Woopsie.

Here’s the kind of thing I’m kind of surprised doesn’t happen more often. After the flip for some screen shots…

First, from the Markowitz for Governor site:

Second, from the Racine for Governor site:

The Racine site seems to generate the entries dynamically, so the testimonials might be in a different order if you go, but Adler is definitely on there.

UPDATE: A quick email in my inbox from Brooke Adler makes the point that she is “not trying to be in two places at once and the the inclusion of my name on the list of Markowitz supporters in the Democratic Primary is an error.”

Honestly, it didn’t even occur to me that somewhat might think Adler was intentionally on both lists. I’d be surprised if anybody reading drew such a conclusion.

Thing is… lotsa candidates. Small state. This is going to happen a lot. Not a big deal necessarily, but the campaigns do have an obligation to keep vigilant when dealing with regular folks’ names like this.

(Updated with ECFiber response to BFP oped after the break)

they got the mojo, they got expertise, they got the companies ready to do the building and now they got the certificate of public good:

7461 FINAL ORDER AND CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC GOOD In Re Petition of ValleyNet, Inc., for a Certificate of Public Good to own and operate a cable television system in the State of Vermont, to provide services in the City of Montpelier, and the Towns of Barnard, Bethel, Brookfield, Chelsea, Granville, Hancock, Hartford, Norwich, Pomfret, Randolph, Reading, Rochester, Royalton, Sharon, Stockbridge, Strafford, Thetford, Tunbridge, Vershire, West Windsor, Williamstown, and Woodstock, Vermont

Now all they need is the cash.

East-Central Vermont

Fiber-Optic Network

Box 8, White River Junction, VT 05001

January 24, 2010

To the Editor:

The Free Press article of January 17 on the ECFiber project in 22 towns in central Vermont is deeply disappointing. Your reporter relied exclusively on the questionable criticism of one self-styled expert, despite the opportunity to contact many more reputable sources.

Your readers should be aware that the critic, Terry McGarty, outlined a brief against Burlington Telecom and projects like ECFiber months before the Free Press’s article on January 17, painting them as “socialist” on his blog. A number of years ago, however, McGarty attempted a similar, unsuccessful project in a number of towns in western New Hampshire. He now blames his failure on local town officials’ inability to appreciate the appetite of private investors (himself among them) for return on their capital. He has now become an ardent public interest critic of community broadband. What he and your reporter have failed to tell your readers is that like the electrification of rural America, the build out of broadband infrastructure in rural areas requires a more patient, public-oriented approach.

ECFiber’s business plan numbers did not come out of thin air. They are based on signed, fixed-price contracts with major vendors–equipment manufacturers, engineers and construction firms – whose credentials are beyond question. The engineers and construction experts involved in ECFiber’s design and costing have build over 100 comparable networks.

All prices have been thoroughly vetted by a major certified GSA contractor familiar with costs and prices approved by actual Federal contracts. The Free Press’s reporter declined our offer to supply him with the names and contacts of many engineers and operators who would vouch that ECFiber figures represent the norm in the industry. Instead he chose to focus solely on Alcatel, the one company which, due to a non-disclosure agreement, he knew could not provide the data he sought.

Unlike the “back of the envelope” figures supplied by the Free Press’s “expert” source, ECFiber’s financial model has been based on fully delineated and detailed financial metrics. ECFiber’s estimated cost per subscriber is about $6000, including not only the capital cost of the basic fiber network and connection costs of 50% of passed homes, but also the cost of all Central Office equipment, all operating costs, debt service, taxes, etc., during the period before the project becomes profitable. This figure is completely within the norm for comparable networks throughout the US and is compatible with profitable operations, as the Free Press reporter would have found if he’d bothered to check McGarty’s claims. In contrast, McGarty’s figure of $50,000 per mile for fiber network construction in rural areas is completely unsupported.

Mr. McGarty’s questioning of the 50% take rate is also baseless – ECFiber pre-registrant database already has reached nearly 25%, with the town of Barnard at fully 88% (and this is despite a virtual standstill of activity in the wake of the private financial market collapse, while EC Fiber has been exploring alternative financing opportunities). This has been achieved with a marketing investment approaching $0.00. Most municipal Fiber-to-the-Home projects running for 4 or more years have achieved a rate of 60% or more, making our estimate somewhat conservative.

As ECFiber grows in strength and nears reality, and as dozens of other similar efforts around the country also grow in strength, we fully expect the campaign against municipal Fiber to the Home networks to intensify. Incumbent carriers hate the idea of a community-oriented network providing competition and succeeding without tax-payer financing – even on the ?level playing field? that Vermont law requires. Who can blame them – given the huge profits they can realize with a minimum of effort and expense, while providing second-rate, last-century service over an antiquated, obsolete infrastructure.

ECFiber feels that its project stands on its own, technically and financially, and we welcome review and input from qualified and objective experts.

Sincerely,

Loredo Sola

Chair ECFiber Governing Board

ECFiber is a community-owned, subscriber-funded group of towns working to build a Fiber-to-the-Home network to provide phone, television, and ultra-high-speed internet services to 100% of the homes and businesses in 22 towns in East-Central Vermont. For more information, see www.ecfiber.net.

(Another good edition of TV interviews with Vermont bloggers. – promoted by Jack McCullough)

Episode 20 of VTblogosphereTV airs tonight and we have a legitimate actual piece of real breaking news. Vermont’s two leading online journalists are planning to collaborate. Yes Jon Margolis of Vermont News Guy and Anne Galloway of VT Digger have “had lunch” in the parlance of the industry. They may have actually had lunch as well. I take it as a very good sign that Vermont’s fledgling professional news sites are thinking collaboratively instead of competitively. The odds that they will thrive and build an online reporting infrastructure for the state just got that much better.

Part of what makes Vermont so special is we have these incredibly accomplished people tucked away in the hills quietly doing their thing. If you are unaware of just how much Mr. Margolis brings to the table, check this out. Thanks to Jon for kicking off our first show of the new year in such an auspicious fashion.  

In this clip, Jon also discusses Vermont Yankee and the Rainy Day fund.

The whole episode will show tonight at 7pm on ORCA Media channel 15 in Central VT, and play throughout the month. VCAM in Burlington also airs it, and Rutland and Hardwick may or may not be picking it up as well.  

 Loading ...

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

In our Nourishing the Planet project we’re looking at how farmers and researchers all over the world are combining high-tech and low-tech agricultural practices to help alleviate hunger and poverty. One place they’re trying to do this is at Africa Harvest/Biotech Foundation International. The organization’s mission is “to use science and technology, especially biotechnology, to help the poor in Africa achieve food security, economic well-being and sustainable rural development.”

And while the biotechnology component of their mission may be controversial to some, Africa Harvest is determined that Africa will not be left behind when it comes to the development-and use- of the technology by African researchers and farmers. As a result, the organization is focusing on breeding African crops for Africans. “If you want to make a difference on this continent,” says Daniel Kamanga, communications director for Africa Harvest, “you have to look at African crops.” These include staples such as banana, cassava, and sorghum, which are all important sources of nutrients for millions of Africans.

But these are also crops that are heavily impacted by diseases and pests. Bananas, for example, are susceptible to sigatoka virus, fusarium, weevils, nematodes, and others. To combat these problems, Florence Wambugu, the CEO of Africa Harvest and a scientist who formerly worked with Monsanto, helped develop Tissue Culture Banana (TC banana). Banana diseases are often spread through “unclean” planting material. But TC banana technology allows scientists to use biotechnology for the “rapid and large scale multiplication” of disease free bananas-a single shoot can produce 2,000 individual banana plantlets.

Africa Harvest is also working on biofortifying sorghum with Vitamin A, creating “golden sorghum.”

“But of course, there remains the thorny issue of control-among the biggest stumbling blocks for sharing any technology across countries and regions. Biotechnology has so far been largely owned by the private sector.” So, in addition to researching crop production, Africa Harvest is also working to improve capacity building for scientists all over Africa. “If we’re going to have GMOs on the continent,” says Kamanga, “we want scientists who know how to do it.” Along with that, Africa Harvest is working to strengthen regulatory systems for biotechnology.

And how does Africa Harvest respond to criticism about the development and use of biotechnology in agriculture? According to Kamanga, it’s an “old debate” and one that takes place in 5-star hotels, not in farmers’ fields. The issue now, he says, is how we make the best use of this technology.

Okay, this is officially getting weird. Last week was apparently no anomaly, as reporter Louis Porter again cuts his “analysis” of the Governor’s budget ideas in a light that is deceptively favorable (here is the link). Gone, at least, is the explicit (and demonstrably untrue) statement that Douglas has proposed no tax increases, but what remains still masks reality to the point that seems beyond simply sloppy.

In his analysis of taxes, there remains no mention – none – of the tax increase Douglas is proposing to the middle class. Only a potential tax break to the upper incomes is mentioned. So while it doesn’t contain the explicit no new taxes line, it deceptively continues the same narrative, in the process simply omitting what is likely to be the most controversial (and thereby newsworthy) element of his tax proposals – an element presented as such by the free Press and AP coverage.

The Governor, of course, wants to eliminate some income sensitivity under the statewide property tax, which could hit two-income families in particular. As one analyst laid it out for me:

For example, if your report $65,000 in income, your ed prop. tax would go from to $1,170 to $1,463 (max. % rising from 1.8% to 2.25%). [note that the local inflators would make the figures different in different towns but this is before the adjustments]  That’a 25% increase for a middle class family.

If you report $80,000, your tax would go from $1,440 to $2,800 (94% increase based on an increase from 1.8% to 3.5%).

He wants to use the savings to lower the residential & non-residential rates by one cent.  Thus, the savings will accrue primarily to the wealthy (instate, second home owners, and businesses).

If you depended on the Vermont Press Bureau’s coverage, you wouldn’t even know this controversial aspect existed – at least not in the two articles I’ve seen.

In the past when we’ve seen a Vermont reporter go all Douglas advocacy, its usually led to a job change. According to Hubbub, Sabina Haskell insisted that the Brattleboro Reformer endorse Jim Douglas for Governor, and shortly thereafter she went to work for the administration (the endorsement did not repeat). When Brendan McKenna began writing fluff pieces about Martha Rainville for (again) the Rutland Herald & Times Argus, it was only a matter of months before it was anounced he was joining the Rainville election team as Communications Director.

Douglas is a lame duck, though, so its hard to imagine any jobs opening up. Maybe Dubie’s looking for a Communications Director.

In any event, this needs to stop. I encourage folks to send emails to the editors of the Rutland Herald and Times Argus and ask that coverage of the Governor’s budget be more… er… fair and balanced (will that get me sued by Fox News?).

Times Argus letters-to-the-editor: letters@timesargus.com

Rutland Herald letters-to-the-editor: letters@rutlandherald.com

Article 25 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights Says All Have the Right to ‘Adequate Medical Care and Necessary Social Services,’ But America Is the Only Developed Country in the World Without a Universal Health-Care System, Which Puts Millions of Americans at Risk of Poor Health — and Financial Ruin — Because They Cannot Afford Private Health Insurance

Former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt holds up a copy of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights in this photo taken at UN headquarters in New York in November 1949, 11 months after its formal adoption by the world body, including the United States. Much of the Universal Declaration, in fact, was drafted by the U.S. and derived from the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution. Article 25 of the Universal Declaration says that “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.” So why is the U.S. not in compliance with Article 25 by not having a universal health-care system? (Photo Courtesy United Nations)

(Posted 5:00 a.m. EST Monday, January 25, 2010)

By SKEETER SANDERS

When the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, it did so against the backdrop of a world still reeling in shock and revulsion at the unspeakable crimes against humanity committed by the Nazis before and during World War II.

Indeed, national and international pressure for a global bill of rights had been building throughout the war and reached a crescendo after the Nuremberg trials of top Nazi leaders in 1946.

The United Nations Charter “reaffirmed faith in fundamental human rights, and dignity and worth of the human person” and committed all member states to promote “universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.”

To that end, Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights — to which the United States was one of its principal authors — says:

“Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.”

President Franklin D. Roosevelt had championed a global bill of rights as far back as 1941, when, in his State of the Union address, Roosevelt called for the protection of what he termed the “essential” Four Freedoms: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, freedom from fear and freedom from want.

Yet more than 60 years after its adoption, the United States remains out of  compliance with Article 25 because it is the only industrialized nation on Earth that does not have a system of universal health care for all of its citizens.

And the minority Republicans on Capitol Hill — emboldened by Scott Brown’s victory in last week’s special Senate election in Massachusetts, robbing the majority Democrats of their filibuster-proof 60-vote majority — appear determined to keep it that way.

BULK OF UNINSURED MAKE LESS THAN $39K A YEAR

For months now, the Republicans have been fighting tooth and nail against every single health-care reform bill that’s been proposed by the Democrats, yet they have steadfastly refused to come up with any viable reform proposals of their own.

And when this writer says “viable,” I mean proposals that enables the estimated 31 million Americans who cannot afford private health insurance to obtain coverage they can afford.

These 31 million Americans — as well as the estimated 13 million illegal immigrants living in this country — are only one serious illness or accident away from financial ruin because they cannot afford the high cost of private health insurance.

According to a 2006 study by the Kaiser Family Foundation, two-thirds of the uninsured are low-income individuals or from low-income families, making less than 200 percent of the poverty level, or $38,614 for a family of four in 2004.

Over a third of the uninsured (37 percent) are poor, according to the Kaiser study and another 28 percent are near-poor — defined as those with incomes between 100 percent and 199 percent of the poverty level, or between $19,307 and $38,228 in 2004.

Were it not for Medicaid, the Kaiser study notes, “many more of the poor would be uninsured. The near-poor also run a high risk of being uninsured because they are not likely to be eligible for Medicaid.”

LACK OF INSURANCE OFTEN MEANS INADEQUATE — AND EVEN NONEXISTENT — CARE

What impact does not having health insurance have on receiving the kind of adequate medical care that all Americans are entitled to under Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? A very severe impact, according to the Kaiser study, which says that the uninsured are up to three times more likely than those with insurance to report problems receiving needed medical care, even for serious conditions.

Part of the reason many of the uninsured postpone or forgo needed care is because “over 40 percent do not have a regular place to go when they are sick or need medical advice,” the study found, “compared to just nine percent of those with coverage.

“About 20 percent of the uninsured — vs. three percent of those with coverage — say their usual source of care is a [hospital] emergency room,” the study found. “Anticipating high medical bills, many of the uninsured are not able to follow recommended treatment. Over a third of uninsured adults say they did not fill a drug prescription in the past year and over a third went without a recommended medical test or treatment due to cost.”

The Kaiser study also found that insured adults under 65 years of age are at least 50 percent more likely to have had preventive care such as pap smears, mammograms and prostate exams than uninsured adults.

HIGH NUMBERS OF UNINSURED IS COSTING TAXPAYERS BILLIONS

Aside from the risk to one’s health that lack of health insurance poses, there is also the severe financial strain that lack of health insurance can wreak, not only on individuals, but also on the country’s health-care system as a whole.

The Kaiser study found that having health insurance makes a huge difference to a person’s credit worthiness. “Like any bill, when medical bills are not paid or paid off too slowly,” the study found,”they are turned over to a collection agency, and a person’s ability to get further credit is significantly limited. Nearly a quarter of the uninsured — 23 percent — report that they were contacted by a collection agency about unpaid medical bills in just the past year [2003].”

More importantly, the cost of caring for the uninsured is costing taxpayers billions of dollars.

In 2004, the Kaiser study found, taxpayers forked over $41 billion to pay for the health-care costs of the uninsured. More than half of all public funds to cover the costs of medical care for the uninsured came from the federal government, with the majority of federal dollars — 70 percent — flowing through Medicare and Medicaid.

Most government dollars to cover the uninsured goes for hospital care, which is paid indirectly to hospitals based partly on the share of care they provide to the uninsured. Health-care costs in direct service programs to the uninsured, such as community health centers and the veterans’ health system, are funded almost completely by taxpayer dollars.

The Kaiser study notes, however, that federal health-care spending “has not kept up with the recent growth in the number of uninsured. Although federal support for community health centers increased by more than 50 percent between 2001 and 2004 — from $430 million to $670 million — these expenditures account for only three percent of total federal spending for [caring for the uninsured]” — even as the number of uninsured Americans increased by 11 percent during the same period.

ACCESS TO ADEQUATE HEALTH CARE IS INDEED A HUMAN RIGHT

The bottom line is that if you don’t have health insurance, you have no guarantee of access to adequate health care which Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says you are entitled to — and to which this country is a signatory.

That the Republicans on Capitol Hill have fought against all attempts to enable the uninsured to afford health insurance — while at the same time refusing to come up with any viable health-care reform plan of their own — means that they are violating Americans’ right under international law to universal access to adequate health care.

At the same time, the Republicans’ intransigence is costing taxpayers billions of dollars that would otherwise not be spent if the uninsured had health insurance that they could afford.

That many private insurers continue to exclude hundreds of thousands of Americans from coverage due to pre-existing medical conditions also violates Article 25. Such discrimination is unconscionable and can no longer be tolerated. Outlawing such discrimination is long overdue and absolutely essential for any meaningful health-care reform.

The United States has been out of compliance with international law on health care for more than 60 years. How much longer will this country remain an outlaw state when it comes to universal health care?

# # #

Copyright 2010, Skeeter Sanders. All rights reserved.

Statements contained in a January 21, 2010 report by WCAX about Entergy's Vernon Nuclear Plant raised so many disconnections surrounding the nuclear power issue that I am drawn to comment, as follows:

Vermont Yankee officials and federal regulators are quoted saying the tritium leak at the plant is not a reason for public concern.”

The public is concerned! The public should be concerned. What has occurred is a lack of attention on the part of capitalist, market oriented, Vermont Yankee officials.

Federal regulators are obviously more concerned with covering their butts than addressing public concerns. Yankee officials care for their bottom line, not the public.

Public officials should have sufficient experience to comprehend the current extent of corporate corruption of public due process.

Public concern must be dissuaded rather than declared not.

What has occurred is exactly what I feared about commercial nuclear power when Westinghouse and General Electric first began promoting “turn-key,” commercial, nuclear powered electrical generating power plants, in the mid-1960s.

At the time, I had assembled six of those firms first nuclear reactors for submarines and knew that marketing people should have nothing to do with nuclear power. Success in the marketing profession is too seldom the result of honesty and admitted understanding of what is being sold.

Nuclear power plants, managed by persons who are “from away,” who are not living the real-time of operation, maintenance and safety of such a plant, are unobservant of plant conditions. They will not order inspection of cooling towers and trenches when it will cost them profits to discover maintenance issues the cost of which they would like to avoid.

“Yankee officials revealed Wednesday that the radioactive isotope Tritium was found in standing water inside a concrete tunnel at the plant. The tunnel is the conduit for pipes that carry radioactive waste to the plant's waste processing facility.”

Why did Yankee officials not know about it? Why did they not presume a trench carrying radioactive waste might have loose radioactive materials and inspect it regularly. Why are they not inspecting the entire plant regularly to learn if the plant has issues? Did they hide the facts? Or did they not look because the more they and the public do not know about what might cost them, the better? Everyone understands 'bean counter' logic and money draws lawyers to cover bean counters' asses like a dead body draws maggot flies.

“Yankee officials say the standing water should not be in the tunnel but it is not a cause for public alarm.”

No shit! What else would anyone expect them to say? If there is anyone breathing who believes what corporate officials say to the public, they are either idiots or sycophants.

Yankee officials stated this the tritium containing water that is not out in the environment. It is contained in a locked room within the plant.

Where did they get the water that does not evaporate? Since when does a lock on a door contain vapors?

“It's a below-grade room within the plant in a confined space,” said Neil Sheehan of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.”

It is not in a confined space if it reached radiological test wells, Below grade did not keep it out of the test wells. Sorry, Sheehan, you would not have made the grade with Admiral Rickover.

Neil Sheehan of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission also is quoted as saying that the standing water was not expected to be found there in the trench.

What a terrible statement! Is it OK if persons who manage Vernon do not slow down when driving through your neighborhood and kill a two-year old girl because they did not expect the child to run from behind a parked car? The key to successfully working with power, is to always try to anticipate the unexpected.

“One positive that could come out of this is that this helps them trace back the source of any groundwater contamination. That would be a very good thing.”

The best example of 'spin' that I have read. Sheehan should work on Wall Street. Can he turn feces into honey?

“So far the amount of tritium found in groundwater outside the plant is below federal reporting standards. Sheehan says it's a mere fraction of the amount found in an illuminated Exit sign.”

Most illuminating bulbs, these days, must be discarded as waste hazardous to human health.

Gov. Jim Douglas, R-Vermont, was quoted as saying the state health department is monitoring the situation.

Yup! That covers his ass.

“This is a test well that has been placed near the nuclear plant. So the health department, I have complete confidence in, and I'm sure they'll let the people of Vermont or anyone else know if there's a reason for a public health concern,” Douglas said.”

Jim Douglas will say anything to benefit a corporation.

“Of greater concern to the governor is the revelation last week that Yankee officials had made misstatements to state regulators about the very existence of these underground pipes.”

Being out of the loop sucks.

“Douglas says he's still waiting to hear back from company executives with an explanation. But even though his trust in the company has been shaken, Douglas says he still supports relicensing the plant.”

Douglas can be bought much too cheaply to be a governor!

Now!

Nuclear Power should not be a commercial enterprise!

Public officials must learn to talk about the details of the nuclear process if they desire to educate the public and dispel its fears.

Nuclear reactors are not black magic. While nuclear reactors have a larger scale, they essentially have fewer moving parts than an automobile engine.

The Vernon plant should not be re-licensed. It should be taken out of service. Vernon is not the place to perform destructive testing of how long the first GE commercial nuclear power plant design will last. Only gamblers to take chances like that.

Profit and nuclear power do not mix!

Profit and power do not mix!

If Vermont is unable to operate a nuclear plant to produce the power it needs, with its own citizens, at the risk of its own citizens, it should turn off its lights and snow-making.

I recommend that a Public Power Commission be established to replace the Vernon plant with a new reactor in order to take advantage of extremely valuable tradesmen, permits, procedures and site improvements. The commission should also replace the statewide corporate production and distribution of power.

A functioning public power infrastructure is more important than private profits.

Whether overly paranoid or cowardly people like it or not, nuclear power is here to stay. The oppositions to nuclear weaponry espoused by the pickets whose lines I crossed when building early nuclear reactors in submarines, 53 years ago, were appreciated. I would remind you that as a result of the efforts many people, war between the Soviet Union and the United States did not happen.

It was unthinkable! Today, persons opposed to nuclear energy plants cause me to think of a person screaming 'Don't do it! Don't do it!' at the first human attempting to stand on his or her hind legs. They are losers!

Nuclear power is here! We must learn to operate it with control!

As much as we cannot environmentally sustain the standard of living to which the citizens of the United States have become accustomed, if this nation fails to learn to control nuclear power, that will put our country behind the rest of the nations of the world, economically.

Witchcat

Shumlin stays hot, Racine turns it up to 10, and Dunne moves front and center. All told, most of the candidates really kick it all up a notch or two.

Peter Shumlin. Shumlin’s still hot, again to large extent thanks to Vermont Yankee’s continuing troubles and his strong association with the issue. But he’s also got his email list running, is growing his Facebook contacts, and is actively campaigning (when I called him about another issue over the weekend, I caught him shaking hands on a Middlebury street corner alongside Elizabeth Ready en route to an evening fundraiser). In the news, looking more gubernatorial than Douglas (and Dubie), raising money, campaigning. Check, check, check and check.

Doug Racine‘s been all over the place this past week. In the news on health care, but also hitting the Governor strongly on his budget cutting proposals insofar as they impact those who can least afford it, and taking advantage of the greater campaign flexibility his position affords him on as compared to Senate Prez Shumlin. Capping off the week with the high profile campaign event Sue reports on below makes for an explosive week for the former Lietenant Governor. It’s unclear how much money is coming in these days for the Chittenden Senator, as his ActBlue meter hasn’t shown much life lately, but there’s little doubt his kickoff event garnered him some campaign cash. All told, as good a week as a candidate can have at this still-early stage.

Matt Dunne. I thought he might bump up another notch this week, but Dunne comes on even stronger as his statewide momentum has even started to breach the legislature-centric Montpelier bubble. Dunne has not only assembled an impressive collection of advisers, he is also bringing on staff and reportedly already has six figures in the bank, despite his late entry. Dunne also entered the Montpelier arena literally as well as figuratively with a media event focused on Vermont Yankee. As such he is the only other Democratic gubernatorial pretender making any real effort to actively share the issue with Senator Shumlin.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; Dems tend to fall into one of two categories regarding Dunne – those who really like him a lot, and those who refuse to accept just how many other Dems really like him a lot. It’s starting to dawn on the latter group that the former Vermont State Senator and House Whip is going to be very much a factor in this primary.

Susan Bartlett. Bartlett’s getting a little buzz in the sense that more folks are accepting her as a legitimate candidate as opposed to wondering why the state Senator – who has never before appeared on a statewide ballot – would jump in to such a high profile race for the top job. Her attempts to stake out the fiscally conservative Democratic turf seem to be paying some dividents, and readers of the this site will note a few diaries down that she even took that message here to GMD – hardly a receptive crowd ideologically. Props for chutzpah. That combined with my encountering my first couple people that have indicated to me their intent to vote for her in the primary makes for a little extra mojo.

Deb Markowitz. Starting to get some negative feedback on Markowitz for her mixed signals on state issues (she reportedly exited quickly after the Governor’s budget address and managed to avoid the press). She continues to be the most relentless fundraiser, but that too is starting to weary folks. There’s clearly a real desire to see her dive more clearly and definitively into Vermont issues. She does get out press releases about “safe” national issues, such as the recent SCOTUS decision, but the muttering-for-more has definitely increased this week, at least insomuch as what I’m hearing. Without any good media or events to counter, it means she drops another mojo point for the week, although I have no doubt there are some significant moves from this campaign to be seen some time from now, particularly in the realm of media buys. My gut tells me Markowitz is going to have a very paid-media-heavy campaign.

Brian Dubie. I got nuthin on the Dubester this week. The movements of Republicans are often unclear to me, although there are still mutterings about possible primary challenges from more doctrinaire and/or marketable GOPers. Heard Randy Brock’s name again. Whether its a name being floated with his approval or awareness is debatable. I’d bet no, and that its just another sympton of old-guard Republican ambivalence towards their anointed one.

Sunday night, and this doesn’t really belong on the front page, but so what.

Was just reminded of a movie I’d forgotten about completely. In 1983, Francis Ford Coppola directed two films based on similar S.E. Hinton books written for the “young adult” set. Both starred Matt Dillon and one, The Outsiders, was a fairly pedestrian 80’s young-adultish film and performed reasonably well at the box office.

The other was Rumble Fish, and it largely crashed and burned at the theaters. It too starred Dillon, but also featured Diane Lane, Tom Waits, Mickey Rourke, Dennis Hopper and others – a really interesting cast. Unlike The Outsiders, it was filmed with a lot more creativity – not simply by virtue of being filmed in black and white (except for the fish, as I recall), but for some unusual cinematography and scene transitions. In fact the whole film’s tone really transcended the source material. Yeah it was melodramatic, and perhaps pretentious, but it worked – at least as I recall. Haven’t seen it since I was in high school.

Anyway, it just came rushing back to me when I recalled the song from the movie, which I absolutely love, and which (again, from what I remember) captured the odd, even disturbing tone of the film well. Does anybody else remember this pic? Was it as good (or at least interesting) as I remember it being (I was only, like 15 or 16 at the time, and I thought some pretty crappy stuff was good when I was 16, after all)?

Embracing the promise of twenty-first century communication technology, Doug Racine officially kicked-off his gubernatorial campaign today with a simultaneous appearance, via live-streaming, at nine gathering spots across Vermont.  I joined the group of about sixteen people who  assembled at the McCarthy family’s “Cosmic Bakery”  in St. Albans to enjoy coffee and pastry and watch Doug’s kickoff speech, held at the much larger gathering in Winooski’s Champlain Mill.  Following opening remarks in which he described his campaign as a grass-roots effort focused on hope and optimism for Vermont’s future, and contrasted  that  positive message with the negativity of the Douglas administration, Racine responded to a series of questions that had earlier been submitted by e-mail from voters in various locations.

When asked to list what his top three priorities would be as Governor, he listed “jobs” as number one, citing the necessity of providing broadband access throughout the state so that Vermont might benefit from the growing market for hi-tech products and services.  He also spoke of the opportunities available for Vermont to become a leader in answering the problems posed by climate change, and observed that, unlike the current administration, he does not believe that encouraging a flourishing business environment  must  be done at the expense of ordinary Vermonters.  

Moving to his second priority, healthcare, Racine spoke of the need to move toward universal and affordable coverage in Vermont, regardless of what happens on the national front.  He identified his third priority as accomplishing the “efficient management of government;” which he said may not be a goal that generates a lot of excitement, but is an underlying requirement for addressing all of Vermont’s urgent needs.

Through his responses to other questions, we learned that he opposes touch-screen voting for it’s lack of a “paper-trail;”  is committed to a strong school system in which the state partners with communities exercising local control; supports pre-k education as a way to ensure the success of Vermont’s children in meeting the challenges of the future; believes that the practice of cost-shifting for essential human services like mental health does not serve the best interests of Vermonters; and that the state must step-up to the plate to pay these costs.  Focussing on recent attempts to justify cost-cutting through reductions in school spending,  Racine pointed-out that, even though school enrollment may be declining in Vermont, the number of children with special needs is increasing.

At the conclusion of the live-streamed event, local participants were given an opportunity to register comments and questions for future response.  Supporter Jack McCarthy, who is the Superintendent of Schools for the Franklin Northwest School District expressed indignation with Governor Douglas for his “insults to local school boards,” unfunded mandates and cost shifting.  Some of the St. Albans listeners said they would like to hear more about other issues, such as Vermont Yankee (for which Racine is on record as opposing re-commissioning); but they were promised further opportunities to query the candidate in the upcoming months.  

I am still waiting for a requested explanation of his stance with regard to the issue of ATV use on public lands; but, a couple of days ago, I was assured by campaign Field Director Amy Shollenburger  that he is working on a draft response for GMD on this topic.