So the election was an interesting diversion, and I don’t want to diminish the importance of it but we still have a lot of the same players at hand, even if the board is in flux.

I was going to take a break for the rest of the week, but, oh well.  Here goes:

It was no real surprised today when I saw a headline which read VY plant’s closure likely to affect grid.

Well, sure.  Any time you remove or add a power source, it will affect the power grid.  The article notes that:

The computer simulated assessment from the Independent System Operator (ISO) New England reports Vermont and New York could face overloads — defined as more electricity flowing through the system’s equipment than it can handle, which could lead to the lines heating up, sagging, possibly melting and eventually shutting down — in the system if the nuclear facility goes out of service once its license expires in roughly 17 months.

That sounds like a problem.  It’s not irrelevant, but it’s not exactly unexpected.  The article itself, somewhat down the page a bit also notes that:

Chris Dutton, CEO of Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc. (VELCO), said problems within the state would likely revolve around low voltage issues — such problems are likely resolvable with minor equipment modifications in different substations.

[…]

However, simulated findings showed potential deficiencies were expected to rise under certain conditions in 2018 absent improvements to the grid, which were similar with or without Yankee in operation.

In other words, these are issues we need to resolve regardless of whether or not the plant continues operation.

And these modifications that need to be made?  Did anyone involved in the state’s electric grid start planning to make these modifications once it was, you know, enacted in law that Vermont Yankee would not be relicensed?

The pace this week has been exhausting.  I attended the Biden/Shumlin rally and met Vice President Biden.  I worked the phones, email, and stood at the polls campaigning, and stayed at the post election count until the wee hours of the morning.  And then when my candidate Peter Shumlin was announced as Vermont’s new governor, I went to the rally to acknowledge his success.

In the midst of all this effort, DPS Commissioner David O’Brien announced that Vermont Yankee is officially for sale.  AP’s Dave Gram broke the story that Entergy had been denying on and off for months.  After which I spent the past two days mediating in small claims court.  If you think traffic court with Judge Rita Villa is interesting, you should come observe her in small claims court.  Judge Villa is brilliant, insightful, compassionate, and most of all knows the law inside out.  See tickets please in Seven Days.

It’s Friday night, I just got home from an art show, ate a late supper, and decided to check email and the blogs.

Lo and behold Fake Rob sends out his prayer about VY for sale on eBay, read it here. A great laugh before bed.  It’s hard to tell what is truth and what is fiction any more these days.

After spending $160 million of her own fortune on a losing campaign to be the governor of California, former eBay executive Meg Whitman is hard pressed for money, and has agreed to work for commission in her attempt to sell Vermont Yankee on eBay.

In 2010 nationally, self-described “conservatives” made up the highest percentage of the vote since 1984. The electorate was 4% more white than in ’08, 7% less “young” (18-29 year olds), and less “liberal” (by 2%), less “moderate” (by 5%).

We can talk about enthusiasm gaps or whatever, but there is an undeniable fact, whatever the reason: nationally, the 2010 electorate was a different electorate that 2008’s. This was not the same “America” changing its mind, this was a different group of people directing our democracy.

Why didn’t the previous Obama voters show up? You can analyze the particulars all you want, but logic gives us two options: they were unable to vote or they were unwilling to vote. Reason rules out the former.

Everyone saw this coming, as well, hence the aformentioned “enthusiasm gap” narrative. What did the Obama crowd do to get those people who had been their supporters in ’08 but sounded disinclined to rouse themselves to vote in ’10? Pretty much they derided them. Chastised them. Sometimes insulted them.

See how well that worked?

Much is made of Obama and his moderate supporters being “pragmatic,” but there is nothing pragmatic about facing the intractable dynamics of social psychology and thinking that intellectually lazy petulance is an effective way to deal with it. Whatever the combination of communication and actual policy action that was needed to bring the ’08 America back the polls was, it’s clear that a strategy of whining-only was going to be a failure, and the easy acquiescence to the President’s desire to whine is the opposite of pragmatism. It is, as any parent can attest, lazy self-indulgence, and it never gets you what you want. Maybe it did in Rahm Emanuel’s and Robert Gibbs’s houses growing up, but one of the things we liked about this President was that he was supposed to be smart.

The root of the national Democratic meltdown was an easy, arrogant laziness. The “captive constituency” thing. The left will always turn out to vote because they’re not as smart as we are, and besides – who else are they going to vote for?

The lesson here is that it’s not just about who else they’ll vote for, it’s also about who they won’t bother to vote for, whether that’s the way any pundit, politician or supporter thinks they should have behaved or not. This isn’t about how someone or other thinks human groups should behave – it’s about how they do behave.

With an outgoing Republican administration and the resultant fired up liberal base, Peter Shumlin did not have Obama’s problem. He may not have that problem in 2012 either, since it’s likely that the ’08 America will re-engage for the next Presidential election.

But that isn’t necessarily a guarantee in Vermont, which everyone assumes will go for Obama regardless of what he does. There is real potential for apathy there and a Vermont version of the ’10 midterms – in which Peter Shumlin will be on the ballot.

Also, Shumlin’s base isn’t going to give him as much leeway as Obama received. That’s because, now that the drive and focus of the general election is wearing down, lots of those voters are remembering “Challenges for Change,” and are concerned that now Governor Shumlin, along with Speaker Smith and likely Senate Leader John Campbell could feel empowered to deliver unto us some sort of Challenges-for-Change-on-steroids, given the new environment. SHumlin will inevitably do that reachy-outy thing and appoint a bunch of conservatives – even Republicans – to positions in his administration. Lefties in Vermont will be looking closely to see that they are just as well represented in the true positions of power in this administration.

It’s one thing to have the Governor’s office door opened for progressives, it’s another thing whether there’s a seat for you at the table inside, or if you’re just expected to stand around hoping someone will notice that your there. It’s a difference liberals won’t be able to be duped about.

Running and winning elections is about controlling the variables. Shumlin’s progressive base is one of those variables. Obama has showed us the wrong way to control that variable. The right way is obvious: be responsive and respectful of the base, and come through on promises (or at least make honest attmpts to meet those promises). That’s not always easy. It’d be easier to kick back and take the left for granted – deal with them when you feel like you absolutely have to.

Stepping outside what someone like Shumlin may like reality to be isn’t the easy way to do things, but as history has shown, it can be the pragmatic way.

And we like pragmatism on the left.

(Just couldn’t control myself.  Every so often, I feel ashamed to be a White Radical when regular folks out there are taking more and more shit.  No offense, Michael–this is aimed at ME, not you.  A band-aid for my bleeding heart  Oh…and some Real Lefties even told me about them voting for Nixon in protest.  Shit.  This version is for you, Cutie-Pie.  My favorite Jewish Princess.)

 Snotnoses Of The Pure White Left

  (The ‘Blame The Jews’ version)

in 1968 I voted for Nixon in protest

since then I’ve had a very busy busy time

what with all the wars and injustice

to juice up a White Lefty’s heart

Reagan and Bush and Clinton and Bush

and of course godamn Israel Israel Israel!

boy  it’s been better than the sixties

if you read my latest very very long essay

online at privilegedanarchistintellectual.com

you will note how with academic incisiveness

I have defined the question of Israel and good and evil

and right and wrong and left and right and stupid and ugly

as relative to the ongoing struggles of peoples

exploited by the corruption of the new neo-liberalism

please also note how I quote Marx and Mao

to back up my thesis that this corruption

is also grounded in the idea of art for art’s sake

and enabled by an International Zionist Movement

funded by Israel with American tax dollars of course

that seeks to rule the world because a long time ago

some poor suffering Germans felt compelled

to vote for Hitler in protest

go figure

I am so pleased that the Democratic Party

was totally wiped out this past election day

now the masses of people out there will feel

the full fury of a corporatized conspiracy

of Jewish liberal do-gooders who hide behind poetry

while working for an establishment power structure

that seeks to deprive the people of their right to be angry

you may think that it is selfish or self-serving of me

to draw on the parameters of oppression and death

in making my case for pure revolutionary thought

if you think that

you’re a liberal fuck

and a raving Fascist Zionist

I will continue my battle against all who conform

to an ideology based on the triage of quick liberal fixes

I am now working on my masterpiece online essay:

“When They Start Lynching People, I Want To Be There!”

thank you for reading my works and for the many times

we have spent talking to ourselves about Israel

and the correct political positions we must all take

to make our revolution a truly erotic experience

I can’t wait for 2012 and my chance to vote for Palin

in protest of course

Peter Buknatski

Montpelier, Vt.

(Yeah, gibberish.  Decades ago, a rich bastard once said this to me:  “Deprive the people of what makes them angry, and you do them a disservice.”  Sonofabitch!  IDEAS ARE NOT SACRED!  PEOPLE ARE SACRED!!!)

It’s a different world than when we started this project. Whereas it’d be goofy to take all the credit, it would be equally goofy to suggest this community had nothing to do with it. Consider:

• The Douglas/Dubie era is over. We have a Democratic Governor.
• We have firmly established Democratic supermajorities (or at least, non-Republican supermajorities) in both the House and Senate
• We have Progressive Party stalwarts – even Anthony Pollina himself – engaging in the Democratic Party primary process in order to further their agenda – and they are meeting with unqualified success.
• We have a political press corps whose culture is, despite some holdouts, not beholden to what Jim Douglas spoonfed them over the last couple years, as was the case in the Graff era.
• We have seen a decentralization of the Democratic Party Power structure, including dramatically increased levels of transparency and accountabilty, all of which led to a robust, fair primary and – ultimately – victory (okay, we’re gonna have to take a LOT of credit for this one)
• We’ve seen election process reform in the shifting of the primary date and a “sore loser” law.
• We’ve made the Vermont netroots into an institution that provides the trifecta for good candidates as of this year: media coverage, volunteers/activism, and now even contributions.
• We’ve managed to play a key role in defeating some Democrats who were more Republican than most Republicans, and we’ve also help the advancement of some great new faces (such as blogger Philip Baruth).
• Did I mention we have a Democratic Governor? One that has stood up to corporate power (Entergy), stood up for civil rights (marriage equality), and who even stepped out and called for the impeachment of George W. Bush? So much for the fiction that progressive policies are election losers.

A big part of what we’ve done at GMD to make this possible is to create and develop this site as a direct feed for regular, rank and file lefties into the twin arteries of political power: the lawmakers and policy-makers themselves, and the professional media. They all visit this site and what they read has an effect. All of you diarists and commentaters matter, perhaps more than you even realize.

So, in a sense, GMD “Phase 1” could be considered over. A lot of what we set out wanting to change has changed. But the mantra of the blogosphere has always been “more and better Dems,” and it seems appropriate to double up on the “better” part of the equation.

Party is a means to an end, not an end in itself. A more just, ethical and functional state has always been the end – and it will always be a moving target. GMD has never been, as the grousers insist, some kind of partisan mouthpiece. On the contrary, in building the size and influence of the netroots community, we have managed to annoy those in power who consider themselves Democrats far more than we’ve annoyed anyone else – and that’s because we don’t let up, and we don’t expect our leaders to either.

So: in the brave new world, expect GMD Phase 2 to be bigger, louder – and more effective than ever. This is a no-captive-constituency zone. Tomorrow I’ll put up a diary taking that concern head on in the hopes that the new Shumlin administration and newly empowered Democratic majorities will learn to avoid the mistakes the national Democrats made going into the recent election.

Hopefully that’s a lesson that our leaders won’t have to learn the hard way, but if it comes down to it, we’re pretty practiced at the whole “tough love” thing.

Peter Shumlin is the latest reason why I love Vermont. Why is Vermont special. If slavery is the US’ original sin, then Vermont was born without original sin, yeah, it’s called the immaculate conception. We’ve had our share of bigots, crooks and deadbeats, but we’ve had so many in a great long line that begins with Ethan Allen (in all his imperfections) to Matthew Lyon to Justin Morrill to George Aiken to Ralph Flanders to Consuelo Bailey to Phil Hoff to Bob Stafford to Richard Snelling to Madeline Kunin to Howard Dean and FINALLY PETER SHUMLIN.

For this Vermonter, real conservatism means carrying on the traditions of the only legitimate child of The Enlightenment.

I originally wrote this for Daily Kos, intended for a non-Vermont audience, so there’s a lot in here I’ve written about before, but it’s all worth saying again.

This piece stems from a comment that set me on edge this morning– I talked about Vermont maintaining its Democratic control of both houses and regaining control of the Governor’s office and was told that Vermont was lucky.  Here’s what I wrote:

Not Lucky.

We worked our assess off for this on multiple levels.  This was one of the most engaged and active races we’ve seen here since Dean’s last election to Governor here.

Elections aren’t about luck.  They’re about extremely difficult, scrappy work and careful planning.  We have tea party groups here, but they don’t have power, not because we are more left wing than the rest of the country (we are not) but because our left wing is extremely active, engaged and inspired.  

The original commenter apologized for the comment, which I respect.  This piece isn’t about that or meant as a rebuke.  It just got me thinking and I feel as though the broader issue of what it takes to build movements and foster change is worth discussing.

Political change doesn’t generally come from luck.  It comes from years, sometimes decades, of work.  Nor does this work guarantee victory.  It just makes you more likely to win.   A lot of people all over the country worked ridiculously hard in this election and lost, big time.  It’s brutal, painful and can just wreck your day, if not your whole damned year.  I once worked on a union drive for two years, that our opposition managed to dismantle with $30,000 of taxpayer money and two months.  It was devastating.  Sometimes no matter how much work you put in, you lose.  But not always.  And that’s what makes the work worth it.

So let me tell you a story:

Ten years ago, we enacted Civil Unions here and the aftermath was horrendous.  Howard Dean came incredibly close to losing his seat.  The State House changed hands, moving into Republican control.  

In two years, all that was reversed.  Dean stepped down to get ready for his presidential run and we ended up with a Republican nightmare in the Governor’s seat while Democrats regained majorities in the State House.  Since then, the Vermont Freedom to Mary Task Force has been incredibly active.  Nine years later, in a state in which civil unions were a source of bitter, divisive controversy, not only did the legislature upgrade civil unions to full marriage equality, but they had rebuilt majorities to the point where they managed to override a veto by our conservative governor.

This wasn’t something that just happened by luck or circumstance.  Things changed.  The Freedom to Marry Task force engaged candidates and worked to keep them in office while doing broader educational issues.  (Full disclosure: I did some temp work for them a few years back).  They built a movement to push civil unions to the next level.

In the meantime, anti-gay rights groups were losing steam, not because they were unwilling to work, but because they had nothing left.  They were wrong because they predicted dire consequences that never came to light.  

When marriage equality was passed, they targeted candidates for defeat, focusing on primary challenges to Republicans.  They failed.  The vast majority (over 90%) of candidates who supported marriage equality won re-election and Peter Shumlin, the man who sponsored the legislation and worked his ass off to make it law, just got elected Governor of Vermont.

This didn’t happen by luck.  This happened because the Freedom to Marry Task Force put an immense amount of effort into supporting the Shumlin campaign and the campaigns of those who supported marriage equality.

Similarly, groups such as UPV/AFT‘s Early Childhood Educators United’s (again, disclosure: I have multiple ties with this organization, both professional and personal) Kids Count on Me campaign did work supporting candidates at multiple levels.  They met with politicians, understood their positions and promoted the candidacies of those who supported their goals.

Movements happen because of sweat and tears.  They happen when we work for them.  We write.  We talk.  We walk.  We knock.  We communicate.  We call.  We do.

We are not lucky.

We are active.

We know the numbers here.  Republicans are not more popular than Democrats.  But they did better in many races in terms of turnout.  A lot of them voted.  Not as many of us did.  

We won in Vermont, because we were active, interested and engaged.  We had a five way primary which brought diverse candidates together to do honorable battle with one another.  The one with the highest negatives won, despite those negatives, and yet still we took the day, because we, and they, worked so very hard to do the right thing and to build the future we need to thrive as a state.  Most of the people who voted for Peter Shumlin were not in love with him.  But they could see the lay of the land and know that having him in office was so much better than the alternative.  He received 25% of the vote in the primary, but all four of his opponents worked to see him elected.  Not hoped.  Not wished.  Worked.

Just as I was writing this, I got this note from Peter Shumlin’s campaign, and he says exactly what I’m trying to say:

This victory is your victory and I thank you from the bottom of my heart. This was the best get-out-the-vote effort ever executed in the state of Vermont. We won, in part, because of the many volunteers and dedicated organizers that assisted them in reaching out to neighbors, knocking on doors, making those phone calls and emailing friends. The hard work that you put in over the course of these many months convinced Vermonters that we had the best plan for the future of our state.

We’ve got a new governor.

We earned it.

Entergy is actively peddling Vermont Yankee. The rumors Vermont Public Service Commissioner David O’Brien mentioned last week have proven to be true. According to reports Entergy will make an announcement this week. Officials at VY didn’t respond but David O’Brien, continuing his policy of active public commentary on Vermont Yankee, offered up his assessment of the value of the aging plant. David O’Brien is proving Entergy Louisiana’s most active broker real estate agent or simply a nuclear used car salesman.    

He stresses the NRC’s rating of the plant though he never mentions the condition of the plant.  At the same time he fails to mention why this sale is in the interest of the people of Vermont and turns a blind eye to leaking under ground pipes, a tritium plume and the dangerously under funded decommissioning fund that may leave taxpayer footing the bill.

What environmental concern does Commissioner David O’Brien see as the largest hurdle to the sale of Vermont Yankee? He notes only one environmental problem surrounding the sale.  

He said its biggest liability is the political environment in a state with a powerful anti-nuclear movement and where the incoming governor and key legislators are longtime critics of it.

"Certainly the political environment that's developed in recent years in Vermont is a cause for concern for any potential bidder," O'Brien said. "That's real. That I would say is the largest hurdle" to a sale.

Back in August, I pointed out that attempts to primary Republicans who supported same sex marriage had fallen flat, noting that:

You had your grace period.  We gave Vermont time to get comfortable with same sex couples receiving some state recognition.  That time is over.  No one cares.  Everyone’s moved on.  There are more important things for us all to deal with than whether or not some lesbian couple in the Northeast Kingdom needs your permission before they can marry.

Just to drive the point home, I would like to quote Vermont First:

Based on preliminary and unofficial election results, it looks like 86 of the 89 House members who voted to override Governor Douglas’s veto of the marriage equality bill were re-elected to their seats…  On the Senate side, 18 of the 19 Senators who voted for the bill (and not against the override) were re-elected — or 95%.  

You’ve lost the battles.  

You’ve lost the war.

Learn a lesson from Brian Dubie: be gracious in defeat.

In case there’s any question as to who’s on the right side here.  You have this guy:

We have George Takei:

A wash in the House, where some solid new talent, as well as some repeat candidates found success…

Pick-ups:

Sarah Buxton (WSR-ORA-1)

Sam Young (ORL-CAL-1)

John Bartholomew (WSR-4)

Kevin Christie (WSR-6-1)

Brian Campion (BEN-2-1)

But some seats were lost as well, either by incumbents, or in the case of Addison-5, a new candidate aiming to keep an open seat in Dem hands…

Losses:

Jeff Young (FRA-3)

Megan Smith (RUT-WSR-1)

Erin Bessy (CHI-7-1)

Spence Putnam (ADD-5)

John Rodgers (ORL-CAL-1)

All told, the makeup of the House will be 94 Democrats, 48 Republicans, 5 Progressives and 3 Independents.