vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

Political notes from Free Press staff writers Terri Hallenbeck, Sam Hemingway and Nancy Remsen

8.16.2007

Setting "the agenda"

So Gov. Jim Douglas drives up to Alex's Restaurant in South Burlington this morning -- well after the morning breakfast crowd departed -- to announce he'll be visiting places like this across the state at prime time (7 a.m.) to find out what's on Vermonters' minds.

It's an eight-week "Set the Agenda Tour," give or take a few days, to allow Vermonters of all persuasions to tell him what they want to see accomplished during the next legislative session. He'll also visit fairs and spend 45 minutes chatting with fair-goers. He'll deliver meals to the elderly. He'll eat sandwiches with small business owners.

If I hadn't checked the calendar, I might have thought the year was 2008 and we were headed into an election. I know Alex's was a campaign stop in 2006.

Jason Gibbs, Douglas spokesman, assured me there was nothing political about this tour. "This is not a political, partisan event," he said with a straight face. "It is about engaging Vermonters in conversations about their priorities for this legislative session."

Democratic House Speaker Gaye Symington of Jericho said she didn't have a problem with the governor making a tour. "I think the issues are clear," she said, but she added that perhaps the governor needed to be reminded of what the issues are.

Symington noted that she and most lawmakers spend a lot of time -- especially during summers -- meeting with Vermonters and listening to their concerns. "This is our job this time of year. We are all doing that."

Senate Democratic Leader John Campbell said the tour is all about politics. "If the governor isn't aware of what our priorities should be, then I'm quite surprised."

Campbell said listing the problems that need to be solved is easy. Finding answers is the tough work.

I would add that finding political consensus about those answers has been the real challenge under the state's current political makeup -- Republican governor with veto power and Democrat-dominated Legislature.

Anyway, check the schedule on the governor's Web site and give Douglas a piece of your mind over coffee or fried dough. He said it was OK to call your legislator, too, and share your concerns -- if you haven't already. Douglas said he would report back to all of us in the fall about what he learns. I wonder if there will be any surprises.

-- Nancy Remsen

posted by vt.Buzz | 12:42 PM |

Comments:

What a parade.... What happened to his Affordability Agenda, his E-State initiative, Jim=Jobs, etc., etc,. etc.

Did I hear him correctly when he said he wanted to find out what people wanted the Legislature to do? Isn't it more appropriate for the Governor to survey citizens on toward building his own agenda via budgetary or administrative directives?

It's pure politics. He's out to smear the Legislature.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:44 PM, August 16, 2007

Too bad he's hitting all these places early in the morning.

I guess he won't be hearing from the impeachment fools (remember - the one's who couldn't get out of bed before 10AM to meet with Rep. Welch).

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:57 PM, August 16, 2007

All Douglas can really do well is gladhand, which is what this waste of taxpayer money is. We should all start asking "who is paying to shlep Douglas all over the state and feed him and his entourage" and "does Douglas live in a cave that he doesn't know what is on the mind of Vermonters"? Another listening tour? What a crock!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:19 PM, August 16, 2007

I don't recall the same negative responses to Gaye's listening tour. Hmmmm. Let's criticize a Governor who is going out to public places to meet with people face-to-face to find out there thoughts. Heaven forfend! We can't be having a Governor do that sort of thing, now can we???

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:44 PM, August 16, 2007

It's about the time the Governor try to set an agenda.

He's gone 5 years on office without one.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:47 PM, August 16, 2007

The Governor wants to reduce property taxes, make Vermont more affordable, and reduce barriers to job creation.

That's not an agenda?

Oh - I guess this is: Investigate gay marriage, talk about impeaching the president, etc. etc.

If we separate the wheat from the chaffe, who has the agenda that matters to real Vermonters (you know, the silent majority that work for a living and pay the bills)?

Symington/Shumlin claim to know what Vermonter's want. But the reality is that their vision is obscured by a small cotingent of vocal party faithful (perhaps a 1,000 or so) who can leap into action at a moment's notice. Why? Because they're all on a trust fund or on the dole.

The other 599,000 Vermonters have to work for a living.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:11 PM, August 16, 2007

"I don't recall the same negative responses to Gaye's listening tour."

What a meathead. Symington doesn't criss-cross the state every two years gladhanding and supposedly listening to Vermotners. She represents a small portion of Chittenden County and my guess is she listens mostly to her local constituents and whatever her legislative colleagues are telling her. All Douglas does is travel Vermont with his "woe is me, I'm completely devoid of ideas so help me" tour. And now he does EVERY year, instead of every two years.

"Let's criticize a Governor who is going out to public places to meet with people face-to-face to find out there thoughts."

That's all this guy does. What part of that realism cannot penetrate your cranium? Does he have early onset? Does he forget what he heard last year?

BTW: It's "their" not "there."

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:44 PM, August 16, 2007

Here's a real question: why must bloggers appear so illiterate? The spelling and punctuation mistakes on this site are amazing. So far, not one comment on this post would escape a 3rd grade teacher's red pen.

Come on, guys. How do you expect your views and opinions to be credible when you don't even take them seriously enough to check the spelling? It's embarrassing.

And no, I don't have a trust fund and yes, I did go to public schools in Vermont.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:47 PM, August 16, 2007

"The Governor wants to reduce property taxes, make Vermont more affordable, and reduce barriers to job creation."

That's not an agenda, it's a combination of platitudes.

No specifics. No results. Just nice words that the Governor loves to repeat.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:54 PM, August 16, 2007

Last time they all went on a listening tour about health care and we ended up with Catamount. They didn't listen then and now have taken health care off the table. I hope people show up at the dog and pony show and put health care on the agenda.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:08 PM, August 16, 2007

"Senate Democratic Leader John Campbell said the tour is all about politics. "If the governor isn't aware of what our priorities should be, then I'm quite surprised.""

Campbell's response is a joke. Like the Legislature DOES know what the priorities are? If the Legislature knew what the priorities were, we wouldn't have had a failed veto override session on a global warming bill. Instead we'd already have school spending reform and property tax relief.

What a sad joke.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:05 PM, August 16, 2007

To the smart-ass who commented:

BTW: It's "their" not "there."

At least I know how to spell "Vermonters".

HINT: It's not Vermotners

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:27 PM, August 16, 2007

Douglas has one agenda item: GET RE-ELECTED.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:37 PM, August 16, 2007

Jim Douglas runs around the state on a daily basis all year long - he now needs a eparate "listening" tour!

Sounds to me like his listening is pretty selective - only listen to those that agree with him.

Gee, sounds just like GW.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:35 AM, August 17, 2007

Some people will likely tell the Gov they don't like the fact that their income will become a matter of public record as a result of the new way of handling "prebates."

When the GOP, the Progs, and the ACLU are all on the same side of an issue, that shows how out of touch the Dems are on this one.

Of course most of the trust fund Dems have incomes that are high enough that they don't qualify for the prebates, so they don't have to worry about their incomes being public - just as Gaye Symington said she was all in favor of greater personal financial disclosure for the Governor, but not for legislative leaders.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:42 AM, August 17, 2007

The Republican Governor signed the bill that resulted in this privacy issue.

Isn't he a bit out of touch too???

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:54 AM, August 17, 2007

The Gov did not sign the bill that became Act 185. He let it become law without his signature and made clear in his statement about the bill his concerns over privacy. Read the story in the paper that covers real issues in Vermont (hint RH/TA)

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:03 AM, August 17, 2007

I wish someone would pay me $150,000 a year to travel around the state listening to people, eating and cutting ribbons.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:25 AM, August 17, 2007

So, the Governor let it become law ????

He's responsible for the laws that are enacted.

He's responsible.

He'd rather pass the buck.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:51 AM, August 17, 2007

Don't blame me, I'm only the Governor.

I can't do anything.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:12 AM, August 17, 2007

Jimmy Boy doesn't do anything unless I tell him to do it. So if I don't have any new ideas, other than to traverse the state yet again, then neither will he. Get used to it pinheads.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:33 PM, August 17, 2007

"He let it become law without his signature and made clear in his statement about the bill his concerns over privacy."

So he identified an imminent problem, but did nothing to stop it.

What a loser.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:15 PM, August 17, 2007

Republican legislators gave strong support to Act 185.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:33 PM, August 17, 2007

I don't understand how the governor can blaim the legislature over the privacy of financial information when he signed the bill. If he opposed it, why didn't he ask that the provision be changed before he would sign the bill?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:34 PM, August 17, 2007

As a state employee, I can tell you the governor gets the credit no matter what.

Some of my fellow workers in Bennington were forced to go to work every day in a sick building. The legislature was passing legislation to close the building regardless of what the governor thought.

Then, just before the bill was to be passed by the legisature, the governor went to Bennington and said he was closing the building.

The state employees, most of whom don't read newspapers, bowed down and thanked him.

If nobody cares, then they/we get what we deserve.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:38 PM, August 17, 2007

Those Bennington people should make an ad to put on tv next year. Tell Vermont how the governor only came to their rescue after some legislative people had to step in to get the governor to do something. Gopv.Douglas would have left them inside that building if pressure had not been applied!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:40 PM, August 17, 2007

"I don't understand how the governor can blaim the legislature over the privacy of financial information when he signed the bill. If he opposed it, why didn't he ask that the provision be changed before he would sign the bill?"

Fact #1: The tax department recommended AGAINST Act 185

Fact #2: The governor did not sign Act 185, it went into law without his signature

Fact #3: The governor made it very clear that he had concerns about the privacy issue and specifically requested that the legislature address those concerns in the 2007 session

Fact #4: Republicans and Progressives raised the privacy issue NUMEROUS times during the legislative session this winter. The issue was debated on the floor of the house on at least two separate occassions. Democratic leaders said that there was no problem.

Fact #5: A bill (H367) sponsored by a Republican and a Progressive Rep. was introduced this winter to remedy the privacy problem - legislative leaders would not allow it to be considered.

There are plenty of reasons to vote against the Republicans (and the Progressives for that matter), but you've got to hand it to them - the Democrats screwed up big time and the Republicans were right.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:28 PM, August 17, 2007

Only 15 House members voted against Act 185. How is this a partisan issue?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:16 PM, August 17, 2007

It became a partisan issue when Republicans and Progressives realized that there were real privacy issues and tried fixing them this year. Democrats refused to admit that the problems existed, so now it has become a partisan issue.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:05 PM, August 17, 2007

"Fact #3: The governor made it very clear that he had concerns about the privacy issue"

And yet he alowed the legislation go to into law.

The governor is responsible for for every piece of legislation that becomes law.

He chooses to pass the buck.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:12 PM, August 17, 2007

If the governor won't take responsibility for the laws that pass, he shouldn't be governor.

He acts more like a Queen than a Governor.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:49 PM, August 17, 2007

"Fact #3: The governor made it very clear that he had concerns about the privacy issue"

And yet he alowed the legislation go to into law.

So you solution would have been for him to veto the law, knowing that the veto would have been overturned? That sounds like a good ol' fashioned Democratic waste of money - we did that already this summer, remember?

No, instead, he instead made constructive comments on what the legislature should do to correct the flaws in Act 185.

And they did.....

Ding - nothing!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:12 PM, August 17, 2007

If he's against a law, he should veto it.

What's so hard about that?

He hasn't hesitated to veto other laws.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:15 PM, August 17, 2007

Governor Douglas deserves credit for again reaching out to Vermonters and their legislators in an effort to craft a package of legislative reforms that reflect the top priorities of the people of our state.

He is known for visiting frequently with Vermonters in their communities, homes and places of work, listening closely so his work in Montpelier can reflect their priorities.

I'm always impressed with his work ethic when he sends the entire Legislature and Vermont's media copies of his public appearance schedule every week and makes it available to the entire state on his website.

Unfortunately, the Speaker--despite her holier-than-thou-rant of yesterday--does not share the Governor's commitment to transparency. The Republican caucus members have never once received a notification or copy of her public appearance schedule, or an indication of where to find it online from the Speaker or her political aides. On the other hand, we can look at the Governor's public appearance schedule online every morning.

That's why "mystified" might be the best way to describe my reaction to Speaker Symington's statement yesterday regarding the Governor's Set the Agenda Tour who was clearly trying to bamboozle folks.

We certainly share the Governor's concern that the priorities of the current majority are too often out of touch with those of our working families. For example, Republicans propose to make housing more affordable with a commonsense and balanced package of permitting and tax reforms, and they ignore these proposals. To add insult to injury, the majority party actually considered a plan to make homeownership more expensive by increasing the property transfer tax. Republicans proposed to cut health care costs by allowing Vermonters to buy their health insurance from any qualified provider from any state, and they refuse to consider it.

The Republican caucus looks forward to listening in on these outreach events as often as our schedules allow and I urge our friends across the aisle to do the same. It's time for the majoirty in the Legislature to put progress ahead of partisanship. If they will, our caucus is prepared to join them in working with the Governor to advance the people's agenda.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:27 PM, August 17, 2007

Why can't Governor Douglas take responsibility for his actions??

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:32 PM, August 17, 2007

Say all you want about Douglass - but the Democrats (Symington & Shumlin) have gotten nothing done!
Get rid of them. ( and I am a Democrat)

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:50 PM, August 17, 2007

Say what you will about the Democrats but Douglas has gotten nothing done!
(and I'm a Republican)

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:32 PM, August 17, 2007

Impeach Shumlin

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:35 PM, August 17, 2007

When Republican Walt Freed was Speaker he invited Madam Symington to breakfast every Tuesday morning to discuss the weeks agenda at the State House. Symington and Big Bird Partridge have never attempted to sit down with the minority leadership on a regular basis to work on the issues. They are they worst "leadership" team to ever "run" the State Housae. They would do well to listen to regular Vermonters to discover what we really want...Hint: it's property taxes, affordable homes and real jobs...not polar bears floating on icebergs or useless windmills on hilltops...

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:59 PM, August 17, 2007

Hot air is all we got from Symington's "brown bag" lunches. Remember she would rather (1st) travel and on second thought maybe spend time with her family eating Ben & Jerry's of course. Interesting that Chuck Lacy and Kids come in second on the priority list. Real telling. What a female dog.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:13 PM, August 17, 2007

"Say all you want about Douglass - but the Democrats (Symington & Shumlin) have gotten nothing done!
Get rid of them. ( and I am a Democrat)"

Hear, hear. I'm a Dem too and I say the same thing.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:14 PM, August 17, 2007

"What a female dog."

Talk like this explains why the Repubs are a minority in the Leg and in the state.

They'd rather level a vulgar attack than contribute something postive.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:01 PM, August 18, 2007

What makes you think that a republican wrote about female dogs? You should know by now that even democrats aren't happy with her performance.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:59 PM, August 18, 2007

Would you like the real story behind Republican's attempts at trying to fix Act 185?

Excerts from the floor debate on a Republican attempt at fixing Act 185 earlier this year. Note from the audio that republicans are pleading with their Democratic colleagues to recognize and address the privacy issue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9uCRePvxeM

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:41 AM, August 19, 2007

And then a majority of Republicans voted FOR Act 185 ...

They hated it so much that they voted for it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:25 AM, August 20, 2007

Very Interesting --- If you go to the Legislative WebSite, and look up Act 185 in the 2005-06 biennium, you will find that about 60% of the GOP House members, and 56% of GOP Senate members voted in favor of the bill.

And if the Governor thought the bill was so bad, why did he let it become law when he could have vetoed - heck, he has vetoed for less and even vetoed strictly for politics. Some leadership!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:03 AM, August 20, 2007

Act 185 also contained immediate property tax relief in 2006, reducing the statewide rate by three of four cents. This portioin of the bill needed immediate action.

Because the implimentation of this prebate rebate mess didn't kick in for over a year, there was plenty of time to pass the property tax reduction, then spend the next year and a half fixing the problems with Act 185.

Alas, the democrats wasted that all that time. Obstructed reforms. Denied there was even a problem.

The telling vote about who "get it" and who is out of touch was not that for Act 185 in 2006, but the one for the Sunderland amendment in Feb 2007.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:10 AM, August 20, 2007

The Republicans were all FOR IT before they were AGAINST IT.

What's so hard to understand about that?

flip, flop, waffle, waffle.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:24 AM, August 20, 2007

Don't blame me, I voted for Act 185, and then I bitched about it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:25 AM, August 20, 2007

Symington has got to go!!!!!!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:25 AM, August 20, 2007

Steve Adams has got to go!!!!!!!!!!!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:44 AM, August 20, 2007

Actually, Steve Adams is so foolish and weak, he makes the D's look good.

Let's keep him around.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:03 AM, August 20, 2007

Don't blame me, I voted for Act 185, and then I bitched about it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:31 AM, August 20, 2007

Man. Management employees are starting to flee from ANR. Is this Crombie guy causing the flight?

Maybe Wenneberg or Allen will now start spiling the dirt on what's really going on at ANR.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:39 PM, August 20, 2007

Check out Part II of the Act 185 saga: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3E2ySx9V_7s

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:43 PM, August 20, 2007

I want to see the part where the majority of Republicans voted for the bill.

Can we see that part?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:17 AM, August 21, 2007

I want to see the part where the bill is delivered to Jim Douglas and he vetoed it ... oh, that's right, he didn't veto it!

He just wrote about how he didn't like it, and then he let it become law. Aw, well. Must be somebody else's fault anyhow.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:19 AM, August 21, 2007

Jim Douglas: Touring the state yet again on your dime!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:09 AM, August 21, 2007

"I want to see the part where the majority of Republicans voted for the bill.

Can we see that part?"

Now that's FUNNY! Great stuff.

I wonder why they don't post that YouTube video!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:54 AM, August 21, 2007

"I want to see the part where the majority of Republicans voted for the bill. Can we see that part?"

Here you go - you want the truth or are you like those conservative talk shows --- the links, for House and Senate Roll Call votes --- Read it and weep!

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/database/status/rcdetail.cfm?Session=2006&RollCallID=3760

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/database/status/rcdetail.cfm?Session=2006&RollCallID=3806

It's amazing that the GOP House members continue to say how bad this is - when most of them voted for it!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:03 AM, August 21, 2007

Most of the Republicans voted to fix it, too.
44, Yes, 93 No

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/database/status/rcdetail.cfm?Session=2008&RollCallID=3854

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:57 PM, August 21, 2007

Yea, they voted for it before they voted against it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:46 PM, August 21, 2007

At least the Republicans can admit to making a mistake and trying to fix a problem. The Dems seem to have their heads where the sun don't shine. Let's eat hot dogs.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:12 PM, August 21, 2007

When did the Republicans admit a mistake???????

They've done nothing but point fingers and lay blame.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:32 PM, August 21, 2007

From the press release:

“There was broad bipartisan support for Act 185 in 2006, but as our constituents started raising concerns, we soon realized that this well-intentioned piece of legislation had some undesirable consequences,” said Assistant House Minority Leader Patti Komline.” “We have since been working tirelessly to address this problem.”

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:09 PM, August 21, 2007

But Adams told everyone that it was flawed from the start. Remember the YouTube videos?

Why didn't they do something then???

And Douglas wrote about how flawed it was when it hit his desk and before he made Act 185 into law.

Nope. They just sit back and bitch ... about a law that they voted for.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:35 PM, August 21, 2007

The legislature made a mistake with Act 185. Legislators are only human. But the difference is that humans are willing to admit to their mistakes and make amends. Politicians bury their mistakes.

I struggle to understand how you can say that the republicans are "bitching" - when they recognized the problems with Act 185, admitted that they were part of the mistake, and then offered solutions to fix the problem. How is that "bitching"?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:05 PM, August 21, 2007

Because the Repubs have been bitching about this for weeks, and blaming democrats for the problem.

Read the emails from Rob Roeper, read the conservative blogs. Listen to Steve Adams. All of these are blaming Dems and bitching, bitching, bitching.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:04 PM, August 21, 2007

I listened to the YouTube videos and I didn't hear Adams even mentioned in them. Let's have a hot dog.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:33 PM, August 21, 2007

Adams is a hot dog.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:13 AM, August 22, 2007

Politicians are like hot dogs - they look tasty on the outside, but under the skin, its all junk.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:00 AM, August 22, 2007

A new YouTube video - staring Symington and Shumlin!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CcnfQ4mCB40

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:58 PM, August 22, 2007

R.I.P. Snarky Boy. You have become highly unreliable and we tire of reading about you trying to "find yourself" or about your crazy love exploits. BORING!!!

P.S. This YouTube video is stupid.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:05 PM, August 22, 2007

Check out the Progressive's website - http://www.progressiveparty.org/?page=5&articlemode=showspecific&showarticle=155

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:31 PM, August 22, 2007

Snarky is a limp hot dog.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:37 PM, August 22, 2007

Anthony Pollina for Governor!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:56 PM, August 22, 2007

How can Gaye Symington be replaced?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:59 PM, August 22, 2007

Progressives for Privacy!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:46 PM, August 22, 2007

A Progressive for Governor - lets get going!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:43 AM, August 23, 2007

Good luck with that one.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:52 AM, August 23, 2007

The Progressives in Vermont are as impotent as the environmentalists in our state. A lot of talk without a lot of active bodies to back it up.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:13 AM, August 23, 2007

Shumlin for King!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:52 PM, August 23, 2007

Before people continue to perpetuate the idea that marriage equality is inconsequential, I would ask them to please explore the issue a little further.

This issue has profound spiritual, emotional, health, legal and financial consequences for thousands of Vermonters. Our needs and concerns are as valid as anybody else's.

Take a look at the article below for an example of what gay couples face. I can understand how Marvin Burrows feels. I'm proud of my state and I want Vermont to do the right thing. Thanks!
http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_6695942

Same-sex pension benefits won for ILWU members
By Josh Richman
San Jose Mercury News
Article Launched:08/23/2007 01:36:08 AM PDT

Marvin Burrows of Hayward simply wanted what he believed his late partner of 51 years had left him, but by pursuing it, he apparently has won new rights for about 5,500 union members and retirees across Northern California.

Burrows, 71, has fought for pension benefits left by his partner, Bill Swenor, since Swenor's death in March 2005 at age 66. Last week, International Longshore and Warehouse Union locals 6 and 17 - based in Oakland and West Sacramento, respectively - announced they had renegotiated their contracts to grant pension benefits to domestic partners, and made the change retroactive to include Burrows.

"Our union's motto is, `An injury to one is an injury to all,' and we definitely feel that applies in this case," ILWU spokesman John Showalter said Wednesday, adding that the union was proud to have worked with the National Center for Lesbian Rights to address Burrows' case.

The San Francisco-based rights center went to bat for Burrows in July 2005 after the Emeryville-based Industrial Employers and Distributions Association - representing more than 150 public- and private-sector employers in their labor relations - twice rejected his claims for Swenor's pension benefits, citing that federal law doesn't recognize same-sex couples as spouses.

But Showalter said Burrows' case inspired the ILWU locals to renegotiate their pact with IEDA so Burrows and others in his situation aren't left in the lurch.

"We're thrilled for Mr. Burrows beyond words. We're so delighted that he finally - after 2 1/2 years - has got the benefits he was entitled to, the respect and the recognition," NCLR Elder Law Project coordinator Joyce Pierson said Wednesday.

"For surviving heterosexual spouses, marriage automatically ensures access to pension and retirement benefits," Pierson said.

"We applaud the ILWU for doing the right thing. We should not forget, however, that the vast majority of same-sex partners in California still do not have this protection."
Showalter was unsure Wednesday whether other ILWU locals' contracts allow domestic partners to receive their deceased partners' pension benefits.

According to its Web site, the ILWU has about 42,000 members in more than 60 local unions; 3,500 members belong to the union's Marine Division.

Burrows said the past two years have been hard, mostly due to the sudden loss of his lifelong love but also in surviving on his own $300-a-month pension and $800 a month from Social Security. He had to move out of his home of 35 years, and needed surgery that emptied his checking account, he said; only a friend's support has kept a roof over his head.

"Bill was very proud of his union and always was convinced they would do the right thing," he said, adding that Swenor - who was represented by the ILWU for the 38 years in which he worked at the Owens-Illinois glass manufacturing plant in Oakland - probably wouldn't have thought it would take so long. "He would've been shocked that this happened."

The battle has prompted him to volunteer with the pro-gay-marriage group Marriage Equality, he said. "I didn't want anyone else to go through what I had to go through."
________________________________________

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:25 PM, August 23, 2007

That's fine, but it doesn't excuse the farce of forming a completely stacked "commission" to supposedly study the issue.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:00 AM, August 24, 2007

Act 185 is a total sham designed to make people's tax bills look lower, and thus secure more votes for the Democrats.

The Democrats traded my personal privacy for the sake of scooping up a few more votes. Sick.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:42 AM, August 24, 2007

Get your facts straight -- A strong majority of GOP House members and Senate members voted for Act 185!!!

The House GOP was palying politics and tried a political move instead of following legislative process.

Why didn't they bring this up in House Ways & Means? Why did they try to pass it as an amendment on the floor?

BECAUSE it served their party!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:47 AM, August 24, 2007

HUH???

Check out H367. Note that it is sitting in the Ways and Means Committee!

The committee refused to acknowledge this problem.

The Republicans tried the committee process. They were ignored. They tried the floor of the house. They were ignored.

So, they took it to the people and now the Democrats have egg on their face. Sorry - but this is their mess. You can't blame the Republicans.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:06 AM, August 24, 2007

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah ---

First they voted for it,
and then they voted against it!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:33 AM, August 24, 2007

This is just stupid - you just can't give the Republicans any credit. If the Republicans had refused to deal with these privacy issues, you would be all over this like flies on crap.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:42 PM, August 24, 2007

Jason,

Is that you?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:01 PM, August 24, 2007

Mr. Loffy,

Is that you?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:13 PM, August 24, 2007

Gaye is that you?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:38 PM, August 24, 2007

No, its Kentucky carpetbagger Odum.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:47 PM, August 24, 2007

You mean Odumb

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:20 PM, August 24, 2007

Don't you mean O-Dumb

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:21 PM, August 24, 2007

I mean Shu dumb

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:23 PM, August 24, 2007

No, just Dumb

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:58 PM, August 25, 2007

Dumb is the voters continuing to support this Democratic leadership.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:34 AM, August 26, 2007

Three cheers to that!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:55 AM, August 26, 2007

The VT GOP is following the Karl Rove playbook to a "t" -- god forbid anyone ask a negative question or make a negative statement about the Douglas Administration -- they are attacked with full guns by both Jason Gibbs and Rob Roper.

Jim Douglas has become more and more conservative as he perceives that he is unbeatable.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:13 PM, August 26, 2007

God forbid anyone suggest that Symington and Shumlin should focus on school reform and property taxes instead of global warming and Al Gore. They are attacked with full guns by Ian Carleton, etc.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:02 PM, August 26, 2007

Symington ans Shumlin are working to deflect all work away from the issues the voters want tackled.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:56 AM, August 27, 2007

Impeach Shumlin.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:58 AM, August 28, 2007

Impeach Douglas!

We need a Governor who has vision and leadership - not out and out partisanship. Dick Snelling is scratching his head and asking what the heck is going on? Dick Snelling was a Governor who knew what principles and leadership was all about - Jim Douglas wants to believe he is the same!

Governor Jim Douglas, Mike Smith, Jason Gibbs, Neale Lunderville, and Rob Roper could care less about Vermont and its Vermonters, as long as they keep gettting re-elected.

Tell me why the Governor is going to the NH State Fair in Lancaster? Is he going to run for Governor in NH or maybe throw his hat in the ring for President?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:10 AM, August 28, 2007

Vision and leadership? Ok, I'd take Gov. Snelling. But I'm assuming that what you really mean by "vision and leadership" is that you want a Democrat to be Governor. Well, I don't want the "vision and leadership" of the ridiculously out-of-touch Speaker of the House or the "vision and leadership" of the snake oil salesman who runs the Senate.

Some so-called "vision and leadership" we're better off without.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:40 PM, August 28, 2007

Senate Democratic Leader John Campbell said the tour is all about politics. "If the governor isn't aware of what our priorities should be, then I'm quite surprised."

He does know what our priorities are - that's why he won in a landslide victory. duh!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:05 AM, August 29, 2007

That's true. It's the Legislature that doesn't know what Vermonters' priorities are. For Campbell to say that the Gov. doesn't know what "our"priorities are is worse than the pot calling the kettle black.

Let's examine our priorities, shall we? Property tax reform? No. Global warming, yes. School consolidation? No. Same sex marriage? Yes.

Gotta love the Legislature's "priorities."

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:57 PM, August 29, 2007

Gee... It's amazing - you say think the Governor is pushing school consolidation - even he says that is a local decision.

And as for property tax reform - the Governor thinks it's solved he supposedly "forced"the legislature to agree with the change in school funding this year - amazing it was a GOP Senator who brought the idea forward.

Senator Vince Illuzzi for Governor - born and bred in VT and he is really concerned with Vermonters lives - unlike Gov Douglas!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:26 AM, August 30, 2007

Amen to that om Shumlin.

Although anyone who thinks that Illuzzi is "really concerned with Vermonters lives" -- as opposed to his own career -- is fooling him or herself.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:10 AM, August 31, 2007