No details at the moment. Here is the text of Kitzmiller’s letter of resignation from the position:

Rep. Shap Smith, Speaker ofthe House

Vermont House of Representatives

State House

Montpelier, Vermont 05633

Dear Shap:

I am writing to inform you ofmy desire to resign as Chair ofyour Committee on

Commerce and Economic Development. My request comes with considerable

reluctance, but in the certainty that it is the best thing for me and for the good of the

House.

Certainly, you know that I enjoy my job, especially as one of Montpelier’s

Representatives. Serving as a Chair is a great privilege, and I am honored to have been

chosen. However, as Chair, I increasingly find that the requirements ofthe job do not

allow the time I really need to maintain the balance of serving the State and serving the

needs ofthe good people of Montpelier who elected me. I am one who feels the need to

serve as best I can in all areas ofthe job as both Chair and as Representative and I do not

feel I am able to do this as well as I want at this time. This has caused unwanted stress

which will eventually take a toll on my work in general.

I would deeply appreciate it ifyou would retain me as a member of the Commerce and

Economic Development team. I want to continue to be a strong team player, both in the

committee and in the caucus and I will do everything I can to help a new Chair

understand the demands ofthe role. Especially in the near future, my knowledge ofthe

Worker’s Comp and Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund issues will be valuable to the

committee.

Serving as a Chair has been my profound honor. I will always be grateful to Gaye for

having given me this job and to you for having retained me. I look forward to serving

Montpelier as one oftheir Representatives for several more terms …. but if I am going

to be able to do that, I must give up my position as a Chair.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Rep. Warren F. Kitzmiller

This is the second in a two-part series of my visit to Africa Harvest in Johannesburg, South Africa. Cross posted from Nourishing the Planet.

Daniel Kamanga, the Director of Communications of Africa Harvest, and former journalist, says that journalism in Africa has to overcome many challenges, including a general lack of coverage on agriculture issues-let alone a deeper understanding about who is funding agricultural development in Africa. “No one knows who Bill [Gates] is in Africa,” lamented Kamanga. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is one of the biggest and most influential funders of agricultural development in sub-Saharan Africa. (See Filling a Need for African-Based Reporting on Agriculture).

“You can’t have a revolution in Africa if people aren’t briefed,” says Kamanga, referring to the call for a Green Revolution in Africa by the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA). Although agriculture makes up about 98 percent of the economy in Kenya, it’s barely covered in the country’s newspapers. And there are not any agricultural editors at any of the newspapers on the entire continent.

But it’s not just a question of reporters having more knowledge, according to Kamanga. It’s also a matter of compensation. African journalists are typically paid very little compared to journalists in other countries. In Burkina Faso, reporters receive just 160 dollars per month. As a result, many journalists see bribes as a way to supplement their income.

Yet with newspaper and media consolidation, fierce competition for advertisers, and lackluster economic conditions in Africa and all over the world, it’s a trend that might only get worse.

After a rocky few months, things are looking much better for the reelection prospects of Montpelier mayor Mary Hooper.

If you've been paying attention, you know what's been going on. Back in October it was revealed that Scott Construction, a city contractor, had defrauded the city of about $400,000. Specifically, when a series of administrative errors created an overpayment to Scott, not only did Scott fail to report or refund the money, as any honest person would do, Scott continued to bill the city for additional work on the same contract, without mentioning the $400,000 overpayment.

At the time it came to light people, even here, were saying that Hooper must go.  There was even a blog by that name. Not everybody cared about the argument from Hooper and Bill Fraser, the city manager, that their decision not to publicly disclose the overpayment problem was the soundest strategy to keep Scott in business, at least until the city got the money back from him. Which, of course, wasn't going to happen, especially when the company went belly up.

People were pretty hot, and there was a lot of criticism of the Council, but especially of the Mayor and City Manager. It got so bad that people were writing Mary Hooper's political obituary, saying that there was no possible way she could hold onto either her mayoralty or her House seat.

 Recent events indicate that reports of her political demise may have been exaggerated.

First,  the City got the money back. All of it. Anyone would assume that a city would carry insurance for this kind of thing, and Montpelier does, and the insurance carrier finally came through with the money.

Next, potential candidacies seem to be pretty scarce. Sure, there's Gary Schy, a local landlord who considers himself a bit of a gadfly, but even he admits that he's not a viable candidate:

He said he is willing to step aside if a viable candidate comes forward to challenge Hooper.

Like possibly former Council member and Representative Jon Anderson, even though Mary has soundly thrashed Jon on the two occasions they have run against each other, once for mayor and once in the Democratic primary for House. Last week, however, Anderson took his hat out of the ring, or said that he wasn't throwing it in the ring.

According to the Times Argus Anderson said Monday that he has been urged to take on the race, but felt the time wasn't right to make such a demanding commitment. Could he have beaten Mary Hooper in a head to head race? It seems unlikely, but now we won't get to find out.

There are still a few days to file nominating petitions, and it doesn't take a lot to get them in, but nobody is surfacing as a “viable” candidate to this point.

A couple of other things.

First, a distinguished citizens' panel studying the Scott Construction affair essentially cleared the Mayor, Council, and Manager of any wrongdoing in the handling of the problem.

Other than Scott Construction, there are no villains here,” read one report, an 11-page document completed by the Montpelier Citizens Financial Review Committee, which examined the non-financial issues linked to the Scott case, including whether the City Council inappropriately met in executive session to discuss the situation.

“I think that really sums it up. There's no question they made some mistakes and some errors of judgment. But the documents and the discussions with them made it clear the things they did they thought were in the best interest of the community,” said resident Nick Marro, the chief author of the report. “Hindsight is always 20-20.”

Second, Montpelier's city leadership got a huge boost last week when the results of a competitive grant were announced. Out of a total award of $20 million nationwide, Montpelier's proposal for a downtown district biomass heating system was awarded $8 million. That's right, 40% of the total for the country  and way more than any other recipient. The project has been in the works for fourteen years, and the award is a tribute to the hard work and vision of the City Council, the Mayor, and Community Development Director Gwen Hallsmith.How do you turn out the leadership after a big accomplishment like this?

Finally, one smaller thing. Remember that blog, Resign Now Hooper? The blog dedicated to the proposition that Mary Hoope must resign now?

Well, it's gone. Nothing there. Whoever set it up apparently got tired of it pretty quickly

So where's the anti-Hooper sentiment in the city now? From all that appears so far, it's nothing more thana few hotheads on the comments section of the Times Argus.

And if that's the case, I like Mary Hooper's chances for reelection.

Revealed: Retired CIA agent ‘made up’ waterboarding details, RawStory, 1/26/10

“Now comes John Kiriakou, again, with a wholly different story,” Stein noted in Foreign Policy. “On the next-to-last page of a new memoir, The Reluctant Spy: My Secret Life in the CIA’s War on Terror (written with Michael Ruby), Kiriakou now rather off handedly admits that he basically made it all up.”

From the above referenced Foreign Polic article (CIA Man Retracts Claim on Waterboarding, Foreign Policy, 1/26/10):

“What I told Brian Ross in late 2007 was wrong on a couple counts,” [Kiriakou] writes. “I suggested that Abu Zubaydah had lasted only thirty or thirty-five seconds during his waterboarding before he begged his interrogators to stop; after that, I said he opened up and gave the agency actionable intelligence.”

But never mind, he says now.

. . .

“Now we know,” Kiriakou goes on, “that Zubaydah was waterboarded eighty-three times in a single month, raising questions about how much useful information he actually supplied.”

Interesting side note to the Foreign Policy article. Apparently the pro-torture Kiriakou went on to work for Senator John Kerry.

Hey .. did I forget to thank President Obama for helping maintain our status as a torture nation? Oh, and the rest of the Democratic DC surrender monkeys too?

Speaking for me only… and on vacation too!

Some good news came out of Washington yesterday that went largely unnoticed. Ha’aretz reports 54 members of Congress sent a letter to president Barack Obama urging him to pressure Israel to end the siege on Gaza.  Peter Welch, of Vermont, was one of the 54 members of Congress that signed the letter.

Ha’aretz correspondent Natasha Mozgovaya writes:

The letter was the initiative of Representatives Jim McDermott from Washington and Keith Ellison from Minnesota, both of whom are Democrats. Ellison is the first American Muslim to ever win election to Congress.

McDermott and Ellison wrote that they understand the threats facing Israel and the ongoing Hamas terror activities against Israeli citizens but that “this concern must be addressed without resulting in the de facto collective punishment of the Palestinian residents of the Gaza Strip.”

“We ask you to press for immediate relief for the citizens of Gaza as an urgent component of your broader Middle East peace efforts,” they wrote, adding that the siege has hampered the ability of aid agencies to do their work in Gaza.

The congressmen urged Obama to pressure Israel to ease the movement of people into and out of Gaza, especially students, the sick, aid workers, journalists and those with family concerns, and also to allow the import of building materials to rebuild houses. Israel has warned that such materials would be used to rebuild Hamas infrastructure and not civilian homes.

Fifty-four members of Congress urging the president to pressure Israel to treat Gazans like human beings is unheard of. On top of that, several prominent Israeli human rights and lobbying groups signed on as well. This is a positive development IMO.  The tide is slowly turning in how we, and the Democratic Party, view the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Operation Cast Lead blew the lid off Israel’s rationale for the occupation. The congressional visits to Gaza have exposed them to the realities of the conflict and what Gazans encounter on a day-to-day basis.

The full text of the letter is posted below. In the meantime, call Peter Welch’s office and thank him for taking an all-important and brave stand on the Israeli-Palestine issue.

 

President Barack Obama

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Obama,

Thank you for your ongoing work to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and for your commitment of $300 million in U.S. aid to rebuild the Gaza Strip. We write to you with great concern about the ongoing crisis in Gaza.

The people of Gaza have suffered enormously since the blockade imposed by Israel and Egypt following Hamas’ coup, and particularly following Operation Cast Lead. We also sympathize deeply with the people of southern Israel who have suffered from abhorrent rocket and mortar attacks. We recognize that the Israeli government has imposed restrictions on Gaza out of a legitimate and keenly felt fear of continued terrorist action by Hamas and other militant groups. This concern must be addressed without resulting in the de facto collective punishment of the Palestinian residents of the Gaza Strip. Truly, fulfilling the needs of civilians in Israel and Gaza are mutually reinforcing goals.

The unabated suffering of Gazan civilians highlights the urgency of reaching a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and we ask you to press for immediate relief for the citizens of Gaza as an urgent component of your broader Middle East peace efforts. The current blockade has severely impeded the ability of aid agencies to do their work to relieve suffering, and we ask that you advocate for immediate improvements for Gaza in the following areas:

* Movement of people, especially students, the ill, aid workers, journalists, and those with family concerns, into and out of Gaza;

* Access to clean water, including water infrastructure materials,

* Access to plentiful and varied food and agricultural materials;

* Access to medicine and health care products and suppliers;

* Access to sanitation supplies, including sanitation infrastructure materials;

* Access to construction materials for repairs and rebuilding;

* Access to fuel;

* Access to spare parts;

* Prompt passage into and out of Gaza for commercial and agricultural goods; and

* Publication and review of the list of items prohibited to the people of Gaza.

Winter is arriving and the needs of the people grow ever more pressing. For example, the ban on building materials is preventing the reconstruction of thousands of innocent families’ damaged homes. There is also a concern that unrepaired sewage treatment plants will overflow and damage surrounding property and water resources.

Despite ad hoc easing of the blockade, there has been no significant improvement in the quantity and scope of goods allowed into Gaza. Both the number of trucks entering Gaza per month and the number of days the crossings have been open have declined since March. This crisis has devastated livelihoods, entrenched a poverty rate of over 70%, increased dependence on erratic international aid, allowed the deterioration of public infrastructure, and led to the marked decline of the accessibility of essential services.

The humanitarian and political consequences of a continued near-blockade would be disastrous. Easing the blockade on Gaza will not only improve the conditions on the ground for Gaza’s civilian population, but will also undermine the tunnel economy which has strengthened Hamas. Under current conditions, our aid remains little more than an unrealized pledge. Most importantly, lifting these restrictions will give civilians in Gaza a tangible sense that diplomacy can be an effective tool for bettering their conditions.

Your Administration’s overarching Middle East peace efforts will benefit Israel, the Palestinians, and the entire region. The people of Gaza, along with all the peoples of the region, must see that the United States is dedicated to addressing the legitimate security needs of the State of Israel and to ensuring that the legitimate needs of the Palestinian population are met.

Sincerely,

Members of Congress

Arizona

Raul Grijalva

California

Lois Capps

Sam Farr

Bob Filner

Barbara Lee

Loretta Sanchez

Pete Stark

Michael Honda

Lynn Woolsey

Jackie Speier

Diane Watson

George Miller

Connecticut

Jim Himes

Indiana

Andre Carson

Iowa

Bruce Braley

Kentucky

John Yarmuth

Maryland

Elijah Cummings

Donna Edwards

Massachusetts

Michael Capuano

William Delahunt

Jim McGovern

John Tierney

John Olver

Stephen Lynch

Michigan

John Conyers

John Dingell

Carolyn Kilpatrick

Minnesota

Keith Ellison

Betty McCollum

James Oberstar

New Jersey

Donald Payne

Rush Holt

Bill Pascrell

New York

Yvette Clarke

Maurice Hinchey

Paul Tonko

Eric Massa

North Carolina

David Price

Ohio

Mary Jo Kilroy

Marcy Kaptur

Oregon

Earl Blumenauer

Peter DeFazio

Pennsylvania

Chaka Fattah

Joe Sestak

Vermont

Peter Welch

Virginia

Jim Moran

Washington

Jim McDermott

Adam Smith

Jay Inslee

Brian Baird

West Virginia

Nick Rahall

Wisconsin

Tammy Baldwin

Gwen Moore

Virginia

Glenn Nye

[Update: From dearth to flood — Senator Ginny Lyons of Williston will be at the Grand Isle County Committee meeting Monday Feb. 1 as a potential Lt. Gov. candidate, joining Steve Howard and Chris Bray, making it possible that there will be four candidates in that Democratic primary.]    

Two of the three Democratic candidates for lieutenant governor introduced themselves to Franklin County Democratic activists on Monday night. Both Chris Bray and Steve Howard made it to the meeting, having driven a considerable distance in flood weather to be there, while the third candidate, Tim Palmer, from Chittenden County, had to be in Washington DC instead.

Bray was quiet and professorial at his first outing as a statewide candidate. Howard took a more rabble-rousing partisan tone, which might work well with a larger audience.

The gist of their presentations is after the jump.

Rep. Chris Bray, from New Haven in Addison County, concentrated primarily on the role he envisions for his tenure as lite guv in encouraging the re-establishment of food processing and distribution centers in the state as a way to bring back a half-billion dollars in money sent out of state for food. That would represent a 10 percent increase in money spent locally. According to Bray, 97 percent of our food money goes out of state. In addition to increased processing and distribution facilities, he like to see more diversification in farming toward other foods than dairy, and at the same time an alliance [in law and policy] among all farmers, not the current division between “dairy” and “non-dairy” farms.

Bray has degrees in Zoology (BA, UVM, 1977)  and English (MA, UVM, 1991), and taught English at UVM for four years. He is the principal of Common Ground Communications, a writing-editing-design-production outfit in New Haven. He’s been on the House Ag Committee since 2007. Bray and his partner Kate Selby have a horse farm on 82 acres.

Rep. Steve Howard (Rutland City), is a 6-term veteran of the House, half from Rutland Town, more recently from Rutland City. He gave a near-textbook stump speech, hitting the current governor for trying to balance the budget on the backs of senior citizens without even asking Vermonters in the top two income brackets to contribute a little more, specifically, 3 percent more, the same amount as the state employees gave back in their recent contract negotiations. If we can ask the snow-plow driver to give 3 percent, then we should be asking people in the top two brackets to give the same, he said. He was running to stand up for “the little guy.”

He touted his ability to bring people together — as shown by his successful campaigns in two tough, conservative districts.  Howard also named healthcare a major issue that must be addressed in order to encourage job development and control the state budget, identifying increases in medicaid costs as the biggest state budget buster of all, and the lack of wage and salary increases in the small-business private sector as a direct result of the rising cost of health insurance. He favors making Vermont a national leader by establishing a single-payer system within the state.

Howard graduated from Mount St. Joseph Academy (a private Catholic school) and from Boston College (1993). He is a political and communications consultant.

Both men said they would address the current budget deficit through a combination of approaches, including some budget cuts in services, better government efficiency through re-organization and outcome-based budgeting, an increase in some taxes, and using some portion of the “rainy day” fund.

How either man will fare against the Republican candidate — construction company owner and stock car racer Phil Scott or political family scion Mark Snelling — is the question.

(Continuing the policy of promoting diaries from officeholders and officeseekers – promoted by odum)

GMD readers: I wanted to make sure my first of many posts during this campaign cycle, was an important one. Well this is about as important as it gets.

When it comes to Vermont's energy future, we need bold leadership. Today, I spoke out in newspapers throughout the state on Vermont Yankee. Montpelier needs an up-or-down vote now on the aging nuclear plant's future, so we can plan a responsible withdrawal in the two years left on its license. The two most important components of my decision were safety and jobs.

Every week it is a new safety issue. Today, it is the 40 NEW underground pipes containing radioactive material. What will it be tomorrow? Safety must be our first concern and that concern has grown tremendously for me.

But jobs and Vermont Yankee also go hand and hand. You can read in more detail about growing new, clean energy jobs in my opinion piece, but I am just as concerned about finding new jobs for the Vermonters and their communities that will be affected by the closure. Voting now lets us put the plans in motion to build jobs and an energy future without Vermont Yankee.
Speaking out in newspapers and on television is one thing. Making this vote happen is another.

That is why today I am asking all Vermonters to sign this online petition to make sure we get a quick vote on Vermont Yankee.

You can also send this petition and my article to your friends and family. This kind of grassroots organizing is how we will make sure safety and jobs are a priority. It is also how I plan to win this race for governor!
 

Cross posted from Border Jumpers.

Or, specifically, “*more* than 40,” which is as nice a way of putting it as “there is no immediate danger.”  Per Susan Smallheer in today’s Rutland Herald:

There are more than 40 buried pipes containing radionuclides at the Vermont Yankee nuclear reactor, according to a document Entergy Nuclear submitted Monday to the Vermont Public Service Board.

A year ago, the company’s vice president of operations and the site vice president in charge of the Vernon reactor said there were none.

Now, you would think, that pretty much says it all, but it gets better.  VY apparently can’t decide whether it wants to be seen as fraudulent or incompetent:

One of the executives, Jay Thayer, has since publicly corrected his statement.

The company… said there was a difference between underground piping and underground vaults, which often contain multiple pipes, according to company spokesman Robert Williams.

“No one is saying the company didn’t know” there were buried pipes containing radionuclides, Williams said, attributing the problem to lack of communication within the company and “conflicting assumptions.”

Arnie Gundersen, however, brilliantly puts this in proper perspective:

“ENVY is saying that if you die and you are put directly in the ground with dirt on top of you, you are buried. But if you die and are put in a casket, you are not buried, but you are ‘underground,'” Gundersen said.

So let’s see if we can simplify this:

The company either lied about the pipes or didn’t understand the nature of the legal requirements for disclosure of them.  

Then, when it got caught glowing-green handed, it now wants to clarify matters.  

It then used a fairly complicated set of verbal parsings to justify its previous “lack of communication” in the prior case.

And, of course, we’re supposed to just ignore all this because it’s more expensive to get our fuel elsewhere.

Did you ever go to a mechanic who, you find out after the fact, didn’t understand how your car worked?  Ever go to a mechanic who, you find out after the fact, lied to you about how your car worked?

Did you ever go back?

Reports say that the governor’s budget will “pinch” Vermonters.  The fact is though that the governor is doing all he can to avoid pinching the sensitive upper income brackets.  Governor Jim Douglas is asking most Vermonters to make sacrifices during these difficult times. State services are being cut to the bone, state fees are being increased and there is talk of cutting unemployment benefits.



Care and Feeding of the Upper Tax Brackets:  Minus any hint of shared sacrifice, Douglas has proposed replacing a 40% capital gains tax exemption removed last year that favors those in upper income brackets. This move and other changes he proposes would, according to the Times Argus, result in $9.9 million loss of state revenue. He attempts to justify this by raising the fear that Vermont’s rich will have no incentive to stay unless their taxes are lowered.

Douglas acknowledged last week that if his proposal were enacted it would effectively be a tax reduction for top earners. Vermont's having among the highest top margin rates risks driving wealthier Vermonters out of the state, Douglas said.

"We have to make sure there are people in those brackets in the years to come," he said. "I think we are going to see fewer of them."

In addition, Douglas would roll back changes made last year that reduced how much money could be excluded from Vermont's estate taxes.

It remains to be seen how empathetic those experiencing Catamount health cost increases, cuts in human services, housing support service cuts and limited state Medicaid programs will be toward Governor Douglass’ proposal.  No explanation was offered as to why a horde of upper bracket Vermonters didn’t leave the state in droves over the past year.

Perhaps some sympathy could be had if he were to document the coming exodus, show the empty mansions, the derelict condos, the luxury cars packed high with goods abandoned along the highway in hurried flight from the tyranny of a closed capital gains tax loophole.  

No word yet of upper tax bracket exodus from other states such as Connecticut that have raised taxes on the wealthy. Last year Connecticut enacted a new tax on top income brackets that increases taxes on incomes above a certain threshold.  Governor Douglas might be shocked by the reaction.

In a letter, 21 upper income Connecticut residents state "We are willing and able to share in the solution to our state's budget crisis":

"As upper-income residents of Connecticut who treasure the quality of life in our state, we believe that Governor Rell's proposed budget cuts unnecessarily limit the State's ability to maintain public structures and human services that are vital to keeping Connecticut strong and vibrant […]