Howard Dean’s tenure as DNC Chairman.

“Over the past few years, we’ve maintained a strong democratic organization staffed in all 50 states thanks to the 50-state strategy put in place by Howard Dean,” Wasserman Schultz said. “And I can tell you that I am looking forward to sitting down with Chairman Dean next week so I can pick his brains clean on what he thinks that we should be doing to continue the fight to make sure that we can elect progressives all across the country.”

  I would bet Howard’s brain, if requested has been available for picking for the past two years or more. Better late than never but wonder if this isn’t an effort at getting all the ducks in a row. I understand there is an election coming up.    

Bob Kinzel had a very interesting story on VPR the other day about Vermont's tax revenues and how they have recovered since the depths of the recession.

We've known for some time that Vermont's tax revenues have come back from the lows of a couple of years ago, but Kinzel's story explains why that is, and where the money is coming from:

(Kinzel) Between 2007 and 2009, state income tax revenues declined by roughly $72 million. 70 percent of the decline or $50 million, came from Vermonters who make more than $300,000 a year largely due to a big decline in revenue from their capital gains.

Now that the stock market is higher, state revenues are benefiting from a resurgence of investment gains from people in Vermont's top three tax brackets.

What's interesting here is the observation made by Jack Hoffman from the Public Assets Institute: 

(Kinzel) Hoffman says the revenue figures show that wealthy people aren't leaving the state because of Vermont's progressive income tax system.

What we've been hearing from everyone, and especially Governor Peter Shumlin, is that Vermont can't afford to raise taxes on the super-rich because they'll just take their money and leave, go to Florida or someplace.

The experience, though, shows that this isn't the case. Looking at the 3,000 Vermonters at the very top of income distribution, people who have plenty of money, and the smarts and resources to vote with their feet if they are so inclined, and they are telling us with their actions that they value the benefits of living in Vermont so much that they're willing to pay Vermont's taxes even on significantly increasing income.

Maybe the rich Vermonters who have been saying the state should raise their taxes are the ones who have it right.

According to Dick Morris (who just took time from his  busy schedule to call me, personally) the nation is counting on me, as “one of the top conservatives in (my) area”.

He also bothered to note both Obama’s “socialist agenda” and his “liberalism” which is destroying America.  Of course, there’s where I started to get confused, as a) “socialism” is an entirely different political current than liberalism, and b) America is- and was founded as- a “liberal democracy”.  Sure, within a liberal democracy there is a long, long tradition of both conservative and progressive views, but my mistake might have been bothering to ponder such things, as it turns out Mr Morris is pushing a platform not dis-similar to what was, throughout the 1990’s, known generally as “neoliberalism”.  It’s all a bit confusing, even for a “top conservative” such as myself.

He also said a word or two about some new book of his that I should buy- which these guys always seem to do.

Either which way, I’m torn about whether I find these GOP push-polls that I get about once every 4-6 months entertaining and slightly informative (of their stances, not of any “truths”) or if I just find them extremely annoying.  I’m definitely very, very curious what I did that got me on their list, as almost all these calls identifies me as a “good conservative” or “active conservative” or some such.  Even when I’ve waited through the auto message and spoken to a real person (the way these polls are always set-up) and told the person on the other line under no uncertain terms that I’m either a socialist, communist, anarchist, libertarian-socialist, or (that one time) “so far to the left I’m sure you’d execute me personally if you had the chance”- they seem to insist on keeping me on their list.  That’s a well run organization, as far as I can tell.

Our political and economic leaders trading away Vermont’s future to war profiteers like Lockheed and Raytheon is unacceptable. Please join your neighbors in saying no to tying Vermont’s economy to unaccountable multinational corporations and war profiteering.

2:30-5:30 at Burlington International Airport

As Seven Days’ Ken Picard says “It’s starting to feel as though the Green Mountain State itself is a wholly-run subsidiary of the world’s largest defense contractor.”

Take a stand for Vermont!

Full Seven Days coverage:

http://7d.blogs.com/blurt/2011…

Invite your friends to the protest on Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/event…

Tom Matney, Lockheed’s senior manager for F-35 “major contracts” is coming to South Burlington for a Vermont Chamber open house. The event, scheduled for Wednesday, June 15, from 3 to 5:30 PM, at the Heritage Aviation Hanger at Burlington International Airport in South Burlington. It’s free and open to the public.

Along with Lockheed other war profiteers such as QinetiQ North America, Raytheon Company and Rockwell Collins will meet with Vermont Deputy Secretary of Commerce Patricia Moulton Powden, former Lt. Gov. Republican Brian Dubie, and Ted Brady of U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy’s staff.  

( – promoted by Jack McCullough)

I found this interview to be intense.  Charity Tensel exudes the kind of charged courage necessary when making major personal, political, and spiritual shifts. That she has made these changes in the public world of the blogosphere, where people tend to engage in identity reinforcing behaviors, gives a sense of the honesty you will find at Tenselblog and Shatter Nicely.

Charity left the comfort and certainty of Christianity as well as the popularity and notoriety of She’s Right. She did something all too rare in online discourse; she stopped and said “Wait a minute, maybe I am not right.” And she didn’t just momentarily think those heretical thoughts; she allowed herself to actively challenge the “all questions are answered” combination of conservative Christianity and right-wing ideology.  

I have had difficulty writing up this blurb to go with the interview. I am making a change in my life right now, losing a habit, and MAN is it difficult. Seeing just how automatic the mind works to bring one back to the known and the comfortable, discovering how seemingly separate areas of belief interact and reinforce each other, finding out just how much renegotiating of identity must happen; it’s real work. And that’s about as close as I can get to sharing about it, because I guess guardedness guarantees an illusion of control.

Charity has taken on much larger transformations, and has done so with candor and clarity. I don’t know how she does it and I’m biting my nails here just thinking about it. Oddly, the word “faith” comes to mind. When making identity-shaking change, there needs to be a faith that the losses one feels almost immediately will be replaced by better things in the long run. But that’s the rub; change is a proposition that tends to dole out its challenges on the front end and saves its rewards for the long term.  

I never knew that Charity began She’s Right as a public access TV show and migrated it to the blogosphere. Shortly after her interview with me, she coincidentally returned to public access TV to guest host a show on Channel 17. Amazingly, this full-circle return to her PEG roots resulted in more self-reflection and a decision to take a blogging break at Tenselblog, while she continues to post fresh at Shatter Nicely. Check out her latest post there on the connotations of the label “atheist.” Great stuff.  

The rhetoric of personal transformation generally has a formulaic New Age taint to it that makes it easy to scoff and cynically dismiss the notion. I think because Charity’s background is in the Christian Right, her conception of identity evolution has none of that flavor; she is incredibly direct, clear-eyed, and uncliched. She is perfectly suited for her next endeavor, helping others successfully make transitions as a personal coach. She just took her CharityTensel.com  site online, so think of her next time you look in the mirror and realize it’s time for a change.  

In an unusually heavy turnout for a special election, Montpelier voters came out to support the proposed bond for the district heating plan, 963-609.

The turnout was 1572, just a couple of hundred below the Town Meeting Day turnout this year. This is likely due to the high level of awareness and promotion by both the pros and the cons.

In light of the results it’s hard to say the last minute flurry of activism made much of a difference. These results are pretty much what we see for the city budgets every year: in Montpelier, voters support the proposed budgets.

Or to put it another way, the people who came out and voted no today are the people who vote no on everything.

Congratulations to Mayor Mary Hooper, city manager Bill Fraser, and the members of the city staff and council who worked so hard to make this happen.

The discussion of Montpelier’s district heating proposal has taken an ugly turn in the last few days, and it has nasty implications for politics in the capital city. Aside from the merits of the heating plan, we should all be concerned about what this means for city politics.

The issue relates to a proposed city bond to take the next steps toward creating a biomass district heating system for downtown Montpelier. The plan will provide energy from local, renewable resources to heat Montpelier’s capitol complex, two of Montpelier’s three public schools, and the City Hall and other municipal buildings. In addition, the plant will include hookups to enable downtown businesses to get locally generated heat for their buildings.

Economically, the plan is a no-brainer. Out of a total cost of approximately $20 million, Montpelier is proposing to contribute $2.75 million. The plant will include an upgrade of the boilers at the state’s electric plant that will increase energy output, reduce emissions, reduce oil usage, and will be able to use locally-collected waste wood.

Montpelier will be able to repay the loan and pay for all the fuel for the plant for what we’re paying right now for heat. If the plant is built it will provide heat at a price equivalent to about $3.00 a gallon. How long do you think you’ll be paying $3.00 for fuel oil? Hint: those times are gone already.

And, to top it off,this is an economic development project for the city. We keep hearing that Montpelier is not business-friendly, but the plant will have excess capacity to provide low-cost heat for downtown businesses.

So I think this is a good plan, and I hope any Montpelier voters reading this will get out tomorrow and vote for it, but I also want to talk about the uncharacteristically nasty way the opponents have tried to defeat the plan.

If you’ve driven around Montpelier in the last few days maybe you’ve seen the anonymous red and white lawn signs suggesting that our street paving needs are more important than the need for the district heating plan, as though there’s a tradeoff: buy the biomass plan or repave our streets.

The thing of it is, that’s just not true. Whether we build the district heating plant or not, Montpelier taxpayers will be paying over $300,000 in 2011 dollars for heat for the foreseeable future, and that cost can only go up as time passes. If we build the plant, we’ll have a guaranteed annual payment of that same $300,000 (actually between $305,000 and $331,000) for the next twenty years.

No tradeoff. We’re just taking what we’re now spending on fuel oil and buying a new heating plant and buying the fuel for it for the same price. We’re going to spend that money no matter what–voting no doesn’t free up a single dollar for street paving.

Then there are the robo-calls. All across Montpelier today, voters got robo-calls against the proposal. The calls were anonymous, with no attribution of the voice on the phone or who paid for it. Rumors around town were that the calls were from long time Montpelier Republican Jack Lindley, and when I talked to him he confirmed that he had made and paid for the calls. He did not dispute that the calls were without attribution.

So we’ve got the combination of an anonymous yard sign, an anonymous robo-call, and misleading messages from the opponents. It’s really not the way we do things in Montpelier, or at least not the way we ever used to do things.

We have a City Council election coming up next year and if this is the way things are starting out, it has the potential to be pretty ugly.

This is an open letter to Montpelier voters from Mayor Mary Hooper concerning tomorrow’s special election. I’m reprinting it with her permission.

Dear Friends,  

On Tuesday Montpelier voters will consider allowing the City to bond for $2.75 million for a district heating system.  A yes vote means the City will continue considering whether a district heating system for the city and the state, with the opportunity for some downtown properties to hook on, is in our best interest.  A no vote stops the process-it releases the state’s commitment of $7 million and the $8 million federal grant will be lost to the city.  

This is a complex and evolving project.  All of us have questions, which have to be answered before we make a commitment to building the district heating system.  There is a lot of information on the project on the city’s

web site:  http://www.montpelier-vt.org .  I’ll just recite three basic facts here:

1.) The project is designed to cost no more than the city is currently spending heating three municipal buildings and two school

buildings with oil.  In other words-the cost of bonding and the cost of heating with the new system will be the same or less than the City is

currently spending when it buys 100,000 gallons of oil a year.  

2.) The approximately $300,000 we project to spend heating the five buildings will not be available to spend in another way if the bond is not approved.  

3.) If this project does not work we will not move forward with it.

And I made a mistake in my op-ed piece in the paper when I said the bond would increase the bonding of the city by 1%–it is 10%.  A big difference. I stand by the statement that it does not endanger the city financially.  I apologize for that.

Can we afford to make this investment?  We have to heat our buildings; do we believe that oil will stay below $3.05 a gallon, adjusted for inflation, over the next 20 years?  Or should we make an investment in our community to move to wood?  I think the question is can we afford not to pursue this investment?

As always, please be in touch if you have questions or concerns.

Mary

Mary S. Hooper

Geez, it sure is quiet around here.

While I try to reboot my life at the tail end of an insane little league season, and try again to prep the text of my interview with Speaker Smith, here’s something to hold y’all over via the user comments at The Hill. From allllll the way back in March. Clearly it didn’t make the intended splash:

The Republican Party, the NRC,

AND ALL REPUBLICANS should be aware that “Governor” Peter Shumlin of Vermont, a Democrat, allegedly is a “fraud”.

THERE ARE EVIL FORCES ALLEGEDLY AMONST THE DEMOCRATS! THESE EVIL FORCES INVADE EVERY ASPECT OF GOVERNMENT, AND MUST BE ROOTED OUT!

Thousands of votes were allegedly stolen from candidate Cris Ericson, which you can see by the difference in the unofficial election results collected, and then the official results released to the news media.

“Governor” Peter Shumlin took a sudden and unexplained vacation outside of the mainland USA recently and that could have been, allegedly, to pay off the hacker who changed the votes

And no, I haven’t looked into this. Knock yerselves out. I’m gonna go look for the EVIL forces. That sounds like much more fun.

(The more information that is peeled away, the more the story unfolds and unfolds and unfolds. – promoted by Caoimhin Laochdha)

Hot Particles From Japan to Seattle Virtually Undetectable when Inhaled or Swallowed from Fairewinds Associates on Vimeo.

Original estimates of xenon and krypton releases remain the same, but a TEPCO recalculation shows dramatic increases in the release of hot particles.  This confirms the results of air filter monitoring by independent scientists.  Fairewinds’ Arnie Gundersen explains how hot particles may react in mammals while escaping traditional detection.  Reports of a metallic taste in the mouth, such as those now being reported in Japan and on the west coast, are a telltale sign of radiation exposure

.

In this update to his appearance on CNN with John King last week, which involves the same story & includes similiar information, Arnie Gundersen, chief engineer at Fairewinds Associates, analyzes the recalculation by TEPCO involving the increased amount of radiological releases. He also carefully sxplains the difference between the types of radioctive releases & the significance of each.

CNN’s John King interviews Arnie Gundersen about the Hot Particles discovered in Japan and the US

CNN’s John King interviews Arnie Gundersen about the Hot Particles discovered in Japan and the US. from Fairewinds Associates on Vimeo.

CNN’s John King and Arnie Gundersen discuss “hot particles” detected in Seattle and Japan, the cozy relationship between Japanese regulator NISA (Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency) and plant owner TEPCO, and changes at the Fukushima accident site since March.  John King and Arnie Gundersen also discuss how TEPCO’s acknowledgement today of another error in calculating radiation dose more than doubles the amount of radioactivity to which people in the Northern Hemisphere have been exposed.

-Arnie Gundersen

On CNN with John King, Arnie Gundersen responds to the news that an error in calculation doubles the dose of radiation recieved in the Northern Hemisphere, as well as the confirmation that reactors 1-3 suffered meltdowns, which should have been obvious to anyone following the story.

The assessment is grim to say the very least.

The discovery & presence of “hot particles”, extremely troubling, its import & significance disturbing, especially for those on the West Coast. That this cannot be measured using conventional devices makes it a serious threat. What’s to say that as the contamination spreads, everyone in its path doesn’t eventually share the same risk, to say nothing of the Japanese people, and more importantly the workers.

Oh, and it’s far from over, and until the fuel pools stop boiling & releasing the radioactive contamination it will continue – Arnie estimates

From Huffington Post:

Japan Earthquake 2011: Government Doubles Estimate On Leaked Fukushima Radiation

[emphasis]

“As the disaster approaches its third month, political wrangling, devastation in other areas caused by the tsunami and earthquake[..]with no end to the problems in sight”.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…