(This has been an ongoing conversation between a small group of folks with widely differing ideas, but it continues to be an interesting read. I’m front paging it to encourage more folks to dive in, or just to sit back and enjoy the back and forth. – promoted by odum)

Pop Quz:

What does a magazine, a website, historic preservation, housing, and economic development all have in common?

The answer is below the fold.  But before we get there, ask yourself this question:

If you had the responsibility and authority to grow Vermont's economy, what methods would make your Top 5 list?  If it was your job to oversee the way Vermont government positions itself to help grow our economy, how would you do it? 

Sometimes we need to step back from traditional or even entrenched ways of thinking in order to keep from falling in the same old ruts.  So are you ready?  Look out for the ruts!  Because now you are the Secretary of…

….the Agency of Commerce and Community Development! 

And by now you know the answer to the Pop Quiz.  Commerce and Community Development is the glue that binds together such disparate elements as Vermont Life, VermontVacation.com, the Division of Historic Preservation, Housing, and Economic Development.

So, hypothetically, if you were asked to replace Kevin Dorn (as a hypothetical, assuming some day we have a new governor), what would you do?  Do you think it's still a good idea to put Vermont Life on the same level as the Department of Economic Development?  Would there be other Departments or Divisions you might create, merge, or promote/demote?  What priorities would you focus on while reorganizing the Agency?

Just to spur the conversation, I'll offer a thought that comes to mind:  Separate Commerce from Community Development.  In my opinion, the work of Historic Preservation and the Housing Division have enough on its plate that they should be peeled off from Commerce and put under a separate Housing Agency. 

It's especially interesting when you break out the ACCD's grant programs.  (Source:  CFED Presentation — Power Point.)

38% —  Housing and Community Affairs

9.5% — Economic Development

1.5% —  Tourism

Hmmm….  Is there any wonder that the Commerce side of ACCD — and the general growth of business in Vermont — is, shall we say, weak?

While the folks at the Chamber of Commerce think Vermont is unfriendly to business because of taxes, I would offer that the business climate suffers mostly from a lack of resources devoted to commerce at ACCD.  Of course, we're in a tight budget, so it's not like we can dump a lot of resources into Economic Development.  But organizationally, it would be nice to see the Agency of Commerce focus on Commerce.

So if you were the Secretary, what would you do?

Open thread time!  Ladies and gentlemen, your thoughts, please.

Nate Freeman, Northfield

UPDATE: Okay, quick update to offset the kind of snarly freaking out over the comparisons with previous polls in this diary that the crosspost at dKos (which I just got sick of dealing with and deleted – damn, those folks are nuts over there these days… never mind…) is generating from the true believer set: Yes, I know these are different pollsters. Yes I know the poll was from days ago, and yes – the release date of the previous polls ALSO reflect polls done days before.

This is just interesting – and yes, I say below that I DO think it’s an outlier poll, but I also think – from being here on the ground – that its indicative of at least SOME momentum for Clinton up here, since she just started pushing in earnest here in the last week and has a couple high-profile campaign ambassadors. Please… calm down… end UPDATE

UPDATE 2 – Okay, some good DID come out of the massive Obamaphile pile-on… somebody rightly noticed that this poll got sat on a bit longer by WCAX than one would’ve thought, so it was actually done BEFORE the Rasmussen poll… as the in-between poll, it almost certainly IS an outlier, in terms of Obama vs. Clinton, and probably doesn’t reflect any kind of actual movement. end UPDATE

As with the Governor poll, Research 2000 used questioned 400 likely voters, with an oversample of self-identifying Republicans and Democrats to get to 400 each. The calls took place February 19 through February 21 and, again, given the relatively small sample size, margin for error is 5%. Thanks to Research 2000 for making what information they can available to GMD (there is more detailed information, but they couldn’t just hand that over… proprietary, and all).

DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY:

QUESTION: If the 2008 Democratic Primary for President were held today, which of the following candidates would you vote for?

                                        ALL      MEN     WOMEN                                                                  

Barack Obama                  53%        60%            47%            

Hillary Clinton                     39%       32%            45%            

Undecided                           8%         8%              8%              

REPUBLICAN PRIMARY:

QUESTION: If the 2008 Republican Primary for President were held today, which of the following candidates would you vote for?

                                     ALL          MEN       WOMEN

John McCain                 52%            58%            45%      

Mike Huckabee             32%            28%            37%      

Ron Paul                         7%              9%              5%      

Undecided                       9%              5%            13%  

ALL VOTERS

QUESTION: If the 2008 election for President were held today, for whom would you vote for if the choice were between Barack Obama, the Democrat, and John McCain, the Republican?

                                           OBAMA              MCCAIN           UNDECIDED

ALL                                         57%                      36%                          7%  

MEN                                        52%                      42%                          6%

WOMEN                                 62%                      30%                          8%    

NORTH                                   56%                      38%                          6%

SOUTH                                    59%                      33%                         8%

QUESTION: If the 2008 election for President were held today, for whom would you vote for if the choice were between Barack Obama, the Democrat, and Mike Huckabee, the Republican?

                                              OBAMA           HUCKABEE         UNDECIDED

ALL                                          61%                      34%                        5%  

MEN                                         56%                      40%                        4%

WOMEN                                  66%                      28%                        6%    

NORTH                                     59%                     36%                        5%

SOUTH                                     64%                     30%                        6%

QUESTION: If the 2008 election for President were held today, for whom would you vote for if the choice were between Hillary Clinton, the Democrat, and John McCain, the Republican?

                                         CLINTON          MCCAIN          UNDECIDED

ALL                                         56%                      36%                          8%  

MEN                                        51%                      42%                          7%

WOMEN                                 61%                      30%                          9%    

NORTH                                   55%                      38%                          7%

SOUTH                                    58%                      33%                         9%

QUESTION: If the 2008 election for President were held today, for whom would you vote for if the choice were between Hillary Clinton, the Democrat, and Mike Huckabee, the Republican?

                                         CLINTON           HUCKABEE        UNDECIDED

ALL                                          60%                      34%                        6%  

MEN                                         55%                      40%                        5%

WOMEN                                  65%                      28%                        7%    

NORTH                                     58%                     36%                        6%

SOUTH                                     63%                      30%                        7%

Some analysis after the fold.

Besides noting that Huckabee may well squeeze out some delegates from Vermont, I’m not going to spend any time thinking about the GOP numbers. They speak for themselves.

The Democratic primary numbers also speak for themselves; the female vote is an even split (with Obama up a statistically insignificant 2%), but males breaking almost two-to-one for Obama. If these numbers hold, given the 8% undecided number across both genders, Obama could be looking at a 58-42 victory, which is a blowout, but perhaps not the blowout he would like to see. Obama strategists are already talking about a massive victory in Vermont offsetting a slight loss in Ohio, if in fact he does lose in Ohio (after the Obama campaign’s astonishing rapid media response in the last few days to Clinton’s who-will-save-us-from-the-terrorists ad, a handful of points may tip over and send it his way after all).

Vermont, being a small state, can turn around very, very quickly, and its worth noting that the Chelsea Clinton visit and accompanying media blitz may well generate some dividends for Team Clinton. That could be moot, though, if rumors of an Obama campaign stop in the state prove to be true.

Here, then, are the three polls done in the last week or so, in chronological order:

            ARG (2-22)    Rassmussen (2-25)   WCAX/Res2000 (2-27)

OBAMA        60               57                            53

CLINTON      34               33                            39

That’s a whopping 12 point change (Obama 7, Clinton +5) in Hillary’s direction from the ARG poll. The question is; is the WCAX poll an outlier, or is there some momentum in Vermont towards Clinton? (UPDATE: Outlier for sure. WCAX sat on the poll a few days longer than usual probably to wait until their entire package of issue polls was done, and as such, somebody caught that this poll chronologically falls between the ARG and Rasmussen polls. Probably the difference is a low-sample size hiccup, given that the other two polling firms agree.)

A little from column A and a little from column B? Obama has had a de facto campaign presence through the efforts of very motivated volunteers and bloggers for some time, but only in the last few days has Clinton had anything going on. With ambassadors such as former Governor Kunin going everywhere she can to remind Dems what they may have liked about Clinton, there’s bound to be some payoff. And as I mentioned, the former first daughter’s campaign stop will feed that even more. So where I think the momentum nationwide has been steadily towards Obama – here in Vermont, where Obama’s had a win wrapped up for some time, we may be bucking the trend (UPDATE: Doesn’t look that way after all… see above…). It’s likely though, that if an Obama visit does happen in the next couple days, that dynamic will again turn around.

Which means, I’ll be waiting until at least Monday night before I dare to stick my neck out with any predictions…

What’s also interesting about this poll is the head-to-head general election matchup questions.

Statistically, you could put Obama, Clinton, McCain and even Huckabee in a big shaker and dump out whoever you want from either party, and the numbers come out basically the same. Obama does a bit better on that head-to-head, but it is on the far end of the margin of error.

The slight bump in Obama’s support versus McCain in women polled (as compared to Clinton’s support versus McCain) is interesting. Given the hard partisan split evident – which will likely equate to solidarity in the general among Dem women regardless of the candidate, it’s likely that slight bump comes from independent and Republican women feeling a bit better about Obama than Clinton.

Gotta love numbers…

According to the Washington Post, Sen. Barack Obama is taking time out of his Texas/Ohio schedule to campaign in both Rhode Island and Vermont. Here’s what the Post had to say:

“In a testament to the importance being placed on every state and delegate in the hard-fought Democratic contest, the candidate will take time away from Texas and Ohio to stump in this state as well as in Vermont, which will also hold a primary on Tuesday.”

Anyone else out there have any information on this?

…an inspirational month….

A three way race for Governor is in the works,which will most likely re-elect the blandly malicious Gov.Jim Douglas.

His re election is a spot on the horizon we are driving at unable to turn.

The two groups that might be able to defeat him are (at this time ) unable to unite ,or even co-operate for long.

Why is the fear of  accommodation greater than the worry of 2 more Gov.Jim Douglas years ?

Come one you power people ..throw some switches ,lever some levers ,dial some dials,deal some deals ,quid some pro quos !

Oops it’s only a two way race at this point .

April ..that’s the ticket ,yeah April……………

Here are some details on the recent polls done for WCAX by Research 2000, a polling firm out of Maryland that does a lot of the polling work for small media markets nationwide and seems to be WCAX’s go-to firm of choice over the last few years.

400 “likely voters” were interviewed by telephone between February 19 through February 21, 2008.  400 is a small sample, and many media sources prefer to see at least 600 as a viable sample pool. Still, Vermont is a small state, so the scale mitigates some of those concerns. Margin for error for this sample size is significant at 5%.

GOVERNOR RACE:

QUESTION: If the 2008 election for Governor were held today, for whom would you vote for if the choices were between Peter Galbraith, the Democrat, Jim Douglas, the Republican, and Anthony Pollina, the Progressive Party candidate?

                                 DOUGLAS     GALBRAITH      POLLINA      UNDECIDED

ALL                                 53%                22%                   15%                   10%

MEN                                57%                19%                   16%                    8%

WOMEN                         49%                25%                   14%                   12%

NORTH                           56%                20%                   13%                   11%

SOUTH                           48%                25%                    18%                    9%

Some analysis follows…

The first thing one notices is that 1-2-3 ordering of Douglas-Galbraith-Pollina is consistent across these crosstabs, through gender and geography. Both Pollina and Douglas perform a bit beneath their overall percentages with women, while Galbraith scores higher. Douglas is clearly weaker in the south (and I have no way to know exactly where that line of distinction is drawn, but lets presume its more-or-less the southern 4 counties and a chunk of Orange), and that weakness pays off equally for both Pollina and Galbraith. That shift certainly comes disproportionately from Windham County which is resolutely anti-Douglas (it was the only County Peter Clavelle won in 2004).

The biggest thing here, though, is obviously the question itself, which, as many of us surmised in the previous thread, identifies each candidate by party. On name recognition alone, Pollina – who has been on three statewide ballots – has name recognition all over Galbraith, so its doubtful anyone would dispute that that 22% is keyed to that “Democratic” label, making it Galbraith’s practical floor of support. Also, as I mentioned before, this group isn’t simply Democrats who likely reject Pollina as a candidate (as they will also splinter off into “undecided” – and of course, there continues to be a weeniecrat contingent which support Douglas), but is likely to be disproportionately liberal and center-left Democrats who reject Pollina, given the bleed into the other categories.

Despite the stark numbers, there is good news, as well as bad news. The bad news, of course, is the surprisingly small percentage of undecideds. 10% aint much at this stage. In this scenario, Pollina’s high name recognition works against him, as most voters already know and have an opinion of him. He’s going to have to change their minds.

Galbraith, however, is likely to be a blank slate to most, and therefore has an opportunity to define himself. If the undecideds were higher, Pollina would have the advantage among the two leftist candidates, but its gonna be easier to win folks if they haven’t already formed an opinion. The problem is, of course, he has to get off his duff and start that process if he’s serious, because it takes time.

And there’s no soft-pedaling that this poll is neither what Pollina supporters likely hoped for or expected. Coming in a solid third against a Dem nobody has heard of completely undercuts their argument that he should be the sole candidate of the left precisely because people have heard of him. And realistically, Dems should avoid the inclination to project this number onto all Progressives. Pollina is a unique figure in Vermont politics who generates strong feelings from people. It’s likely that, had the Progs run someone like Zuckerman or Pearson, those numbers could be different – and in either direction (I suspect Zuckerman’s would be higher and Pearson’s would be lower).

But the hidden good news is Douglas’s 53%, coming right smack in between his favorability ratings and generic re-elect numbers from the previous CAX poll, further suggesting that those favorability numbers in excess of that November re-elect value (43%) could be soft. It’s also a smidgin down from his support at this stage two years ago, but only by a couple percentage points.

It’s likely, looking at these early numbers, that once Galbraith kicks in, he and Pollina will go into direct competition for the anti-Douglas vote, while also trying to peel off that percentage of the Douglas vote that they each feel entitled to (for Pollina, rural northeast kingdom voters, and for Galbraith, business-oriented Democrats). This could generate enough heat and light to spark interest among the media and press, drawing attention in a way that Clavelle and Parker never could by themselves. That would be a good thing.

Now if we could just get these two into a primary so one of them could have a clean shot come November, we could have the best of both worlds.

Here are the top stories this week related to our soldiers here and abroad, taken from the Our Troops Newsladder.

VoteVets.org founder Jon Soltz, in a short debate with HumanEvents.com’s Ericka Anderson on MSNBC, provided a blueprint for dismantling right wing talking points on Iraq from someone who’s been there. Click here to watch the clip and read analysis at DailyKos.

Alternet expanded on Veterans For America’s report on the crisis at Fort Drum. Click to read Military Doctors Withholding Treatment from Soldiers with Mental Health Problems.

Brig. Gen. Belinda Pinckney, the Army’s new Diversity Task Force Director called the issue of decreasing minority graduates, which decreases the number of minority youth who can join the Army a “silent epidemic.” Click here to read.

Admiral William J. Fallon, the leader of the military’s Central Command, announced that he would endorse a pause in troop reductions in Iraq this summer, but then seek to resume withdrawals to reduce stress on the military.

This announcement of a pause in reductions comes as Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey told a Senate panel that the Army is under serious strain from years of war-fighting and must reduce the length of combat tours as soon as possible, citing spikes in desertions, divorce rates and suicides.

Veterans of America is proud to sponsor the Our Troops Newsladder, a new tool to find the top news and articles in the progressive community by, about and for our troops.

Spotted in the statehouse: Republican Senator and political dynastic heir Diane Snelling (R-Chittenden) sporting an Obama button.

Shumlin waxes Churchillian on education funding: While commenting that the current, recently tweaked school funding scheme should be given more time to work before resorting to another wholesale overhaul, Shumlin commented to reporters that Act 60 and Act 68 amounted to “the worst system for funding school budgets in the country – except for all the others.” Heh.

Why I’m giving Al Franken money for his US Senate campaign in Minnesota: Because he sent me the best fundraising letter I ever read. My favorite part was the salutation – no mail merged “Dear John”, but rather “Dear Person I’m Asking For Money,”

Freaking priceless!

How are those Fish and Wildlife appointees working for Gov.Jim douglas ?

From Rutland Herald 2/29/08

Fish and Wildlife board member faces charges, resigns

For the third time in four years, a member of the Vermont Fish & Wildlife Board has resigned after being cited for a hunting violation

The news from the Free Press today was a shocker:

Beset on all sides by regulatory challenges, the beleaguered Intervale Center announced Wednesday night it will close its majorbig [sic] composting operation sometime the coming months.

The facility cannot afford to answer pollution concerns and obtain recently mandated permits, Perkins said.

At the Chittenden Solid Waste District, General Manager Tom Moreau said the district will urgently seek alternatives.

The Intervale has been a crown jewel, not just of Burlington, but of Vermont. Find another city which has increased its agricultural base in the last two decades. The reclaimed dump of a site has not only been a thriving economic engine and community-enhancer, it has maintained a uniquely successful, large scale composting operation, diverting tons of waste in Chittenden and neighborig counties that was otherwise destined for landfills, and generating agricultural products in the process. It is something I’ve heard Democrats, Progressives, Republicans and Independents speak of with pride.

But not all Republicans. A couple in particular became fixated on the Democrats and Progressives involved in its operation – particularly Democratic Speaker of the House Gaye Symington and Progressive Representative (and organic farmer) David Zuckerman. When it came out that runoff from the composting operation was not up to specs, Governor Jim Douglas and his attack dog, Agency of Natural Resources Secretary George Crombie could hardly maintain their glee. They tied the discharge violation around Zuckerman’s and Symington’s necks as tightly as they could, despite a continuing history of ignoring meaningful permit violations that don’t have high profile Dems and Progs associated with them.

But the problem was that they were dealing with environmentalists, and unlike their GOP business buddies who might mutter and fume about having to cowtow to the tree-huggers, the folks at the Intervale were fully and humbly prepared to comply – providing, in the process, an example to others.

That would never do for Douglas. So what does he have Crombie do? Revoke the Intervale’s classification as a farm, retroactively making it subject to all the Act 250 provisions it had never built into its business plan. The new, unexpected burdens – particularly ones relating to concerns about possible siting on archeological sites – suddenly dumped never-accounted for costs that, with an unfriendly agency, would clearly go well into six figures.

If you’re still entertaining the notion that this wasn’t a political hit job, consider the rumor in circulation that I was able to confirm with a source close enough to know. In a conversation with the Intervale Director, Crombie openly gloated that he had the Intervale “in a noose” and wasn’t about to let go.

That’s right. He actually said “in a noose.”

So an operation that has diverted tens of thousands of tons of solid waste from landfills and kept nearly a million gallons of liquid waste from wastewater treatment facilities over the last two decades, serving as a model of urban agriculture and green economic success is closing its doors.

And all for one reason, and one reason only: pure, vindictive, political thuggery. Congratulations, Jim. You win.

I originally posted this over at FBC but figured why keep it to myself? Plus with all the seriousness abounds lately, we could use a good laugh. So, by all means, give us a good caption for this photo:

A few to get you started:

“Bush headbutts small Ghanian boy after he asks question about Obama”

“Bush asks boy to stand still while he signs the top of his head”

and from wdh3:

“Bush uses powers of telepathy to psychically siphon moral intelligence from young Ghanian boy.”