During the presidential election, Vermonter (and my former officemate at the VDP) Robby Mook was Hillary Clinton’s big organizing gun, being dropped into must-win states like Nevada and Indiana to pull out a victory. But he’s not the only local-boy-done-good making waves in the national Democratic scene.

Sharp eyes may have noticed the name of Ben Metcalf on the recent press release from the Democratic Governor’s Association announcing their new Vermont ad. Metcalf is the DGA’s Chief Operating Officer, but more than simply filing reports, Ben has stayed involved in the key national party organization’s strategic decision-making – particularly as regards his home state of Vermont. If you don’t recognize him, but his name seems familiar, his mother Cindy was the Chair of the Vermont Democrats at the end of the last decade, and his father Steve (pictured on right) was an Orange County Democratic Chair, as well as being the Montpelier School’s Superintendent before passing away last year of cancer.

Besides having the good fortune of looking like Matt Damon, the now not-quite-so-young Mr. Metcalf never fit the profile of a typical DC political type. Always more fired up about the principles at stake than the game of politics itself (which, make no mistake, he knows well), Ben comes off a lot more like a straight up, make-the-world-a-better-place activist than a Washington hack (which is very much to his credit).

Ben worked with me, Robby, and many other Vermont political hack usual suspects in the late nineties to the early oughts, transitioning (as many in that coordinated campaign office did) into a role in the Dean for President campaign. Did he learn everything he needed to know to be a successful politico in hometown Vermont? Not likely – but I like to think I taught him how to scream at DC people over the phone effectively, at any rate.

(Promoted due to final results coming in: Shumlin wins. – promoted by JulieWaters)

The results are in from all counties and the recount is officially over.   Racine gained 19 votes in the recount and Shumlin gained 25.

See the Burlington Free Press for county breakdown.  

Congratulations, Peter!

Chittenden County Clerk Anne Williams said Thursday afternoon she expected to wrap up counting Friday morning, the third day of the recount. Chittenden County had the most Democratic primary ballots to recount: 20,173.

“It’s looking good,” Williams said as four teams of 12 volunteers each sorted and reviewed ballots at tables in the courthouse lobby and a nearby lounge.

Windsor County officials planned to continue counting into the evening Thursday in an effort to finish, releasing the results today.

In the meantime, we’ve seen solid, extended, and engaged party unity across the board with all five candidates participating in serious cross-campaigning.  This would have happened with or without the recount, but it probably wouldn’t have happened with this amount of coordination over an extended period.  The lone unity event scheduled the next day would have been good, but also obligatory.  What’s happened since, involving all five candidates in a full-court press to support the eventual nominee?  

That’s been fantastic.

When tracing so many of our current serious problems, it is virtually impossible to even count the vast number of failed conservative policies that took hold in the Reagan administration.

Energy “policy,” or the lack of one, stands out among the worst failures of conservative Republican rule in the United States.

The Reagan administration, followed by Bush & Cheney/Bush and successive conservative Congresses of both parties are responsible for the complete lack of an economically sound or environmentally sustainable approach to creating or harnessing energy. The Republican and conservative approach to energy has been to massively subsidize fossil fuels, and destroy the United State’s competitive opportunities in emerging technology.  

Now, however, it appears that the Obama administration might be reconsidering one of Ronald Reagan’s more egregious acts of violence against the U.S. economy.

From Chris Good at the Atlantic:

Environmentalist Bill McKibben has been campaigning for the last few weeks to get solar panels put back on the roof of the White House, taking a road trip to DC with the original panels President Carter installed before Reagan took them down, which McKibben has lifted from their current home at Unity College in Maine for the purpose of this advocacy effort.

When the Reagan administration ripped the solar panels from the White House roof, it was proudly engaging in a symbolic act. It was an intentional tribute to ignorance that glorified economic squander and environmental degradation on an unimaginable scale.

If the Obama administration decides to undue this gross act of conservative Republican vandalism against America’s future, we can thank Bill McKibben for his leadership.

There's a big court decision today. Of course, it's only a District Court decision, but it's one more blow against official discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

The subject this time is Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and the case is a facial challenge to the federal law. The fact that it's a facial challenge is important: the plaintiffs' position is not that the policy is unfair or invalid as applied to them, but that there is no conceivable way that the policy could be interpreted or applied to survive a constitutional challenge. The District Court agrees.

It's a longish decision, and I haven't read it fully yet, but here are the highlights of the court's reasoning:

1. DADT does not significantly advance the government interest in military preparedness and unit cohesion. (pp. 48-74) While these are legitimate concerns, the court concludes that any claims that gays in the military impede preparedness and unit cohesion are based on assumptions, and that every attempt to actually study the question has concluded that there is no factual basis to the claim.

Foremost among the Rand Report's conclusions is that no empirical evidence exists demonstrating the impact of an openly homosexual
servicemember on the cohesion of any military unit.

Dr. Korb testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on
March 31, 1993 concerning the likely impact on unit cohesion if homosexuals
were permitted to serve openly. According to Dr. Korb, there was no
empirical research to support the view that homosexual servicemembers
would disrupt unit cohesion, and that such evidence could not be obtained
without integrating homosexuals into the military.

In fact, the court finds that not only does DADT not contribute to preparedness and unit cohesion, it actually harms military preparedness by causing the loss of qualified service members, many in critical specialties, by creating additional burdens and costs of recruitment, and by forcing the military to recruit less well-qualified personnel to make up for gays and lesbians who are prevented from serving.

2. DADT infringes on service members' First Amendment rights. (pp. 74-85.) Again, the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, holding that they have First Amendment rights to freedom of speech, freedom of association, and the right to petition the government, that DADT infringes on these rights, that the infringement on these rights is based on the content of the speech (which subjects the infringement to the highest level of scrutiny, as, for instance, if a town government adopted an ordinance allowing Republicans but not Democrats to post campaign signs in town), and that these restrictions are broader than necessary to serve any legitimate government interest.

The conclusion is that the plaintiff, which in this case is the Log Cabin Republicans, is entitled to a declaratory judgment that Don't Ask Don't Tell violates the First and Fifth Amendments, and to a permanent injunction prohibiting the government from enforcing the policy.

There are many steps to go from here, starting with whether the government is going to appeal this decision. It can be a long way from a district Court to the Supreme Court. Still, as with recent marriage decisions, this is another showing that equality is on the march.

http://www.benningtonbanner.co…

“Racine Campaign Manager Amy Shollenberger said Thursday she was flabergasted that the error rate was far less than 2 percent “not surprised” by the results reported so far.  Our most fervent supporters We wanted to put the Dems on hold for several weeks while we went through a mourning period go through the process. We felt that it was important to go through the process because Doug makes decisions in the crunch too quickly it appeared pretty close to anyone who didn’t understand how votes are counted was so close. We knew the town clerks hadn’t screwed anything up but once Doug announced for the recount we couldn’t lose face by recinding it It’s a horrible wake-up call to realize nice to know that the counting was so accurate,” she said.”

Racine does not intend to end the recount because the two counties still to report represent more than a third of the vote and one big mistake could turn the whole thing around should be able to complete the recount by Friday evening, she said.

“Doug has said that he wants to wait until Windsor and Chittenden prove they are just as good at counting votes as the rest of the state all the counties are done. It looks like they should finish by tomorrow,” Shollenberger said. “It just seems like it’s not that much longer although some would say that since it has been 3 weeks since the primary and we said it would only take a week, oh, forget it.”  

Hats off to Vermonter Bill McKibben. As of late, he’s been pushing the White House hard to put the solar panels that Jimmy Carter put on the White House, and Ronald Reagan later took down, back up.

From a press release on the Atlantic:

As of Thursday morning the Administration has offered to meet with McKibben and his team and says they are discussing the proposal to put solar back on the White House roof. “We keep hearing, ‘We’ll see’ and ‘It’s complicated,'” McKibben said. “Compared with the other things Obama has to do, it seems relatively easy. You can’t filibuster the roof.”

Here’s to hoping Bill gets Obama on board, and a big thanks for his efforts, too. More on that campaign here.

by Jim Condos, Democratic Candidate for Secretary of State

I want to share my vision for the Secretary of State’s role in the future of Vermont.

The Secretary of State must follow the Constitution, and the laws of Vermont while protecting the public interest.

Open Government is Good Government.

A commitment to open government must go much further than open campaign races.

It must be a commitment to transparency at all levels of government, which includes open access to public records throughout our state agencies and departments.

My plan, as Secretary of State, is to ensure that the current Douglas administration practice, of which my opponent was a member, does not continue to be a barrier to the public’s access to public records.

Vermonters need to stop being treated as adversaries of government; we are all a part of government.

If government operates in secrecy, then we erode our democracy.

I believe that it is of paramount importance that we do everything possible to ensure that the citizens of Vermont trust our government.

I believe that openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency, accountability, and effectiveness in government.

My vision for the Secretary of State’s office includes:

1. Advocating for the creation of a Public Records Advisory Office within the office of the Secretary of State.

a. Several states have similar offices intended to resolve public records disputes and eliminate the need for litigation.

b. This would include a new position of “ombudsman” to be the first line of appeal.

2. Supporting the establishment of a Public Records Act Review Committee to review the more than 200 exemptions to the Public Records Act which contain ambiguities, technical flaws, or are simply out of date.

3. Working with the Legislature to determine if any of the barriers to public access to government meetings and records are a result of current laws and, if so, working to promote legislative changes to increase public access.

My research indicates that Florida, Washington, Texas, and California have the strongest open records laws and they

include a provision whereby payment of attorneys fees are

required, which acts as a deterrent to government holding back

records.

4. Working with the new administration to issue a Memorandum on Transparency and Open Government (perhaps as an Executive Order), instructing heads of departments and agencies to take specific actions to establish an open government based on the principles of transparency, participation, and collaboration.

5. Working with state government overall to develop information technology that will enable people to access information online in a user-friendly way.

6. Meeting with town clerks and city/town boards to discuss the importance of open meetings and open records and encourage the same local polices.

7. Updating and making readily available the Secretary of State handout, Matter of Public Record: A Guide to Vermont’s Public Records Law.

8. Strongly advocate for a searchable on-line format of all contracts and grants in all areas of state government to further transparency.

In 2008, I was the lead sponsor on a bipartisan Resolution (JRS 57) as a Senator to urge the Agency of Administration, in an effort to achieve the greatest possible transparency in the state’s fiscal transactions, by posting the full text of its contracts and grants, in all fields of endeavor, in a searchable format on the Internet.

9. Working with the Legislature and the Administration to ensure that all state contracts include a provision whereby all contractors must abide by Vermont public records laws.

On the issue of open government, here are some examples where I believe my Republican opponent, who was a senior aide with the Douglas administration, falls short.

The Douglas team:

• Supported and expanded the principle of deliberative process, especially for the executive branch, keeping meetings and documents secret and behind closed doors.

o Denied media access to documents relating to violations of state and federal law that resulted in serious pollution of the Missisquoi River by a private developer.

o Denied a citizen group access to agency documents that could help explain why the Department of Environmental Conservation has failed to implement an important pollution prevention program.

o Denied state employees access to workplace policy documents involving a situation where state employees became seriously ill because of adverse working conditions

• Supported serious restrictions on the ability of state workers to testify at legislative hearings; deliberately restricting the legislature’s ability to deal with issues throughout government.

• Supported privatizing government jobs, resulting in those  private companies ability to hide records from the public – contracting out the public’s right to know about the quality of services that are being contracted out

o An example of this is the recent Prison Legal News case, where access to public records was denied in an investigation of the death of an inmate.

• In 2006, the Administration held back an affordable housing audit which they asked for, until I, as Chair of Government Operations, requested a public hearing and brought the author in for the hearing to testify.

He told the legislature that the administration did not like the report and wanted significant changes which the author refused to do.

I pledge to ensure the democratic rights and privileges that we cherish as citizens.

I have a unique and relevant background for the Secretary of State position with over 20 years of elected public service including 18 years on South Burlington City Council, 8 years as a Vermont State Senator, and over 30 years of private sector business experience.

I skipped out of school today to go up to the St. Albans’ District Court (no, it’s not what you’re thinking) to help out with the recounting of votes in the Democratic primary for governor.

I figure I’ll get the opportunity to sit through dozens of lectures on Roman History and Modern Poetry, but how often does a state-wide recount take place? (Recent history suggests every two years, but I think that the reality is much less often)

Now, the first thing that stuck me as I entered the room was that, apparently, there are were not a lot of youth jumping at this once-in-a-blue-moon opportunity.  At age 21, I could have been safely considered the grandson of almost any one of the other volunteers there, and maybe the great-grandson of a few.

And while there were about forty folks in the room, it seemed that most everyone knew most everyone else.  Greetings ranged from inquisitions about the well-being of the family, to inquisitions about the well-being of the farm, to passed-down bastardizations of bonjour.

The whole operation was slow to start: The official start time of 9 AM passed and the organization process started around 9:30.

The crew was divided up, with two groups of four working each of the tabulators (to count up the scanned ballots) and three groups of four at tables counting by hand. There were a few volunteers appointed to walk around and supervise, as well as a few who were tasked with opening ballot bags and distributing the ballots to the counters.

Now, it was a complex process that took  a while to get off the ground, but the situation demanded the utmost care, lest even one vote be counted twice or even one vote not be counted at all.

For the hand-counters, only one town would be open at a time.  Until all the ballots from that town were counted and put away, another town’s bag could not be opened.

The first step with each bag was to sort out the Democratic ballots from the Republican and Progressive ballots, which was something that had been handled before by whoever counted the votes to begin with, but which we checked over again to ensure no errors.

The number of Democratic ballots was added up, to ensure that we had as many as the town had reported as cast.  As we counted, we grouped the ballots into stacks of fifty.

Each table of four was then given a stack of fifty and two tabulation sheets.  The pair on one side of the table would go through the ballots, reading off the vote for governor one at a time, one passing the ballot to the other, and waiting for confirmation before moving on to the next ballot.  The pair on the other side of the table would be marking off the confirmed votes on the tabulation sheets.

When all fifty ballots were tabulated, the recording pair would compare sheets: Any discrepancies? Recount the stack.

If both volunteers had the same numbers, then all four would sign the tally sheets and the two pairs would switch positions: Those who had tallied would check the ballots and those who had checked the ballots would tally.  Thus each stack of fifty votes was counted and checked twice.

Then the four tally sheets, all concurring, would go off to be checked against one another, and then added to a master tally, which was checked again.  All told, the numbers from the sheets were checked by at least four different people, as well as against the three other tally sheets.

I regret not taking any pictures of the scene  there; with weathered Vermonters hunched over ballots and sheets of paper, it looked like Norman Rockwell had painted the SATs. Quite a sight.

All told, it took us about 4 hours to complete the whole recount in Franklin county.  I’m not sure how it turned out (if anyone went up or if anyone went down) but the last word was that it was pretty close to the previous total.

It’s all over but the crying in Franklin County this afternoon. We finished the recount by 3:00 PM, allaying fears among the volunteers that our sentence to the courthouse would be indefinite.

All in all, it was a pleasant experience with the atmosphere of community-driven democracy that some St. Albans City residents must surely miss from the old days before Town Meeting was replaced with conventional balloting.  The participants were so convivial in fact, that there were frequent requests to keep the noise down so that we could hear our partners read the ballots.   Most of the volunteers were from the blue-haired battallion (sixty and older), including surprisingly heavy representation by men.  Almost no one had prior experience with a recount and so, at the outset, confusion was the order of the day. After a few false starts, the teams of hand-counters each found their own rhythm and made short work of the job. A technical issue sidelined one of the machine readers but a replacement was soon brought in from Swanton.  If it weren’t for that minor glitch the machine count would no doubt have been finished even before the hand-count.

At lunchtime we were released to dine on pizza, check our phones and walk our dogs.  After a generous lunch break the count resumed.  At the end of the short day, many sat for a moment in dazed disbelief when we were told we were all through and could simply go home.

Once the word gets out, I think they’ll find it a lot easier to recruit volunteers in Franklin County the next time there’s a recount! ” ‘Piece a cake!” they’ll say.

  Little Bighorn…9/11

burn it all

those savages

the outrage

we were only trying

to help them learn

to use their land

their resources

and this

is what we get

burn it

til nothing is left

til history is ashes

for the winds

to erase our shames

Peter Buknatski

Montpelier, Vt.