Community Bus from Bratt/Putney to Montpelier for Vermont Climate Action Day, Feb 3!

(I can’t make this (prior commitment) but it’s a good cause.  Thanks for posting! – promoted by JulieWaters)

Vermont Climate Action Day is Thursday, February 3, and we’ve got a bus for the ride to the Statehouse in Montpelier!

Our community bus will leave:

Brattleboro at 7.50 am (from the Elliot Street Cafe, which will open at 7.30 on Feb 3)

Putney at 8.10 am (from the Putney Food Co-op).

We should get to Montpelier in time for the rally at the Statehouse at 10 am, with music and speakers. We’ll meet up with friends and neighbors from around the state.

The bus will leave Montpelier by 4 pm, and we should be back in Putney and Brattleboro before or around 6 pm.

Email Paulina at celebrate350@gmail.com to reserve seats or if you have any questions. Suggested donation is $10-20/person (we’ve got some of the cost covered already, and any surplus will go toward a Transition Putney bus stop community art project).

Vermont has an incredible opportunity to help create a future built on what we care about (justice, equality, community, health, respect, hard work, open minds), not just tweaks to the status quo. Let’s keep demonstrating the civic engagement we need to make the whole so much more than the sum of its parts! If you’re interested, bring excitement (and food, if you want!) to share and…Get On The Bus! Let’s fill the bus and lift every voice!

Click here for the full schedule: http://on.fb.me/VermontClimate… (schedule copied below, in case the link doesn’t work).

***********************************************

Full schedule for Vermont Climate Action Day in Montpelier

Join Vermont’s Climate Champions as we build a powerful statewide movement for Climate Action. Our coalition – from grassroots activists to grasstops leaders – believes regaining and preserving a stable climate is the most important thing we can do to preserve healthy life on this planet, today and for all future generations. Vermont can be an important national climate leader, and 2011 is the year Vermont’s Climate Action movement gathers to support a powerful mandate for bold local solutions to our increasing climate-related challenges.

Vermont Climate Action Day, Thursday, February 3 Vermont Statehouse Room 11, 109 State St, Montpelier

8:30am – Registration opens

9:30am – Rep. Jason Lorber runs a mini-workshop on how to meet with our legislators.

10am – Rally with music, speakers, art, and a press conference.

Noon – Take your Representatives to lunch in the Statehouse Cafeteria.

1:30pm – Climate Community Schmooze and Strategy Session. Folks from all over the state get a chance to meet each other, share stories of their work, and strategize about how we create a diverse, effective, and unified movement.

Potential discussion topics include:

Statewide climate and peak oil response plan which matches the scale of the challenge

Vermont joining the United Nations Climate Neutral Network

Solutions that are equitable, universal, accountable, transparent and participative

Forming a climate change cabinet or agency to implement state plans

Environmental costs of fossil fuel use reflected in our economy

Stronger focus on developing funding sources for clean energy solutions

Higher priority to green jobs in state economic development programs

Bring your self, your art (Really! Bring your art to decorate the Statehouse!), your vision, your innovative ideas, your passion, and help make Vermont a shining beacon of hope and possibility.

*******************************************

Vermont Climate Action Day Press Release

Vermonters set to pack the Statehouse for Climate Action Day

on Thurs, Feb 3, 2011.  Vermont Statehouse, Room 11 9:30am-3:30pm

10 am rally with speakers, music and art calling for bold Climate Action solutions.

Numerous Legislative Representatives and Governor Shumlin are expected to

express support for strong state climate change solutions at this public forum.

A coalition of grassroots groups, nonprofits, and impassioned citizens will gather at the Statehouse in Montpelier on Thursday, February 3, 2011 in a collective call for bold and comprehensive statewide action on climate change.  

Conscious that Governor Shumlin intends to take on climate change as part of his legislative agenda, and wanting to ensure that the scale of the state’s response reflects the magnitude of the risks posed by escalating climatic instability, this event will serve as the first step in building a powerful statewide movement calling for immediate and sweeping state climate action.

Registration begins at 8:30am, and at 9:30, Representative Jason Lorber will lead a brief training on How To Meet With Your Legislator.  From 10-11, there will be a rally with speakers, music, and a surprise gift for Governor Shumlin, followed by a press conference.  At noon, participants are encouraged to take their legislators to lunch and share the climate-related work they’ve been doing in their communities.  At 1:30, the group reconvenes for an open strategy session around collectively building a long-term statewide climate action campaign.

Organizing supporter David Stember, a volunteer with 350.org, notes that “this coalition is uniting around a shared belief that regaining and preserving a naturally stable climate is the most important step we can take to sustain healthy life on this planet. And,” Stember adds, “the time is now to build up the effort to match the scale of the challenges and risks we face.”

Actor and Transition Town Charlotte member Kathryn Blume is also one of the event’s organizers, and will be serving as MC for the rally. “Vermont can be an important national model for visionary, effective climate action,” says Blume, “and a wide range of people recognize that fact. Which is why we’re so fortunate to have such a diverse cross section of leaders speaking at the rally.”  

Blume adds, “When you’ve got everyone from business leaders to health care professionals to musicians to high school students to organic farmers to State Legislators to Town Planners-all throwing their passion and commitment behind helping to make Vermont cleaner, greener, and more resilient, then you know you’ve got a bold and rising social movement on your hands.”

For more information on Vermont Climate Action Day, please visit www.vtclimateday.org.  

What Well Deserving Moniker Will Governor Shumlin Earn?

(This could be an entertaining discussion.  Have at it. – promoted by JulieWaters)

Thanks to the wry wit of Peter Freyne, former Governor Douglas‘ gifted moniker was Governor Scissorhands.

To my way of thinking, Governor Douglas had earned it as much for deeply cutting budgets as he might have done for his skill at cutting ribbons.

Speaking of deepening or rather impaling budget cuts, either view or read more on the subject, here (via WCAX News).

One is then left to only wonder however whether the moniker Governor Shumlin could eventually earn down the road someday will be that of Peter the Impaler?

State Of The Union

(for Smiley)

yes let us sacrifice once

again for the rich need

more human sacrifice

but I didn’t make this happen

you say as they haul you

away to cut off your balls

cut out your organs too so

the very rich will never

have to worry about dying

they will want our shit next

for us to collect it and wrap it

FedEx it off and pay the fee

then they will do it all again

more adventures in capitalism

tell us to eat our children

except for the newborn who

make for a very fancy feast

at the tables of glut and greed

and always there will be

a President to tell us about hope

while we are being disemboweled

ripped apart and sucked dry

by those so very very rich now

they do it only for amusement

and a lunatic or two or three

with tastes so bizarre and perverse

to give our sacrifice its meaning

Peter Buknatski

Montpelier, Vt.

Help Rebuild a Family Farm

(An action diary worth a look… – promoted by mataliandy)

This is a very short diary, but hopefully helpful.

On January 12th at 4:20 AM, Pete Johnson, of Pete’s Greens in Craftsbury, VT was awakened by a loud noise outside. Out the window he could see the CSA’s barn engulfed in flames. He called the fire department immediately, but the barn was a total loss by the time they arrived.

“The barn was the heart of the farm,” Pete posted on the CSA (Community Supported Agriculture) website.

More below the jump:

For those who don’t want to read the whole thing:


For a direct donation to the Farm, mail to:

Pete’s Greens 266 S. Craftsbury Rd, Craftsbury, VT 05826

To make an auction bid (auction info is below), to be paid by check, you’ll mail to:

Bid for the Barn, 769 w. Hill Rd, Warren VT 05674

In both cases, make checks payable to:

Pete’s Greens, with “Rebuild the barn fund” in the memo.

Pete’s matter-of-fact description of the massive loss somehow makes it all the more heartwrenching:



In the fire we lost all of our vegetable washing and processing equipment; our walk in coolers and freezers; all of our harvested crops; a tractor trailer freezer full of our chicken, beef and pork; some tractors and lots of miscellaneous tools and equipment that were stored inside.  We had been building a new addition to the barn and that too went up in the blaze.

Like so many farms, we were under-insured.  The crops and frozen meats valued at well over $250,000 were not insured at all.  The barn was insured at probably 2/3 of its value, the new addition we had been building was not insured at all yet.  We are guessing that we were insured for perhaps 50% of what was lost.

Pete’s Greens takes its commitment to community seriously:

Our farm participates in the Vermont Farm Share Program. This program subsidizes CSA shares for our neighbors who otherwise could not afford to join our CSA. Through the program, NOFA-VT will match each dollar that our CSA raises to offer reduced rates to income eligible individuals and families. If you are in need of financial assistance, please ask us about the Vermont Farm Share Program. You may be eligible for a partially subsidized share. To find out more about donating, visit our Farm Share page.

Salvation Farms organizes volunteer crews for salvaging surplus in our fields. They will gladly take good, but unmarketable storage crops in the off-season as well. They arrange for storage and distribution of these farm donations. Salvation Farms considers “Vermonters in need” to include those who are food insecure and/or nutritionally insecure. They distribute our produce to local emergency food sites, educational and care giving institutions, retirement communities, non-profits, and the Vermont Foodbank.

Rootswork and the Mad River Valley Localvore Project – We have worked with these two organizations to donate good, but otherwise unmarketable storage crops to local schools. They pick-up the produce, sort and distribute it to 5 Mad River Valley schools.

They even provide a page of recipes to make it easier for people who are learning to eat locally.

People who know Pete and Amy know them for their creativity, their friendliness, and their humility, which shows through at the end of the post:

We will not be delivering Good Eats shares in the next several weeks (we have no food).  Share members please stand by for an email from Amy about refunds or credits for future shares.

A group of local businesses and farm friends have now joined together to help Pete’s Greens rebuild. They’ve created an auction web site, featuring local Vermont items and services.

See http://www.bidforthebarn.org/ for information, or go straight to the catalog page to bid. There’s some great stuff there, and it’s for a terrific cause. If you can afford to help out, and want a chance to win something special in return, please take a look. If you can’t contribute, that’s OK, feel free to share the word – that will be help enough.

CLF Wins a Cleaner and Clearer Lake

The casual reader of today’s Free Press headline:

EPA scraps 2002 Lake Champlain Cleanup plan

might get the alarming impression that efforts to clean-up Lake Champlain are simply being abandoned.   Nothing could be further from the truth.  Federal regulations dictate that failure to clean-up the lake is not an option.

What this EPA ruling means is that the federal Agency is agreeing with the Conservation Law Foundation’s (CLF) long-standing arguments that the TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) for phosphorous adopted under “Clean and Clear,” a plan that was approved by the EPA in 2002, was built on faulty models that did not allow a margin of safety in its projections for phosphorus loading scenarios.  To put it simply, run-off control requirements for both farms and development were inadequate under “Clean and Clear,” and no significant progress in phosphorous reduction has therefore been made anywhere in Vermont since the plan was enacted eight years ago.  The EPA ruling means that a new plan must be developed using better models that take into account the numerous variables, such as the potential impact of climate change, that were overlooked in the inadequate Clean and Clear plan.

News of the EPA’s decision will inevitably be met with mixed reviews.  The new Secretary of the Agency of Natural Resources, Deb Markowitz, welcomed this decision as an opportunity to work with the Feds to craft a newer, more effective standard, so that the decline of Lake Champlain might finally be reversed.

Some developers and farmers will be less enthusiastic.  So will some willy-nilly local development boards, who see unlimited growth as the single overarching goal, regardless of the ability of infrastructure and the environment to absorb such growth.  These special interests have argued that, even though standards adopted under “Clean and Clear” have not succeeded in reducing phosphorous loading in the lake, levels have not increased proportionate to the new development that has occurred in the area since 2002.   Under the Douglas administration, this argument was accepted by the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR), and the Conservation Law Foundation was frequently vilified as a bunch of  troublemakers undermining the governor’s rapid-growth agenda. Missing from that agenda was adequate attention to sustainability issues.  

The EPA mandate was to significantly reduce phosphorous loading in the lake, not merely to prevent its increase.

Lake lovers can be glad that the new Markowitz-led ANR, under Governor Shumlin’s administration, is poised to restore the balance of sustainability in development decisions.

Despite all the inevitable grumbling from the farming and development sectors, a new and more effective plan for Lake Champlain cleanup will inevitably be crafted, most likely with the assistance of federal funding. Those who drag their feet may be left behind, and the economic rewards will go to those communities and entrepreneurial visionaries who respond most nimbly to the winds of change.

Governor Shumlin’s budget address

Hunh. Writing “Governor Shumlin” still feels pretty wild.

Here’s the text of the budget address as sent out to the media, complete with Willem Lange-style close (after the flip):

Governor’s Budget Address

January 25, 2011

Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, Mr. President Pro Tem, Members of the General Assembly, distinguished guests, fellow Vermonters:

Two weeks ago, we gathered here to commemorate a new day in our state’s long and rich history. In my inaugural address, I laid out my vision for Vermont – a bold and ambitious agenda for job growth whose success depends on our ability to work together to get big things done.

That was a day for Vermonters to challenge our own imagination for what we must make possible: a new and innovative economy, quality health care for all Vermonters in a cost restrained system, broadband and cell service to every corner of the state, and educational excellence for a new century of job creators.  

I stand here today to present a budget that is as sobering as it is necessary, matching state spending with our state revenues, in keeping with the long tradition of frugality and common sense that is the lifeblood of Vermonters. My budget puts Vermont on a solid and sustainable path to fiscal responsibility. Facing our fourth consecutive year of budget shortfalls, I am committed to making the painful choices today that will help ensure that we are not back here next year making drastic cuts. We must match the promises government makes with the capacity of Vermont taxpayers to support those promises.

To meet that responsibility, I am proposing to close a $176 million shortfall in the next fiscal year by imposing roughly $83 million in General Fund reductions, raising $36 million in additional federal funding through provider and managed care assessments, utilizing $27 million in unanticipated receipts and $30 million in Global Commitment carry forward and federal matching grants.

I would like to take a moment to acknowledge what our state has done to address projected budget shortfalls in the past three years.  Hundreds of state employee jobs have been eliminated, many agency and department budgets were reduced several times, state employees took a 3% pay cut for two years, and teacher retirement was recalibrated to save $15 million in this fiscal year.  Compared to other states, Vermont’s Governor and legislature responded quickly and wisely to crisis, and you should be commended for that response.

Some might be wondering why we have a $176 million problem rather than the $150 million shortfall that we have all heard about. Here’s why: if we were to continue to book all of the hoped-for “Challenges for Change” savings, the shortfall would be $150 million. While “Challenges for Change” was a well-intentioned initiative, we simply cannot budget $26 million in savings that may not likely be realized, and I won’t.

This budget also includes over $120 million in unavoidable increases resulting from statutory commitments to the Education, Unemployment, and Pension Funds, as well as rising human service caseloads resulting from the Great Recession. Even with these increases, when adjusted for temporary federal aid, the budget that I propose today represents a General Fund spending reduction of over $25 million from last year. This is the first time in a decade in which state spending is lower than the previous year.  

The top contributors to the $83 million in reductions are the following:

·        A $23 million ongoing reduction from the General Fund transfer to the Education Fund. This reduction, which I announced last month, will require continued spending restraint by our hardworking school boards and local communities to hold back property tax increases. The $19 million in one-time federal funding that I am releasing this year will give our local communities additional time to make further spending reductions, but they must be made.

·        $12 million in government labor, private contract, health insurance, and retirement savings.

·        $7.2 million in savings throughout the corrections system.

·        $5 million from folding the Catamount Health program into the Vermont Health Access program, otherwise known as VHAP, to create one single health care pool for Vermont.

·        $4.6 million in reduced funding for our regional mental health agencies.

My administration takes no pleasure in delivering this budget, and we will work in partnership with the mental health, health care, and human service community to ensure that vulnerable Vermonters are protected.

Critics will observe that some of the budget reductions that I put before you today are the same reductions that I worked with you to protect when proposed by the previous governor. They will rightfully ask, “What has changed?”  

My response is simple: what we face in this budget year is the reality that the hundreds of millions of stimulus funds that were allocated by the federal government to cushion the blow of the worst recession in American history are now gone.

We all knew that this day would come. It is now our responsibility to make difficult choices, and to find a balance between compassion for our most vulnerable citizens and the imperative to put our state on solid fiscal footing. I believe this budget achieves that balance.

In addition to reducing spending, my budget maximizes federal dollars available to our state. For over 20 years, Vermont has asked our hospitals and health care providers to cooperate in a partnership that has used ingenuity to utilize federal dollars to support health care services for Vermonters. My administration understands that in these difficult times, every dollar that we draw down from the federal government is a dollar saved for Vermont taxpayers.  

Therefore, I am expanding upon what is an imperfect but effective revenue stream. We do so first by applying the same assessment to health insurance companies and dentists that we have been applying to our hospitals and nursing homes. This will net 9.2 million new dollars for the General Fund.

Second, we increase the current assessment on hospitals and nursing homes, which will net $18.7 million.

Some recent good news about our revenues from fiscal year 2011 has helped our effort.  My budget utilizes $27 million in General Fund unanticipated revenues to bridge our shortfall.  

Some might ask why I am not utilizing the state’s rainy day fund. There are two simple answers: first, we must minimize the use of one-time money to meet ongoing financial commitments. Second, we must preserve the rainy day funds until we can project with confidence that we will be able to replenish that fund in the out years. My budget team cannot provide me with that assurance for fiscal years 2013 or 2014, and therefore we must not tap into those funds this year.

In light of the hundreds of millions of dollars in budget shortfalls that we have had to endure over the past few years, it should be abundantly clear that the current reserve of five percent of our state budget is not adequate to withstand tough times. I call upon the legislature to join me in raising our reserves to eight percent as soon as we return to better times.

Critics might also ask: why are we not raising taxes?  After all, Illinois recently raised its top income tax rate from three percent to five percent. But remember: Vermont is not Illinois, and our situation is vastly different. Our top income tax rate is not five percent; it is nearly nine percent. Our tax rates must remain competitive with other New England states to grow jobs.

Others might say, “Well, forget Illinois and remember Governor Snelling.” When facing a less severe shortfall, he temporarily raised income, sales, and rooms and meals taxes. But I would remind my friends that Governor Snelling was working in economic times less dire than our own and he started with income tax rates that were lower than our rates of today. The sales tax was four percent; today it is six percent. Our rooms and meals tax was seven percent; today it’s nine percent. The Snelling solution made sense then, but it would be counterproductive now.

****

As difficult as this budget is, our spending priorities also reflect my belief that the choices we make here will lead to extraordinary opportunities for all Vermonters. To achieve long-term budget discipline, we must be innovative and go where the money is.  

Health care is the largest area of growth in our state budget and we must bring it under control.  As taxpayers, we are the largest source of health care payments for our state, and we are paying twice as much in taxes today to keep Vermonters healthy than we were just a decade ago. That is yet another reason why it is so important that we pass a single payer health care plan that Dr. William Hsiao estimates will save Vermonters over $500 million in the first year alone.

We will work together to pass a bill that takes the first step in putting Vermont on a solid road to single payer health care, and we must do it before we adjourn this spring.

****

In addition to bringing health care costs under control, I am committed to replacing the State Hospital and treating our most vulnerable citizens with the dignity and respect they deserve.

To do that, I recommend first that we suspend current plans to build a 15-bed facility that cannot be expanded. Short-term planning will only lead to long-term problems.

Second, I have directed my administration to work diligently with our hospitals and the Brattleboro Retreat to finalize plans for partnerships and deliver to me within six months both the treatment and financial implications of those partnerships. This summer, my administration will determine whether any of the partnerships are clinically and financially prudent, and that date will represent a deadline for determining the number of beds that could be provided from such partnerships.

Third, my budget proposal next January will include a plan to build a state of the art new State Hospital to meet Vermonters’ needs for the next 50 years. We have waited long enough.

****

The second fastest area of growth in the state budget is corrections.  A decade ago we spent $71 million on our corrections system.  Today, we spend almost $131 million, an increase of nearly 100 percent.  On any given day, of the 2,100 prisoners that taxpayers are currently supporting, 180 are in prison because they have no other place to go. Sixty-nine percent of our female inmates and 45 percent of our male inmates are non-violent offenders.

What do we know about these non-violent offenders? Many of them have difficulty reading and writing, and most have drug and alcohol related addictions. When their time is up, a lack of adequate housing, adult basic education, drug and alcohol counseling, mental health services and job options leave them on our Main Streets with the same lack of skills and substance abuse challenges that led them into prison in the first place.  As a result, half of our non-violent offenders end up back in prison within three years, costing us an average of $45,000 a year per inmate.  

Therefore, we are proposing to move the women inmates from St. Albans to Chittenden Regional, and the men to St. Albans to maximize unused bed space and save money.  Since roughly one third of our incarcerated women are from Chittenden County this will help them transition back into their home communities. We will create a parent-child visiting space for these parents and their children. This will not only help mothers bond with their children, it will also help them learn better parenting skills for when their time is up and they are reunited with their families.  

By implementing these reforms, we will save $2 million. At the same time, I ask the Legislature to join me in investing $1 million in prevention and alternative justice in community based programs across Vermont to help keep non-violent offenders out of jail.

My Administration will also re-allocate an additional $300,000 to unlock the waiting lists for methadone treatment.

These choices represent the first steps in my administration’s war on recidivism.

****

There is a direct link between our non-violent offenders and early childhood education. Most primary school teachers can identify which of their students will run into problems later in life. The evidence is irrefutable: the years up to age five are a critical time for brain development. It should come as no surprise that one dollar spent on early education saves seven to sixteen dollars later in life. To give all of our children a bright future and bring long-term fiscal discipline to corrections, special education and human services spending, we must take bold preventative action.  

Today I am calling for expansion of the state’s pre-kindergarten program for ages three, four, and five, by lifting the cap on the number of students counted in Pre-K funding. Vermonters will be able to exercise local control and vote to spend money without the heavy hand of Montpelier preventing them from doing so.

When this cap is lifted, over time, if half of Vermont’s eligible children are enrolled in a Pre-K program – an optimistic goal – the cost to the state’s Education Fund would be about $14 million.

Let us make Vermont the national leader in early childhood education.  

****

We must also invest in workforce development. My budget proposes $4.8 million for fiscal 2012 to assist Vermont workers and employers with high quality job training.

As Vermonters grow older, we must keep more young people in our state in order to have a workforce to train. Ensuring that young Vermonters pursue post-secondary education is critical to our economic future. Vermont students and families have one of the highest education debt loads in the nation. I propose a sustainable higher education income tax credit that will enable Vermont students who stay here and work here to reduce their college debt.

****

Two weeks ago, I launched Connect VT, an ambitious plan to deliver broadband and cell service to every corner of Vermont. Vermont cannot succeed in creating jobs or competing in our global economy if we fail.

To get this essential project done, in addition to using federal funds and private investments, I propose spending $13 million from our two-year capital budget and fully utilizing the $40 million revenue bond capacity of the Vermont Telecommunications Authority. These investments will expedite the build out of fiber optics lines and wireless networks across our state, including the most rural areas that for economic reasons are least likely to attract private providers.

We will also need to address three regulatory areas that have the potential to hamper, if not derail, our progress. These are utility pole regulations for fiber and telecommunication attachments, consolidated land use and environmental permits for the placement of poles, and long-term telecommunication lease agreements to erect infrastructure on state land and buildings. It could cost as much as five times the cost per mile to string fiber on poles if the regulation for our utility companies and providers are not clarified from the start. Rapid build out could be delayed and millions of dollars could be wasted if we fail to act.

Shortly I will submit legislation to expedite these actions so that we can deliver broadband and cell service to every last mile by 2013.

****

A clean Lake Champlain is also critical to our quality of life and our attractiveness to tourists, anglers, boaters and birders who share our love of our lake. Although we protect our great lake with Quebec and New York, much of the water runs through our state, and its cleanliness is as crucial to our economic vitality as it is to our culture and our health. Lake Champlain provides drinking water for more than 200,000 people, while the state’s reputation for environmental quality and lake stewardship reflects upon all of us.

We must make faster progress in cleaning up the lake. I will work together with our Congressional delegation and President Obama to seek waivers that will enable us to place federal dollars in a central pool that would give our communities and farmers the flexibility to maximize our efforts and get results.

The time for talk is over; we must clean up Lake Champlain.

****

Increasing investments in energy efficiency is a top priority of my administration. Vermont spends over $1.5 billion a year on electricity and heating, and many of Vermonters’ hard-earned dollars go to oil-rich countries that will do just fine without us. To protect both our pocketbooks and our environment, we need to transition away from a dependence on fossil fuels and move toward more efficient, affordable, and cleaner renewable energy. Vermont can be a leader in the fight against climate change and at the same time save money and create good paying jobs that cannot be exported to China.

By investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy development in state buildings and lands, we will save taxpayer dollars. I have asked the Lieutenant Governor to work closely with the Commissioner of Building and General Services on this initiative and have allocated $3.5 million to help us achieve this goal. The budget also increases state support for our weatherization programs, investing $7 million for weatherizing low-income Vermonters’ homes.

However, we have much more to do in order to make Vermont the energy efficiency state. Our challenge is to give all Vermonters, not just those in the lower income brackets, incentives to make their homes and businesses more efficient. I ask you to stand with me in this legislative session to make this happen.

****

I am recommending a new approach to the Capital Budget this year by using an unprecedented two-year authorization of over $150 million. This two-year approach will enable us to accelerate important capital projects, borrow at historically low interest rates, take advantage of comparatively low construction costs, and put Vermonters to work.

****

My budget also includes full funding for the Vermont Housing and Conservation Trust Fund.  This will be the first time in many years that the Governor has included full funding for this extraordinarily successful partnership that creates affordable housing and conserves precious agricultural lands that help ensure a bright future for our farmers.  

****

Finally, my budget addresses the deteriorating condition of our roads, highways and bridges. We need to bring our transportation network into the 21st century, and to support this effort I am proposing to spend $106 million on improvements to more than 65 bridges and culverts, and preventive maintenance work on dozens of other structures.  Additionally, the Morrisville Truck Route will finally begin construction this year and work will continue on the Bennington Bypass.

Expanding passenger and freight rail in Vermont is also a top priority. My budget invests in rail upgrades to the western corridor, with the goal of returning passenger service from Bennington to Rutland to Burlington to Montreal as soon as possible.  These investments, coupled with improvements to our rail line on the eastern side of the state, bode well for Vermont’s rail future.

As some states reject federal money for high-speed rail, I am also committed to working in partnership with my colleagues in New England and the Premier of Quebec with a vision of a high-speed rail line from New York to Montreal, with a spur to Boston.

High speed rail is the transportation of our global future, and it is high time that Vermont gets on board.

****

Having been immersed in the difficult choices of the budget that I present today, I understand that my proposals may lack perfection and invite disagreement. The best Governor from Putney, George D. Aiken, in his first address to the joint assembly in 1937, said, “With some things I have said today, many of you will disagree. This is inevitable. But when we disagree on a subject and express our viewpoints openly, then we are in reality making progress.”

Aiken continued, “Let us forget our political differences, forget that we may not attend the same church, or that we belong to different occupational classes, but remember that we are all Vermonters working to promote the welfare and prosperity of the people of our state.”

In that spirit, let us make the hard decisions that this work requires of us, always mindful that balancing our budget gap is one step in our climb to a brighter economic future for the people that we serve.

Let us never lose sight that at this time of economic hardship, our best days are still ahead of us.

If we allow the need to put our fiscal house in order to divert us from our once in a lifetime opportunity to connect Vermont by 2013, begin to build a single payer health care system, reduce recidivism by giving hope and dignity to our non-violent offenders and use the dollars saved to help make Vermont the Education State, we fail those who put their faith in us to get tough things done.

By putting the state that we all love on a fiscally responsible path, we do more than just serve as responsible stewards for our children and grandchildren; we create opportunities to put Vermonters back to work, one job at a time.

Governor Aiken often said, “Nothing makes me happier than to see a Vermont family with a good job.”

With boldness and courage, we will make it happen today.

Let’s get back to work.

Thank you.

Foundations matter: Why Vermont Differs From New Hampshire

New Hampshire was a crown colony in which most power was held by the royal governor.  The legislature was weak – as it still is.  So the foundation is that of a government with authoritarian tendencies combined with a popular hatred of that government.  Plus ça change.

The New Hampshire Grants (that became VT) were on their own, were governed democratically (if you were a man) and the elected representatives of the towns created Vermont and its government first banning slavery.  I love the preamble, 1 paragraph about Britain, and pages about the nefarious Yorkers.  In short, the government is us.  It is telling that Ralph Flanders, who first attacked McCarthy, was very much a conservative of his times.  

At about the same time, an attempt to pass a Vermont Smith Act (basically banning the Communist Party) was laughed out of the legislature just as Louis Wyman, A-G of NH was on the warpath against so-called Communists etc.

Foundations matter.  (For another time, check out Pakistan & India.)

Vermont: Crazy enough to be the sanest state in the whole damned country

I just want to do a quick recap to mention how damned happy I am to live in Vermont.  

We’ve got legislation pending to end corporate personhood.  We’re finding our way to enacting universal health care.  We’re working to unionize early educators.  We’ve got solid Democratic majorities in both our state house and state legislature.  

We’re the first legislature in the country to enact same-sex marriage and make it stick, an we’re just nowhere near as crazy as New Hampshire.

So I just want to say, Vermont?  You’re Good Enough, You’re Smart Enough, and Doggone It, People Like You.

While Super-Rich Get Tax-Cut Extension, Middle Class Get Rude Surprise: A Tax Increase

Republicans Not Only Forced Obama and the Democrats to Extend Bush-Era Tax Cuts for the Super-Rich, They Also Blocked an Extension of Obama’s Little-Known 2009 ‘Making Work Pay’ Tax Credit for the Middle Class, Resulting in Smaller Paychecks Since the Start of the Year — and Continuing the   Mutation of GOP Into ‘Party of, By and For the Rich’ Since 2001

“HEY! WHY AM I TAKING HOME LESS MONEY?” — That’s the question that millions of middle-class Americans are asking as they’ve been confronted with suddenly smaller paychecks since the new year began. Despite the much-publicized extension of the Bush-era tax cuts, middle-class Americans saw their federal taxes go up anyway. The reason: The Republicans in Congress refused to allow an extension of President Obama’s little-publicized “Making Work Pay” tax credit for the middle class that Congress passed in 2009 — causing the credit to expire at the end of 2010. It’s the latest in a series of moves by Republicans dating back a decade to shift the tax burden away from the wealthy and toward the middle class. (Cartoon courtesy WordPress.com)

(Posted 5:30 a.m. EST Tuesday, January 25, 2011)

By SKEETER SANDERS

When President Obama signed into law the highly controversial extension of the Bush-era tax cuts, it was thought that a massive across-the-board tax increase had been averted.

For weeks after Republicans took control of the House and increased their numbers in the Senate in the November midterm elections, Obama and congressional Democrats insisted that the Bush tax-cut extension be applied only for low and middle-income taxpayers. But Republicans insisted that the extension be applied to all taxpayers, including the nation’s millionaires and billionaires.

Senate Republicans all but shut down the upper chamber, refusing to allow votes on any bills unless and until the Bush tax cuts were extended across the board.

Confronted with the GOP’s intransigence — and facing a massive tax increase at the start of the new year — the president and congressional Democrats agreed to the Bush tax-cut extension, despite fierce opposition by liberals, including an old-fashioned, “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington“-style filibuster by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont), that lasted for nine hours.

But if you thought that a massive tax increase had been averted, think again. Since the beginning of the new year, millions of middle-class Americans received a rude surprise when they opened their pay envelopes: Their taxes went up anyway.

REPUBLICANS KILL OBAMA TAX CREDIT FOR MIDDLE CLASS

And for that, you can thank a combination of Republican intransigence in Congress, the Obama administration and congressional Democrats’ lack of backbone and the mainstream media’s dereliction of duty to inform the public.

A little-publicized provision in President Obama’s much-publicized American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 — better known as the federal stimulus package — provided a two-year, $116 billion “Making Work Pay” payroll tax credit for middle-class taxpayers.

Single taxpayers earning $75,000 a year or less received a $400 tax credit. Couples earning a combined $150,000 a year or less received an $800 tax credit.

While Senate Republicans used their filibuster power to hold all legislation hostage until Obama and the Democrats agreed to an extension of the Bush tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, they adamantly refused to allow any extension of the Obama payroll tax credit for the middle class.

Neither the White House nor congressional Democrats — having been effectively whipsawed by the Republicans into extending the Bush tax cuts for the super-rich — were willing to put up a fight to retain the Obama middle-class tax credit.

As a result, the credit expired at the stroke of midnight on New Year’s Eve and the payroll (federal withholding) taxes of millions of middle-class Americans went back up to their 2008 levels, reducing their take-home pay. In many cases, take-home pay went down despite a reduction in middle-class Americans’ Social Security (FICA) taxes.

The death of the Obama middle-class tax credit is the latest in a decade-long series of moves made by Republicans that have resulted in a shifting of the federal tax burden away from the wealthy and toward the middle class, according to an analysis by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office compiled in 2004, when the Republicans controlled Congress — and the CBO was headed by a former Bush administration senior economist.

FEW MIDDLE-CLASS TAXPAYERS KNEW OBAMA TAX CREDIT EVEN EXISTED

In truth, there was no real effort by congressional Democrats to extended the “Making Work Pay” tax credit for middle-class Americans since last summer, when Obama proposed extending it.

Part of the problem was that the credit received very little publicity in the run-up to the passage of the stimulus package in February 2009 and the credit didn’t go into effect until after the tax-filing deadline the following April. Because of the lack of publicity, few taxpayers were aware that the credit even existed, in spite of the fact that it covered 75 percent of all taxpayers.

The lack of awareness of the “Making Work Pay” tax credit was made even more evident during the battle over extending the Bush tax cuts. Much was said and written in the mainstream media about the fight over extending the Bush tax cuts to the nation’s millionaires and billionaires. But there was almost nothing said or written in the mainstream media about extending the Obama tax credit to the middle class.

TAX INCREASE WILL DRIVE DOWN MIDDLE-CLASS CONSUMER SPENDING    

“The most curious aspect of the tax debate is the obsession with taxes at the high end,” said Chuck Marr, director of federal tax policy at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, in an interview last July with CNN. “But when almost every middle-  and lower-class American is going to face higher taxes, nobody’s talking about it.

“Most people may have no idea they received it [the Obama tax credit] and no idea that it’s going away,” said Marr. “But what you can be certain of is that they’ll have less money [in 2011] and they’ll spend less — and this is a terrible time for the economy to lose $60 billion of [consumer] spending.”

Consumer spending accounts for 70 percent of the U.S. economy. But if 75 percent of American consumers are middle class — and they get hit with higher taxes — they’re going to be forced to cut back on spending, exacerbating a sharp decline in spending by middle-class consumers already squeezed by high unemployment, which has remained stuck at over nine percent for more than a year and a half.

And that doesn’t include the estimated 2.6 million long-term jobless Americans who, out of frustration, have given up looking for work and are no longer counted in the jobless figures, according to the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics. When you factor in those “discouraged workers,” the jobless rate actually exceeds 11 percent, the worst since the record 25 percent jobless rate during the Great Depression.

CONSUMER SPENDING DID RISE LAST YEAR — BUT ONLY AMONG THE RICH    

Indeed, according to Bloomberg News, an increase in consumer spending in the latter half of 2010 has been almost entirely driven by the rich, with middle-class consumers continuing to hold back.

Sales at such luxury retailers as Tiffany’s and Coach Inc. rose as wealthy consumers — reaping a windfall from rising stock-market prices — snapped up expensive items such as $6,000 diamond pendants and $1,200 leather handbags, the financial-news service reported.

On the flip side, more middle-class consumers are flocking to discount retailers such as Walmart, Big Lots and Dollar General — and even to nonprofit thrift stores such as Goodwill, long a magnet for low-income shoppers — as more and more “everyday Americans” are forced to live from paycheck to paycheck, a Walmart spokesman said.

Meanwhile, the Census Bureau estimates the poverty threshold for 2010 was $22,314 for a family of four, up from $21,954 in 2009.

“It’s striking,” Dean Baker, co-director of the Washington-based Center for Economic and Policy Research, told Bloomberg News. “Most of the rest of the country is still suffering while the wealthy seem to be largely insulated. You would think they wouldn’t have all that much to complain about. Instead they’ve had unending criticism for the Obama administration.”

GOP MUTATES FROM ‘PARTY OF BIG BUSINESS’ TO ‘REVERSE ROBIN HOOD’

Incredible as it may seem, it was just a decade ago, as George W. Bush was sworn in as the nation’s 43rd president after a hotly contested election (that some still dispute to this day), when the federal government’s coffers were brimming with a record $236 billion surplus left by Bush’s predecessor, Bill Clinton — despite conservatives’ stubborn, revisionist attempts to deny its existence — whose presidency was marked by the greatest economic expansion in the nation’s history.

The Republican Party has had a reputation as the party of big business since the 1880s; under the presidency of Ulysses S. Grant, the GOP became known for its strong advocacy of commerce, industry, and veterans’ rights.  

That reputation solidified in the 1920s, as the GOP, running on a platform of non-involvement in foreign affairs and non-interference in private enterprise, kept control of the White House throughout the decade — until the Great Depression cost Herbert Hoover the presidency with the landslide election of Franklin D. Roosevelt that ushered in 20 years of Democratic control.

But under Bush, the Republicans mutated from being the party of big business into being a Robin Hood in reverse — the party of the rich, by the rich and for the rich, with its naked determination to preserve the wealth of the nation’s millionaires and billionaires — who make up only two percent of the nation’s population — at the expense of the middle class.

REAGAN CUT TAXES BY $275 BILLION — BUT LATER RAISED THEM BY $133 BILLION

In the process, the Republicans ran up staggering budget deficits under Bush that dwarfed the previous then-record red ink under Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. But when it comes to dealing with the federal deficit, there is a huge difference between Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

As Reagan himself said, in an attempt to quote John Adams in 1988, “Facts are stubborn things.” And there are several stubborn facts about Reagan and federal deficits that today’s Republicans have chosen to ignore, but, in Adams’ words, “they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”  

Reagan’s $275 billion in tax cuts of 1981-82 were made when the economy was mired then, as now, in a severe recession, which saw unemployment peak at 10.4 percent. But when the economy recovered in 1983-84, Reagan took back nearly $133 billion of those cuts by raising taxes in order to reduce the deficit — and he did it with the solid approval of his fellow Republicans who controlled both houses of Congress. That is a fact that today’s Republicans cannot sweep under the rug.

Not only did Reagan raise taxes to cut the deficit after the economy recovered from the early 1980s recession, he also vetoed scores of GOP-passed spending bills for the rest of his presidency, whereas Bush didn’t wield his veto stamp at all — until the Democrats took control of Congress in 2006. That, too, is a fact that today’s Republicans can deny all they want, but cannot erase.

GOP SEIZED BY WALL STREET ‘GREEDHEADS’ IN THE ’90S

So what happened to the Republican Party in the 20 years between Ronald Reagan’s election and George W. Bush’s? Simply put, it was taken over by a generation of unabashed “greedheads” — people who made their fortunes in the Wall Street boom of the ’90s and were likely influenced by the “Greed is Good” mantra of the fictional Wall Street trader Gordon Gekko (played by actor Michael Douglas) in the blockbuster motion picture “Wall Street.”  

As Bruce Bartlett — a former domestic policy adviser in the Reagan administration and a Treasury Department official under Bush — recently wrote on his blog, “It may come as a surprise to some people that once upon a time in the not-too-distant past Republicans actually cared enough about budget deficits that they thought raising taxes was necessary to bring them down. Today, Republicans believe that deficits are nothing more than something to ignore when they are in power and to bludgeon Democrats with when they are out of power.”

GOP ‘GREEDHEADS’ SET STAGE FOR ’08 FINANCIAL COLLAPSE

The greedheads in charge of the GOP made their mark in 1999 when they pushed through the repeal of a key provision of the Glass-Steagall Act, a Depression-era law that that prohibited a bank holding company from owning other financial companies.

Glass-Steagall put up a wall of separation between the highly speculative Wall Street investment banks and the more conservative Main Street consumer banks. Its repeal by the Republican-sponsored Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act — which former President Clinton now admits he should have vetoed instead of having signed it into law — set the stage for the creation and later collapse of the sub-prime mortgage market that led to the financial meltdown of 2008.

IT’S OBAMA VS. THE GREEDHEADS FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS

So, as President Obama prepares to deliver his State of the Union address tonight (Tuesday night) before a now-divided Congress — with Republicans controlling the House and Democrats with a weakened majority in the Senate — get ready for Phase II of a titanic struggle between Obama and the greedhead-dominated GOP.

And as conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote in a July op-ed column in The Washington Post, Republicans would be making a mistake by underestimating the president.

Aside from repealing the health-care reform law that House Republicans passed last week — despite knowing full well that the repeal measure will die in the Senate — the financial reform law passed last summer strikes at the heart of the greedheads’ world.

“It will give the government unprecedented power in the financial marketplace,” Krauthammer writes. “Its 2,300 pages will create at least 243 new regulations that will affect not only, as many assume, the big banks but just about everyone, including, as noted in one summary [The Wall Street Journal], “storefront check cashiers, city governments, small manufacturers, home buyers and credit bureaus.”  

Frankly, after the sub-prime disaster, the financial marketplace is long overdue for regulation. So, too, is an end to the fiscally irresponsible Bush tax cuts for the super-rich.

# # #

Copyright 2011, Skeeter Sanders. All rights reserved.

THE FIRST VERMONT PRESIDENTIAL STRAW POLL (for links to the candidates exploratory committees, refer to the diary on the right-hand column)!!! If the 2008 Vermont Democratic Presidential Primary were

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...