If the terrible toll wrought by fear of the Dreaded Tax Boogieman weren’t so serious, I’d probably be laughing at the timing of this whole “Challenges for Change” thing, since the newest Qunnipiac poll finds that the fear is entirely unfounded. It turns out that the American people, by a large margin, want the government to address the deficit by RAISING taxes on those with high incomes:

60 percent of Americans among both major political parties think raising income taxes on households making more than $250,000 should be a main tenet of the government’s efforts to tame the deficit. More than 70 percent, including a majority of Republicans, say those making more than $1 million should pay more.

This is important. If you’re in a position to influence what happens with “Challenges for Change” over the coming days and weeks, think about that – very carefully.  

When 1 in 5 eligible workers in this country is out of work or severely underemployed, another 2 in 5 are worried that they’re next. (There are some people who don’t worry – they’re either lucky ducks or not too bright.) That means at least 3/5 of the country  does not want you to shred the social safety net that’s dangling just over the edge of that looming unemployment precipice. They want to know that the people they elected to represent them are not going to abandon them to free-fall if the economy keeps shedding jobs. Bungie-jumping sans bungie isn’t in a lot of people’s master financial plans.

With votes coming up, and the end of session looming, those who represent us need to do all they can to represent all of us, not just the donor class at the top of the economic food chain.

People who need the services that are likely to be cut are typically one short step away from homelessness and destitution. The cuts being proposed are going to remove the last rung from the economic ladder. As Mark Horvath of InvisiblePeople.tv puts it:

Please always remember, the homeless people you’ll ignore today were much like you not so long ago.

The same is true for the people who are about to lose that last delicate thread of hope in this new great depression. They are our friends, our neighbors, and our families. “They” only morph from “us” to “them” when they skid off into the sidelines of the economic race course.

You know, when I first heard about “Challenges for Change,” something about the whole “Rush to Revamp Everything” felt … familiar. Side note: you’ve gotta hand it to Republicans, they’re The Masters of Naming Things.^TM If you need a rhyming or alliterative title, ask a Republican.

Anyway, it wasn’t that long ago that we were told there was a great, desperate need to very quickly commit to a radical “fix” to avert disaster. In September 2008, Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur discussed the “emergency” financial fix being proposed by the then-current administration:

“We need the right deal, not a fast deal. The White House is counting on fear to propel this Congress into hasty and inappropriate action … that is not in the interest of our Republic. There is a better way.” …

She was referring to the now infamous Wall Street bailout – the one that has done nothing to slow the collapse of Main Street USA. It hasn’t reduced the unemployment rate, it hasn’t kept Mom & Pop businesses from shuttering their doors forever, it hasn’t freed up credit for businesses, and it hasn’t slowed the foreclosure rate. In fact, all it’s done is separate the performance of the stock market from the performance of the larger economy, and enabled the architects of failure to reward themselves with billions of (our) dollars in bonuses, all while tying the hands of the current administration to do much of anything for ordinary people.

Perhaps not the best approach to take, eh?

It wasn’t long after the bailout vote that those who fell for the “OMG! PANIC!” tactics of Bush the Lesser realized they’d been “had.”

Sure, there was a big problem, and something definitely needed to be done, but it wasn’t exactly something that had never happened before, and we already had the tools (think: Sherman Anti-trust Act and receivership) to deal with the issue at far less cost and with far greater control.

So, what lessons did we learn from the Baby Bush Bailout Bonanza?  Sadly, it looks like we have learned nothing.

[over the fold]

In 2008, our country faced a significant financial crisis, and our President faced the final days of his administration. The traditional lame duck jokes wafted gently over the airwaves into America’s living rooms, and a silent financial problem simmered gently in the background.

This problem was well understood. It had been around for a loooong time, and warned about by professionals who knew their stuff. Those warnings were ignored – over, and over, and over again.

Until suddenly, just months before the end of term for the lame duck leader of our country, it became:

“A Very Big Problem That We Must Deal With Right Away, And Here’s What You Have to Do Right NOW!”

The plan was whipped out (with rushed input and undeserved blessing from a legislative branch that had been given too little time to fully vet either the issue or the “solution”), then put to a hurried vote just before a legislative recess.

In Vermont, we’ve had an eerie parallel. It’s the end of an 8 year term for our now-lame-duck Governor.  The Governor (Mr. “Government is too inefficient,” himself) has spent 8 years in office, proclaiming the woeful inefficiency of state government. In that whole time, he has clearly been aware of this simmering inefficiency, but he hasn’t done much about it – until, suddenly, just a couple of months before the end of his term, he called for an emergency revamping of entire state government from the top down.

Representative David Zuckerman called it a “shock troop” approach to government.

“The Governor talked about smaller efficient government for 8 years, but he didn’t make it his job to manage government. He didn’t do it methodically over those years, where there could have been much greater savings over that time. Instead he’s doing a sudden, fast process, at the last minute.”

Governor Douglas has used the financial problems faced by our state due to the economic downturn to create a sense of panic – pushing the legislature to rapidly make massive changes, without allowing time to ensure the proposed changes are the right changes to make.

As Representative Patti Komline said the other day:

“There’s a lot of confusion around this whole process. … We’re going to be expected to adjourn without, again, knowing the full impact of this, and we’re the ones who have to vote on it and answer to our constituents.”

The “this” to which she refers is massive. Every aspect of state government faces deep cuts, both this year and next. Departments will merge, school districts will change, the prison system will shrink, social services institutions statewide will merge and physically move to new locations. In short, the entire human infrastructure of our state will be rearranged in a grand tsunami of change.

In human services alone, one of every 20 dollars will be cut this year, and one out of every 10 dollars will be cut next year. Zuckerman says that rushing to make cuts in human services can have serious consequences:

“You don’t get a second chance with people’s lives. If you mess up with something environmentally, maybe it can recover over time, but with people … for example if a cut to something in mental health pushes a person into the legal system instead of a system of care, it will have an irreversible impact on that person’s life.”

Rushing through massive cuts in critical programs promises to hurt real people in very serious ways, and since these cuts are happening during a time when more people need help due to job losses, soaring insurance costs, and more, the cuts will hurt more people than would be hurt in a time of prosperity.

To top it off, the legislature’s role is severely hampered. In an ordinary budgeting process, there’s a budget and the legislature allocates appropriations and makes cuts based on those dollars – pretty straightforward. But that’s not how it’s going to work this time. This time, the legislature has to make cuts in programs, with little control over whether the money from a given cut will lead to a reduced budget –  because some cuts will really be shifts, redirecting money from one place to another. In addition, the legislature will have a limited ability to ensure that the shifting money goes where it’s supposed to go:

Unlike the normal budgeting process, in which lawmakers analyze the impacts budget proposals have on programs, under the Challenges for Change they do not have a direct say in how the money is removed and “reinvested.”

But there’s more. It’s not just bad for the most vulnerable people in Vermont, and it’s not just bad legislative precedent, the cuts in human services in particular aren’t even likely to be fiscally smart. According to the Public Assets Institute:

Because of the relatively high match rate in human services programs, Vermont could lose more in federal funds than it saves in state money.

…

The Challenges for  Change report promises to do more with less. But skeptics worry that both the administration and Legislature are counting their chickens too soon and booking the savings before they know what the cuts will mean to the delivery of services. When the implementation plans are unveiled, the administration should provide Vermonters with a full accounting of all planned budget reductions including those resulting from the loss of federal money.

That’s perhaps the most important piece of information among all the discussions regarding this topic:

Vermont cuts in human services funding may well be a double-whammy, because those cuts will be compounded by automatic federal cuts to those same services – and the result may mean a bigger hole in the budget than we started with.

This is a BIG DEAL.

And all the while, most of the legislature, afraid of the Dreaded Tax Boogieman, has stayed far, far away from the issue of raising funds. Zuckerman’s comment on the issue:

“We have a severe budget problem. Myself and a handful of others are willing to look at revenue changes, but that’s not the direction of “the chamber.”

“Where are the values? What are the values? This is the time when the battles ought to be fought.”

Maybe one day I’ll do a long discussion of the ludicrous “Laffer Curve” which is the economic altar to which conservatives bow each time they claim that the only possible answer to any fiscal issue is lower taxes. But I won’t do that now. Just suffice it to say that the current economic collapse is a direct result of that particular thinking.

Not everyone is afraid of the boogieman, though. As reported at Seven Days:

By and large, all the candidates said they would approach cuts in services much differently than has Gov. Douglas, though only one explained how the state might pay for making fewer cuts.

Sen. Doug Racine (D-Chittenden) said he believes the state must balance its budget by a mix of short-term tax increases, if necessary, spending down some rainy day funds, and making cuts as well as finding efficiencies.

“I don’t believe our values are negotiable just because we’re in difficult times,” said Racine to applause.

Speaking of those values, Nicole Mace, of Voices for Vermont Children, wrote a very informative opinion piece on VT Digger recently. In it, she made a point that holds true not only for education, but for all aspects of human services:

The Challenges for Change education “challenge” is based upon two false premises. The first is that education outcomes can be improved while spending less money. The second is that education costs are too high for the public to continue to support.

Let’s do a little experiment and remove “education” from the above quote:

The Challenges for Change “challenge” is based upon two false premises. The first is that outcomes can be improved while spending less money. The second is that costs are too high for the public to continue to support.

Here’s the crux: the Challenges for Change (for some reason, I keep wanting to write “Challenges for Chump Change”) premise implies that our problem is too much spending, and that the bare-bones basic services we offer to our community are therefore, somehow extravagant.

Challenges for Change implies that it’s extravagant to educate our children well, to feed the hungry, to help the sick, provide a place for the unemployed to find out about available jobs, and so on. Everything we supposedly value is an extravagance if you believe the premise of the program, and thus the only appropriate action is to cut.

But sometimes a cut doesn’t save what you think it will save. As Representative Susan Davis said in a recent forum (paraphrased) in Bradford:

After working for 31 yrs in state government, I know there’s been no short range or long range planning. We’re seeing the results of that lack of planning. While challenges for change is touted as cutting $38 million, I doubt we’ll actually see those savings. It’s an uncomfortable truth. …

Much of the discussion at the forum focused on program and tax cuts, but Davis’ response hints that the Dread Tax Boogieman is unworthy of that dread:

…in all the research I’ve read, I see no data that shows that raising taxes is actually detrimental when we’re in such hard times as this.

If raising taxes is the right thing to do, why do we hear so many people complain about taxes being too high? You know the system is very, very broken when we collect more tax revenues from people’s paychecks than we collect from all corporations’ profits, combined.

Is there room for more efficiency in government? Yes. There are some good concepts in Challenges for Change. It’s valuable to have each department revisit its mission and make sure that the things done by the department are designed to effectively and efficiently meet those goals. It’s a great idea for agencies to talk with other agencies and work on ensuring that if there’s data needed by both, there is an appropriate mechanism to share that data.

But to throw whole swathes of state government into chaos all at once, in some sort of a Hail Mary attempt to appease the tax cut gods? No. It’s ridiculous. I know the Republican party as a whole loves the idea of running government as a business. If that’s the Governor’s goal with this restructuring program, then let’s hope he never runs a business, because anyone who has been though a massive business restructuring will tell you: once the restructuring process starts, everything goes “kerflooey” (yes, that’s the technical term). Suddenly most employees have to divide their time between figuring out who’s the new “go to” person for, well, everything, while simultaneously trying to juggle the work that was already on their plate, and for which they barely had time to begin with.

When a company is restructured, everything slows down, customers end up very unhappy, and very little gets done until well after the dust settles – often restructuring ends, ultimately, in the company’s failure. What will happen if our state undergoes a massive, poorly planned restructuring? Failure will have disastrous human consequences.

Let us hope that the legislature is smart enough not to fall for the Governor’s “me too” attempt at shock doctrine governance. Let’s hope they find ways to fill the budget hole without throwing the state into chaos, at a tremendous and painful cost to ordinary Vermonters.

I’ll close by borrowing from Sue’s terrific diary on the hidden time bomb in the proposed Challenges for Chump Change permitting process:

Contact your legislators. Tell them you’re paying attention; tell them what you think of the “Challenges for Change” agenda in general; and remind them once again that their first obligation is to protect their constituents.

House of Representatives

Senate

And the sergeant at arms number for phoning messages into the statehouse: (802) 828-2228

Cross posted from Beyond VSH

It's almost a week now that we've known about the latest denial of certification for the Vermont State Hospital, but we just got the actual report from CMS, the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, earlier this week.

The way the state tells it, CMS is picking on them, and they really haven't been doing anything wrong.

If you dig into the report, though, the facts are something very different.

Take this tidbit. One of the problems they identified was in incident in which a patient barricaded herself in her room with her bed, and used the time she was in there to reopen a self-inflicted wound on her arm. It apparently didn't last long, but it could have resulted in a serious injury. It was kind of a mystery, though, how a patient could do this.

 From the report:

During a group interview with facility Administration and staff at 2:10 PM on 3/10/10, in response to the surveyors's question regarding the above event, the facility's Executive Director and Staff Educator #1 both stated that the beds in patient rooms were not movable.

Per observation, while accompanied by Staff Educator #1, at 3:30 PM on 3/10/10, of rooms #11 and #19 (the room Patient #20 had occupied
at the time of the event) on the Brooks 2 Unit, there were wooden framed beds in each room that could be easily moved about the room and
pushed up against the door. Upon observation of the beds Staff Educator #1 stated; “they do move….am I embarrassed.”

We'd provide the link, but it seems to be kind of a challenge to find the report at the Department of Mental Health web page. Maybe that's what they mean by “Challenges for Change”.

While everyone was busy watching the “meltdown” of Vermont Yankee, a potentially bigger natural disaster was shaping up on the House floor, aided and abetted by Shap Smith and the knee-jerk enablers of Jim Douglas’ scorched earth agenda.

Among the smorgasboard of ritual guttings that are suggested in Douglas’ “Challenge For Change” report, is a proposal that could effectively eliminate the permit process altogether.  Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater!! Barely mentioned in the Free Press article  were proposed changes to the regulatory process, as per the following excerpts from the “Challenges for Change Progress Report” (emphasis added):

Permitting and Licensing Efficiencies will be achieved through the expanded use of expedited Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) permitting methods such as general permits, permits by rule, conditional exemptions and acceptance of professional certifications.

.Give ANR authority to issue permits in various ways for categories of activities that are subject to the same regulatory requirements

.Authorize ANR to accept professional certifications that permit applications are complete and accurate and eliminate application review.

It is commonly recognized that one of the factors that prevented Vermont from sinking as low as most other states in this economic downturn is the existence in Vermont of a rigorous permit review process that regulates growth and development to ensure that it does not exceed sustainable levels. One of the best components of this rigorous permit review process is that it recognizes the value of public participation in the process and allows for input from all the stake-holders, including private citizens, whose rights and best interests might otherwise be ignored by decision-makers.

Allowing the ANR to implement a permits by rule system, as envisioned in this report, to replace the customary review process could ultimately mean that a developer might be obliged to do no more than  complete an on-line permit application, simply identifying the rules that would apply and be awarded a permit more or less automatically, without review or opportunity for challenge.  The developer might be allowed to “self-certify” that he was in compliance with the rules, or simply submit an affidavit from a professional certifying that he was in compliance.  

Anyone who has participated in the Act 250 process (as I have) can tell you that developers have no difficulty finding paid “professionals” to select only the facts that would lead one to believe they are in compliance.  It is only through the opportunity for challenge by other stake-holders, that the full facts may be discovered and disclosed so that an informed decision may be reached by the permitting body.  It is not and should not be a perfunctory process when the permit decisions being rendered will permanently alter our living environments and the condition of our valuable natural resources.

Under the “Challenges for Change” agenda, compliance would pretty much become a voluntary decision on the part of the applicant and inevitable permit holder.  To my knowledge no spreadsheet analysis has so far even been offered to support Douglas’ claim of savings.  Whatever might be saved through these so-called “efficiencies” in the permit system would quickly be dwarfed by losses the state would experience through water quality and environmental impacts, declining property values  and unanticipated brown-field situations.

The ANR’s practice of issuing “general permits” has already tested applicants’ reliability when it comes to self-certification.  A  2008 Messenger article by Michele Monroe  reports on a study conducted by the Conservation Law Foundation.   In its analysis, among other evidence of ANR’s failure to do the most fundamental job of water protection, the CFA found that:

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/lms…

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/lms…

And the sergeant at arms number for phoning messages

into the statehouse: (802) 828-2228

( – promoted by GMD)

Green Mountain Daily members and lurkers,

I just wanted to thank this community for having been a part of my life for the past… I don’t know how long it has been now.  I’ve always felt incredibly privileged to be able to share my work here on GMD, and even more honored to have a fair deal of folks reading it.

Today I received acceptance letters from Harvard, Yale and Princeton.  Never in a million years did I expect to be able to say that.  Academically, I am certainly no genius, so my acceptance likely came down to my political involvement.  This place has played a huge role in getting me more involved in the Vermont Democratic community, and it’s incredibly humbling to have the work I’ve done recognized by these schools.

So I just wanted to quickly thank this community for the role it’s had in my life over the past few years, it’s been a pleasure to be a part of this place and I wouldn’t be where I am today without you all

Thanks again,

Matt

Eyewitness accounts and records are finally surfacing that expose Entergy’s reckless corporate negligence in the moments leading up to its infamous 2007 cooling tower collapse.  

In addition to the previous Vermont Yankee tritium leak Entergy hid from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, we now have evidence of a more serious incident occurring in 2007. While we the source of the incident is now public, the underlying problem remains, by all accounts, unresolved.

As of this afternoon, a Whistle-Blower revealed the reason for the infamous 2007 cooling tower collapse. In fact, we now know the entire ugly incident was worse AND had nothing to do (surprise!) with the corporate-speak PR line Entergy spoon-fed to overly trusting government officials.

From eyewitness reports, and photographs taken from Entergy’s security surveillance cameras (and smuggled out by a Whistle-Blower), we now know and can now report there was a serious internal and operational level incident involving concentrated releases of gamma radiation at potentially lethal levels. At least one senior staff technician suffered exposure.

Details of how this release specifically led to the cooling tower collapse are unclear, but the photographic evidence (see below) taken immediately following the massive radiation exposure demonstrates the basis for Entergy’s cover-up.

The photos are disturbing and below the fold:

 Loading ...

Crossposted from the Worldwatch Institute's Nourishing the Planet. 

"We’ve got hundreds of local foods, almost 600 that we’ve categorized through our research," said Kristof Nordin in a January interview with Nourishing the Planet project co-Director, Danielle Nierenberg, at the permaculture project he runs in Malawi with his wife, Stacia (see also: Malawi’s Real Miracle). "But we are starving because we are only planting one crop: maize, which came originally from America."

Many efforts to combat hunger and drought across Africa emphasize boosting yields of staple crops such as maize, wheat, cassava, and rice, which can provide much-needed calories as well as income to millions of farmers. These staples, however, lack many essential micronutrients, including Vitamin A, thiamin, and niacin. That is why many communities rely on indigenous vegetables such as amaranth, dika, moringa, and baobab to add both nutrients and taste to staple foods. These vegetables are rich in vitamins and nutrients and are often naturally resistant to local pests and climatic fluctuations, making them an important tool in the fight against hunger and poverty.

"We are not saying stop growing maize, we grow maize as well," continued Kristof. "But we try to show people how it can be part of an integrated system, how that integrated agriculture can be part of a balanced diet."

Greater variety can lead to a better tasting diet, too, according to Dr. Abdou Tenkouano, the World Vegetable Center’s Regional Director for Africa in Arusha, Tanzania. "None of the staple crops would be palatable without vegetables," he told Danielle when she visited the center last November. For almost 20 years now, the Center—part of the Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center based in Taiwan—has been working in Africa to breed cultivars that best suit farmers’ needs (see Listening to Farmers).

In addition to providing the vitamins and nutrients needed for a complete diet, indigenous vegetables are more affordable and accessible to farmers who might otherwise be forced to pay for costly imported staple crops and the inputs they require. According to the Center’s website, vegetable production also generates more income on and off the farm than most other agricultural enterprises.

Indigenous vegetables help to preserve culture and traditions as well. "If a person doesn’t know how to cook or prepare food, they don’t know how to eat," said Edward Mukiibi, a coordinator with the Developing Innovations in School Cultivation (DISC) project in Uganda, in a December interview with Danielle. The DISC project, founded by Edward and Roger Serunjogi in 2006, hopes to instill greater environmental awareness and appreciation for food, nutrition, and gastronomy by establishing school gardens at 15 preschool, day, and boarding schools. By focusing on indigenous vegetables, the project not only preserves Ugandan culture, but also shows kids how agriculture can be a way to improve diets, livelihoods, and food security (see How to Keep Kids Down on the Farm).

Sylvia Banda is another cultural pioneer. She founded Sylva Professional Catering Services in 1986 in part because she was tired of seeing Western-style foods preferred over traditional Zambian fare like chibwabwa (pumpkin leaves) and impwa (dry garden eggplant) (see Winrock International and Sylva Professional Catering Services Ltd).What started as a catering business grew into a restaurant, cooking school, and hotel, with training programs that teach farmers in Zambia, mostly women, to grow indigenous crops. Sylva’s company purchases the surplus crops from the farmers it trains and uses them in the traditional meals prepared by her facilities, improving local livelihoods and keeping the profits in the local economy.

"When I first met some of these families, their children were at home while school was in session," Sylvia said during a Community Food Enterprise Panel and Discussion hosted by Winrock International in Washington, D.C., in January. "They told me that they didn’t have money to pay for education. But after becoming suppliers for my business, the families can afford to send their children to school and even to buy things like furniture for their houses."

Women who grow vegetable gardens in Kibera slum outside of Nairobi, Kenya, were among the best prepared for the country’s 2007 food crisis, despite being some of the poorest members of society. Their gardens provided family meals at a time when no other food was coming into the city. With food prices on the rise in Africa and the impacts of climate change becoming more significant, home gardens raising indigenous vegetables that are resistant to extreme weather and are rich in vitamins and nutrients have become even more important (see Vertical Farms: Finding Creative Ways to Grow Food in Kibera).

As these examples illustrate, most parts of sub-Saharan Africa "have everything they need right here," according to Kristof.

Thank you for reading! If you enjoy our diary every day we invite you to get involved:
1.Comment on our daily posts — we check for comments everyday and want to have a regular ongoing discussion with you.
2.Receive regular updates–Join the weekly Nourishing the Planet newsletter by clicking here.
3.Help keep our research going—-If you know of any great projects or contacts in West Africa please connect us connect us by emailing, commenting or sending us a message on facebook.

   The Burlington Daily Mentioner’s business correspondent Wichita Garrett wraps up his eight year series on Vermont’s long suffering Republican captains of industry. I quote at length below:  

“Homegrown Vermont Widget manufacturer E.J.Fudd is in the news once again. He announced today that after 42 years he was closing his manufacturing facility in Vermont.  Fudd’s Vermont Widget Co. will be shifting its production to the small Balkan country of Symkaria where he claims it’s cheaper to do business. Fudd started the widget business in his garage in 1968 and rapidly expanded as the Vermont widget caught on nationwide in the mid 1970s.  

Commenting on the reasons for the move, Mr. Fudd said.

‘It makes the most economic sense to pwoduce all of ouw high-end widgets in Symkawia.’ Fudd added “But simpwy put, it costs us significantwy more to pwoduce a widget in Vewmont than we are capabwe of selwing it for, and sadwy, this is not sustainabwe in the cuwwent economy

Vermont Widget’s closing in June will leave 53 workers without jobs. Fudd’s departure will leave approximately 200 design jobs at its Burlington world headquarters, enabling them maintain the Vermont Widget cache.

When asked for a reaction, Governor Douglas said  ‘It’s a sad chapter in the ever-changing global marketplace,’ he predictably added that Vermont has “some costs that are particularly troubling to manufacturers, including taxes and health care”.”

The good Governor and The Daily Mentioner fail to note that the small socialist country of Symkaria has state-provided universal health care. The Symkarianis also enjoy high speed broadband throughout the nation and unlike Vermont’s crumbling roads and bridges they maintain a modern transportation infrastructure.    

The Mentioner’s Garrett continues:  

“The wealthy Elmer J. Fudd, no stranger to tax related controversy, made news last year when he and his wife changed their residency from Vermont to Florida due to what he claimed were inordinately high upper bracket taxes. He published a long emotional and rambling letter at the time:  

‘My wife, Mawrie and I have abandoned Vewmont. Dewe is no more painfuw decision for two 6th genewation native Vermontews than to give up wesidency in the state where we waised ouw famiwy and gwown a successfuw business.  

The wegiswature has stolwen Vewmont fwom the peopwe who wive hewe and then compwetewy destwoyed it. If Vewmont continues with its curwent tax powicy, thewe will soon come a time when the wealthy awe gone. In my opinion, we awe awweady  halfway there and the wecent proposed wegiswation onwy acelewates the fwight of the wealthy.  That’s why my wife and I are sadwy weaving our former home state that now seems intent destwoying itself.’ ”  

I am the very model of the modern gen’ral manager,

(I  couldn’t find a rhyme to use except for scarlet tanager.)

I know the ways to get the most from ev’ry workers’ salary;

My stingy style has landed me in Michael Moore’s rougues’ gallery!

I’m very well acquainted too with matters mathematical

Eliminating workers when the cost is problematical

In selling you my product I can turn on personality

Nevermind  the loopholes and those tiny technicalities.

Nevermind the loopholes and those tiny technicalities,

Nevermind the loophole and those tiny technicalities,

Nevermind the loopholes and those tiny technicali-ali-ties.

My loyalty belongs to those who think of themselves globally

I outsource  jobs and import gobs while compensated nobley.

In terms of being generous I think I do commendably

I may say “no” but offer prayers and end them all “amen-dably.”

When my bonus isn’t big enough to buy a yacht magestical,

It undermines my manhood like an undescended testicle.

I make it up by cheating on my unsuspecting lady-wife.

Expense account philandering has really perked-up my love life.

Expense account philandering has really perked-up my love life,

Expense account philandering has really perked-up my love life,

Expense account philandering has really perked-up my oh my love life.

We minimize new hirement, and emphasize retirement

When stockholders are restless we are not averse to firement

Shortsightedly we toddle on ignoring all contrarians

We can not see how open land can still remain agrarian.

I’m good at keeping government providing lots of subsidies

To maintain me in business while the help toil on their bended knees

There’s order in my universe, though some may call my ways perverse

In short I am the model of the modern gen’ral manager.

There’s order in my universe, though some may call my ways perverse

In short I am the model of the modern gen’ral manager.

Not too many secrets stay secret for very long.

For instance, it didn't take long for us to find out that the Douglas administration sat on the news that the State Hospital hadn't gotten its certification back for twenty-four hours, even though they were counting on $8 million of federal money going to the State Hospital to help close the budget gap.

That didn't go over well, and we understand that House Approps Chair Martha Heath was visibly upset with the Douglas camp.

Now there's more. GMD has learned that the attempted coverup by the Douglas administration has caused open hostiltities between House Republicans and the governor. In fact, our sources relayed that a senior member of the Republican caucus was seen angrily dressing down two members of the Douglas administration, complaining that Douglas is out of touch, he's given up, and that it made them look bad to have to vote for the budget after learning of the $8 million hole the continued decertification created for the budget.

This isn't a good position for the Administration to be in coming into the closing weeks of the session.

We just received this press release:

HODES OPENS UP VERMONT YANKEE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC

As News Of New Radioactive Leak Further Rocks Trust In The Plant, Hodes Successfully Opens NRC Briefing To The Public

Hodes: Yankee Needs To Be Shut Down Until All Leaks Are Found And Fixed

Washington D.C. – Today, Paul Hodes announced that he has successfully opened to members of the community the publicized “non-public” meeting which was scheduled between officials from local governments, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and executives from Vermont Yankee. Hodes has worked with the NRC to ensure that area families are able to access the same health and safety information that government officials receive. New reports of radioactive cesium-137 leaking into the soil have created even more concerns surrounding the troubled plant and further underscore the importance of a public dialogue.

[…] The NRC briefing, which had previously been slated to be non-public, has been opened to the community after Hodes put pressure on meeting organizers to make this meeting open to the public. The meeting will be moved to April 12th. Details on the time and location will be determined.

Normally I don’t like to redistribute press releases, but this was too important and I’m with limited access throughout the day and just wanted to get it up.