(Hmm…. very interesting, eh? – promoted by Christian Avard)

Of course, we're all familiar with the ins and outs of the Doyle poll but, still, it's always interesting. 

 Interesting that people are generally pessimistic (44%) about the economy, but are happy with Douglas (42% vs 39%, anyway). 

Also interesting that Vermonters support hemp production, the decriminalization of marijuana under one ounce, taking the lead on global warming AND the relicensing of VY.  (Not that they're necessarily related, just that you wouldn't think it would shake out that way.

According to Colbert, he’s got “huevos rancheros”. Colbert was quite funny, going on about “dribble-down” economics and “the market will take care of poverty”. Bernie was… Bernie. All in all, it was a great forum for Bernie to get his message out there.

Unfortunately, I couldn’t get the embed to work, but you can watch it here.

UPDATE: kestrel has it working, it’s in the comments.

Yesterday, the Vermont Commission on Family Recognition and Protection (really?  That’s it’s name?  I testified before it and didn’t even realize that that was it’s name) released its final report yesterday.  As was known all along, the commission was never intended to provide a recommendation of any sort.

The basic summary of the  report doesn’t provide any information that isn’t obvious to anyone who’s not an idiot or blinded by bigotry, but I’ll summarize just in case.  Per The Rutland Herald:

Although it didn’t make a specific recommendation on same-sex marriage, the report suggests that lawmakers look closely at some other relating issues, including Massachusetts’ experience since legalizing same-sex marriage, easing the state income tax system for gay and lesbian couples, the impact of raising children by same-sex couples, and what to do with those who have civil unions if the state moved toward full marriage rights.

“The commission recommends that Vermont take seriously the differences between civil marriage and civil union in terms of their practical and legal consequences for Vermont’s civil union couples and their families,” the report concludes. “Their testimony and the testimony of their friends and supporters was sincere, direct, impassioned and compelling. Act 91 represents Vermont’s commitment to the constitutional equality and fairness for these citizens and Vermont should preserve and protect that commitment.”

And to me, this is the relevant thing.  I don’t care about the commission’s recommendations or lack thereof.  I do care about the testimony.  What I saw of it (and live blogged about at the time) was, quite frankly, astonishing.  It wasn’t just that people talked about same sex marriage, but they talked about it without getting booed or catcalled.  They talked about events in their lives honestly and openly and the stories were incredible (the report itself is quite long (35 pages) and only contains excerpts from the testimony, but can be downloaded here.)

I will, however, present an interesting contrast.  From the testimony of Linda Maloney, an Episcopal Priest:

It goes without saying that the laws of the state should not be dictated by the principles of any one religion. State laws are for the good order of the state and the benefit of its citizens, and must not favor one group over another. So I think it is not valid to argue that marriage should be only between a man and woman because the Bible or other religious tradition says it must be so.

From the testimony of Rose Lepeltier:

I realize that a union between two consenting males or two consenting females does not at first view seem abusive or harmful as some other forms of sexual behavior which are legally prosecuted, but for our government to officially and legally open the door to accept and promote a behavior that goes against God’s warnings is clearly to invite distress in days to come.

From Donald and Lynette Cutting:

We are Biblically opposed to homosexual marriage and civil unions, not because we hate homosexuals but because we do hate the sin they are in, because God does. What they are doing is in complete opposition to God’s moral laws as stated in the Bible in many places. It also erodes the country, as families fall apart and there is more crime and heartbreak, kids committing suicide, using drugs, having sex and babies out of wedlock – all because we are not following God’s moral laws.

And really, this is what it’s all about: people want their government to enforce their religious beliefs.  

I think it’s time we stop catering to this increasingly small minority and just say you know, there’s no valid reason to oppose same-sex marriage, and there’s no reason to subject the constitution to the whims of those who think its role is to support their beliefs to the detriment of all others.

( – promoted by odum)

Wow, just when I thought the mortgage crisis was finally being dealt with, here comes yet another email offer! 

Hi Nate.  I recently received the information that you submitted about purchasing a home.  I called the number that you provided but was not able to reach you.  Please call or email me at your earliest convenience.  Thank you.

Fred
—
Peak Mortgage
Fred Phillips
Senior Loan Officer
fred.themortgageguy@cox.net
480-251-9771

Fred, Fred, Fred….  When did we last talk?  Never.  When did I submit information about purchasing a home?  Not in quite a while, and not with anyone other than my local Vermont bank.  So, Fred, who are you?  Who is Peak Mortgage?  Since it seems that our national banking oversight is absent, let me forward your personal note to Vermont's regulatory agency, BISCHA.   

And guess what they tell me about you?

Dear Mr. Freeman:

Thank you for your email.  Peak Mortgage is not licensed by this Department and may be in violation of Vermont banking statute.  The Department will followup accordingly.

Good job, BISCHA!  I hope you let Fred know that Vermonters don't need to put their good mortgage dollars into a bad mortgage industry.

Has Fred contacted you?  Are you being solicited by mortgage sales pros who may or may not be licensed in Vermont?  If so, send your questionable solicitations along to bankdiv@bishca.state.vt.us

In all of the noise about who's at fault at creating the mortgage crisis, one factor rarely makes it to print:  the hyper-marketing and hard-selling of questionable financial products to consumers who can't possibly know the difference between a tranche and CMO (which is how their mortgage gets sliced, diced, and resold around the world).

The mortgage originators are cold-calling, emailing, and pushing consumer debt like crack-cocaine, and now they're looking for new junkies.  Thanks, Fred;  I'll pass.

 What with all the chest beating about tax,budget and revenue policies these past days I found this and it looked newsworthy .  

State to host new type of company

Burlington Free Press

Vermont is poised to become the first state in the country to host a new type of company, dubbed an “L3C.”

The designation allows for the creation of a hybrid between a nonprofit organization and a for-profit corporation. The entity would be a low-profit company with “charitable or educational” goals.

Enacting the legislation in Vermont, advocates say, gives the state an opportunity to further burnish its credentials as a progressive and innovative economy and might generate revenue for the state when in- and out-of-state companies register as L3Cs here.

The three “l”s from “low-profit, limited liability company” are used to form the L3C label, said Robert Lang, president and CEO of the Cross River, N.Y.-based Mary Elizabeth & Gordon B. Mannweiler Foundation Inc. that advocated for L3C legislation in Vermont and elsewhere in the United States.

“We wanted a branding that implied the LLC concept … and yet be distinctive enough to be recognized as a specialized vehicle,” Lang said; an LLC is a limited liability company

It would cost Vermont companies $75 to file as an L3C and those located elsewhere, $100, not including the fees generated by filing annual reports, said Deputy Secretary of State Bill Dalton. There are no estimates on how much money the measure could raise.

Selecting Vermont

Rep. Michele Kupersmith, D-South Burlington, one of the bill’s sponsor’s, said the measure could be used to help with downtown redevelopment, low-income

housing, energy initiatives and work force development.

The legislation passed the Vermont House and Senate on voice votes and awaits the signature of Republican Gov. Jim Douglas. The governor plans to sign the bill, said Jason Gibbs, his spokesman.

“It’s a rare example of this Legislature passing a bill that has, at its core, economic growth as its objective. And the governor looks forward to signing it,” Gibbs said.

I just, really, am at a bit of a loss here.  Per the Rutland Herald:

Gov. James Douglas wants to stimulate the state’s economy by borrowing money, shifting investments and loosening the permitting process for new construction.

The governor’s economic stimulus package, which he unveiled on Saturday, calls for little new state spending, causing some to wonder how effective it would be.

Douglas has repeatedly said he will not support an increase in broad-based taxes, and recently the state has been faced with making $25 million in cuts to the 2009 budget in response to falling state revenues.

At the Vermont Home and Garden Show in Essex Junction, the governor presented a proposal to help Vermont weather a national recession. His plan relies to a large extent on additional state bonding, shifting teachers and state employees’ retirement systems investments into VHFA bonds and relaxing the permitting process for new homes.

Homes.

Right.

Because the housing market is really what we should be relying on at this point in time?

Really, does anyone else here feel like we’ve all gone down the rabbit hole?  

Anyway, I have a different idea: perhaps we could, you know, study our state’s economy so that when we, I don’t know, end up with a $25 million revenue shortfall, it doesn’t put us in such a state of shock.

I’m not a genius when it comes to the economy, but nor am I a moron.  It does not take a genius to see that when faced with an economy that’s in a downturn, it is unwise to invest in a market which is in virtual shambles.  

In the meantime, however, I think I understand why one of the initial moves in response to this is to start cutting the benefits to those who are most defenseless in a poor economy.  It’s because we’re morons.

Seriously, how on earth did Republicans manage to convince anyone that they understand the first thing about economics?  It’s not like we end up with anything but shell games from them.  Borrowing money and just shifting investments?

How about we actually invest in our state?

An op-ed piece from today's Times Argus: 

Article published Apr 20, 2008
Renters' rights deserve protection
Assertions made by landlord lobby are not backed by facts

The point of this bill is to facilitate evictions by landlords, mainly by undermining or rolling back victories tenants have been able to obtain in the courts in recent years. The bill would allow landlords to serve misleading,  confusing eviction notices with inconsistent and contradictory grounds and termination dates, would delay tenants' refunds of their security deposits, and would shorten the time a tenant has to vacate the premises if the court rules in favor of the landlord. Bob Kiss, the mayor of Burlington, is on record opposing the bill.

To call on your representatives to oppose S. 372 you can leave a message at the office of the Sergeant at Arms, 828-2228, or find your represesentative at the online legislative directory. 

Ok everyone, who got a sun burn over the weekend?  My daughter did the honor of spraying Solarcaine on my back after I spent three hours planting willow and lilac on my small picnic lot next to Stony Brook. 

Share your story?

some of it .Earlier the Republicans had emailed supporters telling of free tickets to the Home Show to hear Gov .Douglas unveil his plan.

By Terri Hallenbeck Free Press Staff Writer

April 19, 2008

ESSEX JUNCTION –

Gov. Jim Douglas today unveiled a package of 15 items he said would stimulate $214 million worth of economic activity in the state over the next five years.

The measures included bonding for road and bridge projects, a sales-tax holiday, and help for Vermonters who risk losing their homes.

Douglas said the proposals would cost $2.78 million in state money to implement next year and that he would work with the Legislature to determine where the funds would come from. He spoke at the 2008 Vermont Home & Garden Show at the Champlain Valley Exposition before a smattering of attendees, staff members and media against a backdrop of tractor exhibits and food vendors.

The governor released his plan the same week economists warned Vermont is in a recession and state revenues are slowing.

Douglas said he thought the Legislature could enact his package in the next couple of weeks. However, some lawmakers have expressed anger that the governor is releasing his package two weeks before they are due to adjourn the session and while they are in the midst of trying to cut the state’s general budget for fiscal year 2009.

(AM note: I notice in putting the finishing touches on this diary this morning, that Pollina, too has cited the cap gains tax loophole, but as a source for new spending on his own stimulus plan. I’ll have to take a look more closely later, or maybe another front pager will….)

It’s encouraging to hear the “r” word being discussed in the $25 million shortfall scramble in Montpelier of late – revenues. As Julie reported below, the economic downturn and its consequent $25 mill-hole was initially aimed squarely at those for whom it was a matter of life and death, such as Vermonters who are depending on assistance for prescription drugs. The fact is, government is the institution that enacts our teeter-totter of public policy, as vetted by the legislative branch, implemented by the executive and refereed by the judicial – and that teeter totter balances revenues & costs, rights & responsibilities. When the system is out of whack, you have to look at all the knobs & gauges in order to make an informed judgment on an appropriate adjustment. Leaving revenue off the table in deference to political parochialism or laissez-faire idolatry is just plain dumb.

And its these sorts of discussions that bring out the differences between the left and the right. The left sees people as their constituents (or at least they are supposed to…). Keeping our society running by cutting off poor people’s prescriptions (so that wealthy people can keep their tax bills low enough to afford more better ski trips to Europe) is supposed to be antithetical to that principle. The economy is a vehicle – a means to an end of taking care of people. When it isn’t meeting that end, government needs to step in and fill the gaps through public policy and regulation.

The right, on the other hand, sees a single constituent: the economy itself. We talk about corporate personhood, but in a sense what they see is the personhood of the economy itself, and they see themselves as in its service. It’s macro health, massaging and comfort become the only goal. Large institutions like banks become its vital organs. Individual people, on the other hand, are little more than skin cells. That’s why, when Bear Stearns is in danger of going under, they have no qualms about “heroic measures” to save such a vital organ, but scoff at the idea of mortgage bailouts for homeowners under the guise of parochial doubletalk about “personal responsibility” – which has always been little more than a useful canard for keeping voters in line, anyway. The truth is, you usually have to rip up a lot of skin cells to get to an internal organ to apply the heroic measures.

So conservatives aren’t working from a vision of the economy as a means to an end of helping people, to them, its an end in itself. People are an afterthought… and when it works out for them, its a joyful happenstance. When it doesn’t, well, thems the breaks. Sometimes their constituent gets a cold, and some of the individual cells die off. That’s just life.

Struggles like the one over the budget hole get to the heart of the differences over the left and right, and despite decades of hammering lefties into thinking their view on economics is somehow not the “grown up” view (in defiance of years of history, evidence and scholarship to the contrary), Dems need to hold fast. $25 million budget hole? How about instead of killing working people’s jobs in Vermont communities and cutting off prescriptions, try this:

Close the “Capital Gains Tax Loophole”: $23 million

Finally get rid of most of the Douglas administrations army of spin doctors: $.75 million

Cut back on some of the “Next Generation” scholarships (being sure to keep the workforce training intact): $1.25 million (See? Two cuts… just to prove that I’m not too doctrinaire, either 😉 )

That’s off the top of my head…. any other ideas?