burlingtonfreepress.com

Sponsored by:

vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

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


12.05.2007

 

Showdown in the Junction

Interesting session tonight in Essex Junction, where about 50 people turned out to Burlington resident Tom Licata's presentation on taxes and the economy. He attracted a bunch of angry people and they had a few showdowns with some of the legislators who showed up.

One of the interesting things about Licata's approach was that he did not get political, and that seemed to help. Without naming names, he pointed out that the federal government is helping the state less, that private-sector job growth in Vermont in the last seven years is zilch and that there is a pile of debt the state is facing. There are culprits in there of all political persuasion. His target, really, was government in general, of whatever party.

As a result, he had officials of all stripes trying to defend government. Mike Quinn, the commissioner of economic development, was there standing up for the administration's efforts to create jobs. So too were Republican state Sen. Diane Snelling and Democratic state Sen. Hinda Miller.

One of Licata's main points is that politicians respond to special interests, rather than to Vermont's interests. Snelling, particularly, argued that the citizen Legislature is quite accessible and listens to real people all the time.

A good many lobbyists would probably argue that they are looking out for the interests of real people.

Are they? Or do special interests generate an inordinate amount of power? Ponder that one for a bit.

- Terri Hallenbeck

Comments:
Lobbyist have one interest... generating fees and making money for themselves. They don't care about the people's interest, they care about whether or not the people's issue is emotional enough for them to capitalize on it.

BTW Licata's effort is exactly on target and should be supported.
 
Anonymous said...

"Lobbyist have one interest... generating fees and making money for themselves. They don't care about the people's interest, they care about whether or not the people's issue is emotional enough for them to capitalize on it."

Gee, that's gotta be a first. Somebody is retained to lobby for someone else and their primary interest is to advocate for the interests of the client that hired them.

Stop the presses.

It's called the First Amendment. Perhaps you've heard of it. It was in all the papers. The 12/15/1791 papers.

Unless and until State and Federal Legislatures pass lobbyist reforms that level the playing field, stand up to Constitutional Scrutiny and survive the inevitable legal challenge by the party or parties that feel they've been slighted, ya best get used to it 'cause it ain't gonna change.

Unless and until we get a legitimate President, a filibuster-proof Senate and some Judges with integrity on the Court who grasp the concept that money isn't speech, it's property and trash Buckley v Valeo and Congress reinstates the Fairness Doctrine, to paraphrase Dylan, money will continue not to talk but swear.

And while we're at it, a competent Governor wouldn't hurt.
 
Whoa...what has happened here? Bubba posts a exactly dead-on comment(again) and jwcoop10 doesn't respond/attack to it. He posts an unrelated rambling on his same old tired schtick.

Watch out Bubba.

Does this mean:
a.) It was early in the morning and jw wasn't fully awake b.) the meds jw took last night (finally) haven't worn off yet or c.) jw is slowly becoming a closet Repub.

Of course, by inference it could also mean JW agrees with you :-).
 
Terri,

You said, "One of the interesting things about Licata's approach was that he did not get political"

However, yesterday on WVMT Licata all but said he is considering a run for Senate - that taints his supposed non partisan approach.

Ask yourself Terri, is Licata really trying to manipulate teh press to get his name out there so he can run.

He ran twice for Burlington City Council and lost both.
 
Much like Matt Dunne's "apolitical" PR efforts.
 
Thanks for putting "Republican" and "Democrat" in front of Snelling and Miller's names. I always thought Miller was a Republican too. Sure acts like one.
 
Miller is very much a Democrat. She's very liberal on social issues but doesn't seem to believe that we should antagonize business and do our best to run it out of the state. That makes her a Republican in your view? Too bad. I'm glad there are moderates in my party.
 
Miller is a closet Republican-- her positions and votes support this.
 
To get back to Licata's point, the problem the state faces is this:

We have no more money. As Democrat Susan Bartlet said, the revenue just went "Poof." We have no ability to raise more money through taxes. As Democrat Peter Shumlin admits, "We're tapped out. There is no more taxing capacity in the state of Vermont." Yet we have existing future financial obligations that we appear to be unable to pay. And a legislature that seems -- despite understanding these points -- determined to add expensive new programs, exacerbating the problem.

What do we do? Wait for the implosion?
 
Clearly, we need a change in leadership.
 
Start by throwing the rascals out. Send only people to Montpelier with (1) some common sense (2) a desire to make Vermont business-friendly once again (3) preferably a business background - people that have MET payrolls themselves. Once that is done, get rid of the obstacles to the above, namely all environmental organizations, i.e., VPIRG, CLF. Get rid of as much government as necessary - why do we need commissions on women, human rights, public radio, etc.? The "entitlement" crowd will scream and holler, but who cares? And most important, control the NEA - pass laws stating that it will be illegal for a government teacher to strike! Pretty simple, isn't it?
 
Lobbyist have one interest... generating fees and making money for themselves. They don't care about the people's interest, they care about whether or not the people's issue is emotional enough for them to capitalize on it."

"Gee, that's gotta be a first. Somebody is retained to lobby for someone else and their primary interest is to advocate for the interests of the client that hired them.

Stop the presses.

It's called the First Amendment. Perhaps you've heard of it. It was in all the papers. The 12/15/1791 papers. "

JW is exactly right. It is an easy and cheap shot to blame lobbyists for everything you don't like. And a complete cliche to characterize them as fat cats in $1500 suits.

There are plenty of lobbyists - very successful -- who represent nonprofits and so-called "good" causes. Again, a cliche and a canard to say that they only represent evil business.

And by the way, the First Amendment to which JW refers applies to everybody -- all citizens have a right to petition (i.e. lobby) the government. That's why you see so many "regular" people in there talking to their legislators. Diane Snelling's remark is completely accurate; VT legislators are among the most accessible in the country, and letters and phone calls make a huge difference.

So stop the cheap shot characterizations of lobbyists and go out and argue your case yourself. If you have a legitimate argument (unlike Brian Pearl and wackos of his poisonous ilk) you will have influence.
 
"He attracted a bunch of angry people "
 
The poster is right. Licata is playing the political game for his own benefit. Nothing more.
 
Yeah, lets get rid of everything. Nothing but business. Business, business, business.

Btw, lick-a-cata is a lobbyist.
 
Lick-a-cata. Now that is clever.
 
The White House acknowledged last night that President Bush learned in August that Iran might have shelved its nuclear weapons program, contradicting what the president said at his press conference earlier this week.
 
Anonymous said...
"He attracted a bunch of angry people "

It's called cultivating the ignorant, ill-informed, knuckle-draggin' shrub-shill vote.
 
Oh, of course! Anyone who doesn't think exactly like you is an "ignorant, ill-informed, knuckle-draggin' shrub-shill."

What an a-hole you are.
 
Talk about attracting and angry group of people... This blog is nothing but a bunch of angry, shallow, juvenile name-callers.

Licata's group had much more class and much more substance than this exchange.
 
Get some new leaders over in the Democratic Party of Vermont.
 
Get some new leadership in the governor's office first.
 
Fine, then. New leaders all around. Are you willing to throw out Symington and Shumlin?
 
"Fine, then. New leaders all around. Are you willing to throw out Symington and Shumlin?"

Yup! This is step one to the cure VT needs.
 
There are thoughtful people in the Democratic, Republican, and Progressive Parties who are trying their best to accomplish things that will make Vermont a better place for all of its people.

I would count Jim Douglas, Hinda Miller, Sarah Edwards, and Dick Mazza in that group.

But partisans like Shumlin, Pollina, Zuckerman, etc. who are looking to climb without regard to who or what gets hurt are playing the game just that way. I'm sure there are pols on the right who would be equally bad, but they just don't have enough power to pull it off.

It doesn't matter whether extremism comes at you from the left or right, you've got to watch out for it.
 
I don't know Tom real well. I've met him a couple of times, and he seems like a bright, nice guy. I asked if I could bring a petition to his event and he requested that I not do that because he didn't want the event to be partisan political. My petition was political in that it pushes for a particular law. But it's not partisan in that it is sponsored by a Democrat and has support from both sides of the aisle. The bill certainly would, however, save taxpayers money.

Perhaps Tom didn't really realize that. Perhaps he did. If he wants to advance the agenda of tax relief, he should embrace our bill. (He supports the bill to the extent that he has signed the petition.) But if he just wants to become a state senator, which I don't think is the case, then I guess it's a distraction.
 
It's a worthwhile exercise in any event, whether he's running for something or not. Gaye Symington's press conference to espouse a strategy of "speak no evil" looks pretty thin when compared to Licata's or the Chamber of Commerce's event.

I'm not sure what all the hand-wringing is over lobbyists. Given the part-time, "citizen" nature of the Legislature, they are the de facto staff of the General Assembly. As long as government has as much power as it does via its ability to tax and regulate, there are going to be plenty of people roaming the halls of the State House to protect their interests.
 
Anonymous said...

"Oh, of course! Anyone who doesn't think exactly like you is an "ignorant, ill-informed, knuckle-draggin' shrub-shill."

"What an a-hole you are."

How intelligent, sophisticated and mature of ya to say so, sporticus.

Always a pleasure.
 
Get back to the topic.
 
Anonymous said...

11:07 AM, December 09, 2007

In other words, you don't really know the schmuck in question so ya can't really say for sure but ya think he didn't want to share the stage with you was because he didn't understand that you would have helped him because he should get behind your proposal because it's the only possible proposal that would save taxpayers money but he didn't realize that even though he signed your petition and is behind your proposal even if he doesn't realize it because he may or may not be running for State Senate but you don't really think so.

Gee, thanks for clearin' that up.

Dismissed.
 
Anonymous said...
Oh, of course! Anyone who doesn't think exactly like you is an "ignorant, ill-informed, knuckle-draggin' shrub-shill."

What an a-hole you are.

12:03 AM, December 07, 2007


Anonymous said...
Talk about attracting and angry group of people... This blog is nothing but a bunch of angry, shallow, juvenile name-callers.

Licata's group had much more class and much more substance than this exchange.

7:45 AM, December 07, 2007

-----------------------------------------

The many sides of sporticus.

Well, little fella, at least you can count on the support of one of your little invisible anonymous friends.

Always a pleasure.
 
"ignorant, ill-informed, knuckle-draggin' shrub-shill."

Those are your words. You consistently call people names. Then, when they give you the same treatment in return, you sarcastically refer to them as "intelligent, sophisticated and mature" for resorting to your very own style of dialogue.

Again, you're an a-hole.
 
Anonymous said...

"ignorant, ill-informed, knuckle-draggin' shrub-shill."

"Those are your words. You consistently call people names."

No, I call the likes of you, yourselves and bubbles on your BS.

Big difference.

As for the quote, it was directed at the coalition of the clueless likes o'you and I stand by it.

Are you perplexed? Do you need me to explain it to ya further, little fella?

"Then, when they give you the same treatment in return, you sarcastically refer to them as "intelligent, sophisticated and mature" for resorting to your very own style of dialogue."

"Again, you're an a-hole."

So you said. And this response makes you......what?

That's what I thought.

Oh, by the way, ya wanna explain to me how are you're gonna resort to something you can't comprehend to begin with, little fella?

That's what I thought.

You can start tryin' any time now, sport.

Always a pleasure.
 
"Oh, by the way, ya wanna explain to me how are you're gonna resort to something you can't comprehend to begin with, little fella?"

Once again, entirely incomprehensible.

JW...fess up. You got yer edukation from the Jethro Bodine School of Higher Learnin'.
 
It is much more interesting to be clever than to be mean and nasty.
 
jw confuses meanness and nastiness for cleverness. A common affliction of the sophomore.
 
Anonymous said...

"jw confuses meanness and nastiness for cleverness. A common affliction of the sophomore."

Well, rest easy, little fella. That's one issue you'll never have to face.

Always a pleasure.
 
That's right. I graduated. You didn't.
 
Sure ya did, little fella. Sure ya did.


Always a pleasure.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

June 2006   July 2006   August 2006   September 2006   October 2006   November 2006   December 2006   January 2007   February 2007   March 2007   April 2007   May 2007   June 2007   July 2007   August 2007   September 2007   October 2007   November 2007   December 2007   January 2008   February 2008   March 2008   April 2008   May 2008   June 2008   July 2008   August 2008   September 2008   October 2008   November 2008   December 2008   January 2009   February 2009   March 2009   April 2009   May 2009   June 2009   July 2009   August 2009   September 2009   October 2009   November 2009   December 2009   January 2010   February 2010   March 2010   April 2010