vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

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

1.18.2008

Not so fast

Many House Republicans have signed onto a resolution calling for the House Appropriations Committee to take $1 million from the Legislature's budget and add it to funds to help low-income Vermonters pay for heating fuel this winter.

Here's a link to the resolution.

How could the Legislature save $1 million? The resolution says by going home early -- on April 12.

When have lawmakers exited Montpelier in recent years? Last year it was May 12. In 2006 it was May 10. Rep. Mark Larson, D-Burlington, did a little research and noted that when Republicans controlled the House (Democrats hold the majority now), the legislative sessions ran long.
2001 -- adjournment was June 3
2002 -- June 13
2003 -- May 30
2004 -- May 20

Larson is especially concerned about how the appropriations committees in the House and Senate could wrap up work on next year's budget by April 12. He listed dates when the House passed the budget during most recent years when Republicans controlled the House as well as the past three when Democrats were in charge.

2001 -- House passed budget on March 28
2002 -- March 29
2003 -- April 2
2004 -- March 23
2005 -- March 22
2006 -- March 21
2007 -- April 3

This year it will be particularly difficult to write a budget because there isn't a lot of extra money, but a lot of extra demands. Lawmakers have been in session for two weeks, but have yet to start on next year's budget because Gov. Jim Douglas and his staff won't release any details until his gives his budget address. That's at 2 p.m. Tuesday.

So Larson wonders how House Republicans can expect lawmakers to carry out their responsibilities in the budget process by April 12 "given that under their leadership they weren't able to do it?"

No one should expect the Statehouse to empty on April 12. However, Rep. Alice Miller, D-Shaftsbury, quipped in the Democratic caucus last Tuesday, "I'm going to circulate a petition ... that allows Republicans to go home early."

-- Nancy Remsen

posted by vt.Buzz | 8:35 PM |

Comments:

Nancy, you should look carefully at Rep. Larson's assertions. Note that Republicans did not control BOTH chambers for the dates he cites.

The facts speak for themselves: http://www.leg.state.vt.us/HouseClerk/Legislative%20Process.htm#SessionLength

The legislature consistently exited Montpelier in March or April before the Ralph Wright Political Machine rolled in from Boston.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:32 PM, January 18, 2008

I'd take Ralph Wright's leadership over that of the people currently running the Legislature.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:26 PM, January 18, 2008

Nancy,

Thank you for letting people know about our resolution to adjourn a month early and forward the $1,000,000 savings to the LIHEAP (low income heating fuel assistance program). While Rep. Miller's comments generated a lot of laughter for the Democratic caucus I don't find our proposal for providing much need fuel assistance to needy Vermonters a joking matter.

Being fairly new I wasn't aware of the length's of legislation sessions in other states until this summer. Very few states have sessions that run longer than ours. At the cost to taxpayers of $55,000 per day I think we should actually work full days. While the appropriation committee is waiting for the budget from the governor there is plenty for us to do. Work on education and property tax reform, addressing our medicaid cost shift, affordable housing proposals and workers comp reform - just to name a few issues that are important to our constituents.

I was in the statehouse today until 5:00. At 2:00 only about 4 committees were meeting and by 3:00 there were only a handful of legislators in the building. That is a pathetic waste of your taxpayer dollars.

Given the fact that we will be facing a tight budget year it is essential that we work more efficiently and effectively in order to be adjourned by April 12.

Respectfully,

Representative Patti Komline

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:50 PM, January 18, 2008

How about the Governor getting the Leg the info they need at the START of the session ... that way they can hit the ground running and not have to stay as long.

Wouldn't that be an easy way to speed things up?

Ball's in your court, Governor.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:32 AM, January 19, 2008

I just love all of you so much. I feel like we've been through so much together. We've become so close. So much more intimate than lovers. So much more close than just friends.

All I can say is I love you so much. And I thank you all so much for all of this. It's just such an amazing feeling to have you all here like this.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:18 AM, January 19, 2008

"How about the Governor getting the Leg the info they need at the START of the session ... that way they can hit the ground running and not have to stay as long.

Wouldn't that be an easy way to speed things up?

Ball's in your court, Governor."

The Governor provides the budget in accordance with the schedule set in state statute - a statute that was developed by the Legislature.

No more excuses. It's time that you people could cut the crap, stop wasting energy on non-Vermont issues that you have no control over, and start focusing on Vermont.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:10 AM, January 19, 2008

Sorry dude, there is no law saying that the Gov can't give the legislature a copy of the budget on the first day of the session.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:20 AM, January 19, 2008

Reference Ralph Wright comment above.
How about Jack McMullen who is prominently featured attacking Democratic legislative members in today's BFP. In 2004, he "blew in" from New York to further Republican causes and ran for office without even living here. Maybe there's an agenda to be advanced in his actions too? How about recognizing this.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:31 AM, January 19, 2008

Yes, Jack was a carpetbagger.

That does not make the information he present in his My Turn piece today irrelevant or incorrect. I, too, have lost faith in VPIRG.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:39 AM, January 19, 2008

And for you Bernie haters, Patty Komline, born in Brooklyn, 'blew in' in 1999 and now is a major voice in the Vermont House but onthe Republican side so that makes it OK.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:44 AM, January 19, 2008

So guess Republican "carpetbagging" to use your phrase, is OK,just not OK on the other side. Interesting perspective.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:46 AM, January 19, 2008

"That doesn't make his information irrelevant..."

POsssibly not, but let's know the perspective from which it's being presented and recognize that there my be a bias there as well. That's honest presentation.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:56 AM, January 19, 2008

No, carpetbagging is distasteful on either side.

But for those who criticized McMullen for being a carpetbagger when he ran for Senate (myself included), Bernie's the model. He moved here in the late 60's and immediately ran for Governor. Then he ran for office almost continually until finally winning the Burlington mayor's race in 1980 by 10 votes.

Carpetbagging in Vermont is a Prog, Dem, and Republican tradition.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:58 AM, January 19, 2008

"let's know the perspective from which it's being presented"

We do know the prespective from which it is being presented. The article identified him a a Republican who ran for Senate.

The fact is that VPIRG is a lobbying group like any other, whose board contains businesspeople who have an interest in a favorable outcome on the issue that VPIRG is lobbying for.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:01 AM, January 19, 2008

Komline is a political lightweight. I believe if her party controlled the legislature, the session probably wouldn't end until August. The GOP is great at throwing out ideas like this (remember the national term limits crap that fell in a hole once GOPers starting abusing the law they fought to enact). Why not allow the GOP legislators to go home tomorrow. Might make the session go faster if the girdlock masters weren't around.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:02 AM, January 19, 2008

McMullen ran for national office representing Vermont, not merely for a local one. That's real chutzpah.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:06 AM, January 19, 2008

I know what VPIRG is, and since you do too, what's the problem. There doesn't seem to be any with lobbyists representing corporations (I won't say "special interests" since that is a Republican code word for anyone they oppose)running things in Washington and to a lesser extent in Montpelier. Look at Douglas's appointments to head departments:
the Head of Home Builders to a department overseeing this industry as an example.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:17 AM, January 19, 2008

So let's look at the Democratic leadership of the House. Where did they blow in from?

Speaker Symington - Boston

House Majority Leader Carolyn Partridge - New Jersey

House Minority Whip Floyd Nease - Boston

So let's dispense with the carpetbagging crap. The fact is that the percentage of House Republicans who are real Vermonters far outnumber the percentage of House Democrats who are real Vermonters.

Stick to the issues.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:38 AM, January 19, 2008

The carpetbagger crap was introduced by the reference to Ralph Wright so speak to the Right about that. I was merely pointing out that Jack McMullen ran for office here as someone who didn't live here at all, not merely someone who moved here and ran for office as Bernie and others did much to the chagrin of those who would support McMullen for his party affiliation. That's the irony of it.
Get on their case.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:48 AM, January 19, 2008

Jim Douglas Massachusetts
Walter Freed New York
Keven Dorn Wisconsin
Richard Snelling
Con Hogan
etcetera etcetera.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:52 AM, January 19, 2008

George Aiken
Jim Jeffords
Bob Stafford
Deane Davis
Tom Little
Ray Keyser
Ernest Gibson
Franklin Billings

Shall I go on?

Here's another little fun fact for you.

We have NEVER had a Democratic Governor who was a native of Vermont. Contrast that with how many Republicans have been natives of our state.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:59 AM, January 19, 2008

From my perspective the issues in the state are significant and driven by many complex factors outside the control of what we do inside our state borders. I am less concerned about where the people addressing them come from than I am worried about their qualifications to address them adequately. In a state where we go to great lengths to license Auctioneers, Tattoo Artists and Manicurists we are entirely content to hold tight to the concept of a citizen legislature made up of diary farmers, retired teachers and small shop owners. There is nothing wrong with those professions but they don’t have the training, experience and skills to deal with complex finance, tax and growth issues facing us. Instead we rationalize it is okay for them to be led to a decision by Special Interest groups, Commissions, etc (and by the way then complain about how partisan the committees et.al. are.).

While it may be surprising to some that have never strayed outside our borders, there are actually people outside VT with the experience, knowledge and abilities to come to the State, understand the issues and then make an informed and prudent decisions for the overall well being of the State.

Last I knew, it was a free country for everyone which included the right to live where you chose and have a voice in the government where you live.

For a state that prides itself on its liberal open-mindedness, this thread sounds like the thinking of a bunch of backwoods hillbillies.

Geesh.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:18 AM, January 19, 2008

For your information, native Vermonters are not backwoods hillbillies. And if you don't like the residents here, by all means find a place where your superior intellectuality feels at home.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:30 AM, January 19, 2008

People who live here have a right to govern this state, regardless of what your arrogant, superior a** thinks about it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:32 AM, January 19, 2008

"POsssibly not, but let's know the perspective from which it's being presented and recognize that there my be a bias there as well. That's honest presentation."

McMullen signed his op-ed, and revealed his political affiliation and his role with the GOP. This is more than VPIRG did when it ran that anti-VY campaign through a shadow organization last summer.

Did Sen Flanagan reveal his affiliation to VPIRG when he put in the campaign finance "reform" bill S.164?

Isn't it a bit unethical to let one 501c4 special interest group write a campaign finance law? Isn't this the kind of special interest influence that Vermonters want to see less of and not more?

It's pathetic that people who use these sleazy tactics are the one's claiming to want to "reform" our campaign finance laws.

Equally pathetic that the VT press doesn't call them on it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:32 AM, January 19, 2008

Harry Truman spent some time as a shoe salesman and he made a better president that the Ivy League educated buffoon we now have in the White House; someone who, by the way, had never bothered to travel much outside this country, but who, in his arrogance,felt free to call others camel jockeys and towel heads. Do I perceive a similarity in a certain post above referring to others as hillbillies?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:39 AM, January 19, 2008

What are Arnold Schwartzenegger's superior intellectual credentials?
What were Ronald Reagan's?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:15 AM, January 19, 2008

To get beyond the emotionalism of it, again why would you not want to attract the best people you can to run our state regardless of where they are from?

If you were running a business would you hire skilled people or take just anyone without consideration of qualifications just because they were available? Why should running the state (which is a business) be any different? We go to great lengths to make sure a manicurist is professionally qualified but accept whatever is available to run a state. Why don't you think they should be required to demonstrate their profeciency and ability to meet the requirements of the job.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:28 AM, January 19, 2008

Never said we should not attract people to the state. This is not an issue. You seem to feel that being from somewhere else makes one superior intellectually and in every other way and that farmers and other locals should somehow be eliminated from the pool of potential office-holders. This is elitism and flies in the face of democratic principles that this country was founded upon. The examples above all would be eliminated from your scheme and Bush would be given preference and assumed superior in qualification. We see the result of that kind of thinking.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:44 AM, January 19, 2008

That's not the point at all. As I said there is nothing wrong with any profession. My point was and is we have serious issues in front of us and as such should require basic qualifications and skills of of our legislators. If we care to regulate skills of some fairly inconsequential jobs, why don't we apply the same standard to the Govenment?

I never said out of staters are smarter, etc. In response to the discussion on carpetbagging(where it seemed pretty clear the seniment was you were unqualified if you came from out of state), I said I don't care where they come from as long as they can demonstrate the skills to get the job done.

I think the concept of a citizen legislature is outdated and incapable of delivering anything but the partisan gridlock we have today.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:19 PM, January 19, 2008

No. Re-read your own post. All of the above are stated by you. The rest is "spin."

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:21 PM, January 19, 2008

Look up the definition of "elitism."
It fits the government you are describing exactly.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:37 PM, January 19, 2008

If you do the same thing the same way you can only expect the same results. You all complain enough about the problems that exist because of the D's and the P's and the R's but offer nothing to change it. You want the same old broken approach to do something it can't. There is no elitism here just realism. If you want change, you need TO change something you do.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:49 PM, January 19, 2008

Here, Here!

And get rid of our current leaders.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:10 PM, January 19, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Nancy, you should look carefully at Rep. Larson's assertions. Note that Republicans did not control BOTH chambers for the dates he cites."

And your proof that late adjournment was always the fault of the Dems is.........?

"The facts speak for themselves:"

Yeah, they do. Once again, you've failed to produce any evidence and you haven't made your case.

If nothing else, you're consistent, little fella.

"The legislature consistently exited Montpelier in March or April before the Ralph Wright Political Machine rolled in from Boston."

Ya gonna give us ye ole "You walked five miles to school in your bare feet year round and it was uphill both ways" song and dance now, little fella?

As fascinating as I find your "life before electricity" shtick, little anonymous old timer fella, that world doesn't exist any longer.

Ya wanna reenactment gig, move to Woodstock and get a gig at Billings Farm.

Ya wanna keep makin' with the "we didn't have no fancy computers when I was a boy", BS, tell your story walkin'.

If you're not willing and able to learn to walk upright, go find yourself a tar pit and fall in it.

Ya got bupkis.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 3:22 PM, January 19, 2008

This comment has been removed by the author.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 7:28 PM, January 19, 2008

WCoop10 said...

Anonymous said...
George Aiken
Jim Jeffords
Bob Stafford
Deane Davis
Tom Little
Ray Keyser
Ernest Gibson
Franklin Billings

"Shall I go on?"

Hey, if you wanna compile a list of people who are either dead, out of Vermont Government, no longer gops or all of the above, knock yourself out, little anonymous fella.

"Here's another little fun fact for you."

I can't wait. I'm so excited.

"We have NEVER had a Democratic Governor who was a native of Vermont. Contrast that with how many Republicans have been natives of our state."

Here's a fun fact for you, little fella. It's the 21st Century. Deal with it.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 7:37 PM, January 19, 2008

Anonymous said...
"POsssibly not, but let's know the perspective from which it's being presented and recognize that there my be a bias there as well. That's honest presentation."

"McMullen signed his op-ed, and revealed his political affiliation and his role with the GOP."

Good for him, little fella. What's your point? Nobody would know who he was if he hadn't signed it.

"This is more than VPIRG did when it ran that anti-VY campaign through a shadow organization last summer."

Did VPIRG violate existing law, little fella?

Take your time. You're not going anywhere.

"Did Sen Flanagan reveal his affiliation to VPIRG when he put in the campaign finance "reform" bill S.164?"

Did Flanagan do anything illegal?

"Isn't it a bit unethical to let one 501c4 special interest group write a campaign finance law? Isn't this the kind of special interest influence that Vermonters want to see less of and not more?"

Yeah, but you gop clowns keep fighting CFR. Are you saying it's different when you clowns do it? Should the Dems unilaterally disarm?

"It's pathetic that people who use these sleazy tactics are the one's claiming to want to "reform" our campaign finance laws."

See previous answer.

"Equally pathetic that the VT press doesn't call them on it."

Does doogie disclose every time he has something to to with the Feds, little fella? After all, he was chair of shrub's campaign. Is that somehow different, little fella?

Nice try. No sale.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 7:51 PM, January 19, 2008

""That does not make the information he present in his My Turn piece today irrelevant or incorrect."

No, the fact that he can't prove it does."

What did he say in his piece that he didn't prove, nitwit?

You truly are a freak.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:19 PM, January 19, 2008

Anonymous said...
""That does not make the information he present in his My Turn piece today irrelevant or incorrect."

No, the fact that he can't prove it does."

"What did he say in his piece that he didn't prove, nitwit?"

What did he say that he did prove, little fella?

"You truly are a freak."

In other words, ya got bupkis and you're tired of me handing you your head.

Bummer.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 10:50 PM, January 19, 2008

This comment has been removed by the author.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 11:13 PM, January 19, 2008

Can we impeach jwcoop?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:44 PM, January 19, 2008

To deny any segment of the population their right to representation and to participation in government is undemocratic and un-American. So, old-fashioned as that may be, I'll take it any day to the elitism propounded by the pseudo-intellectually superior.
We do not need an oligarchy in this country or in this state.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:08 AM, January 20, 2008

Maybe the proponents of this elitist approach to government should move to Mississippi. Their approach is more in keeping with the historical (ie, pre-1960) approach to voter's rights in that state.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:17 AM, January 20, 2008

Clarification: the "it" above refers to the present inclusion of all people in serving their state if they want to put their name before the public and be ELECTED to office.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:36 AM, January 20, 2008

Send Alice Miller home early - no one will notice.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:20 AM, January 20, 2008

"there are several people on the board of VPIRG who would personally benefit financially from the policies that VPIRG is lobbying for. Like wind power."

It makes sense that the people who believe in wind power would make financial investments in it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:02 AM, January 20, 2008

I don't think Alice Miller is very funny. I'm sure she could care less how long the legislature is in session - she doesn't have to worry about how she will afford to heat her home this winter.

I hope someone with a little more sensitivity will run against her.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:30 PM, January 20, 2008

Alice Miller is an easy mark for every whiner who comes to the legislature loking for a hand-out. She's been observed coming out of her committee room with tears in her eyes over all the "hard luck" stories. What we need is someone with a set of stones big enough to say "no" to the whiners. Send her home now, even the people in Shaftsbury won't notice she's there (except for when she tries to take credit for everything going on in Montpelier that she didn't have a hand in passing) Dead weight / empty head

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:04 PM, January 20, 2008

Impeach Alice Miller and then impeach Rep. JWcoop, whomever he is.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:19 PM, January 20, 2008

"Assuming that to be the case, little anonymous fool, did he prove that what they were doing was illegal?"

You didn't ask if he proved what they were doing was illegal. You asked what he proved. I told you what he proved and now you change the subject.

You're fundamentally dishonest.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:37 PM, January 20, 2008

You can't impeach Alice Miller - she's too busy sleeping

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:03 PM, January 20, 2008

I hope they replace the Speaker with Ron Allard - he's the only true Vermont Democrat left in that building.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:45 PM, January 20, 2008

We want to attract young people and entrepreneurs to Vermont but once they get here we won't accept them as legitimate citizens able to participate in their own government. This nativist sentiment is one of the biggest obstacles to improving our economy. The nativists work hard to repel the people we are trying to recruit and then complain when they don't come. Wouldn't we be more successful if we welcomed newcomcers.

By the way, we elected our most liberal Congressman ever in 1958 and we elected a very liberal Governor in 1962, both well before the rush of people coming to work at IBM.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:43 PM, January 20, 2008

"By the way, we elected our most liberal Congressman ever in 1958"

Maybe up to that point. But are you saying he was more liberal than Bernie, who was elected to Congress in 1990?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:32 PM, January 20, 2008

"Impeach Alice Miller and then impeach Rep. JWcoop, whomever he is."

Knock yourself out, little fraudulent fella. You can't do any worse than you've been doin'.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 9:54 PM, January 20, 2008

Anonymous said...

"No, carpetbagging is distasteful on either side."

"But for those who criticized McMullen for being a carpetbagger when he ran for Senate (myself included), Bernie's the model."

How so, little fella? Did Bernie try to buy himself a Senate Seat without first establishing legal residence only to lose the gop nomination to Fred Tuttle, too?

"He moved here in the late 60's and immediately ran for Governor."

Did he try to buy himself the office only to lose to Fred Tuttle that time, too, little fella?

"Then he ran for office almost continually until finally winning the Burlington mayor's race in 1980by 10 votes."

So, you're saying that hard work, perseverance and getting more votes than your opposition is a bad thing, little fella?

Gee, too bad the nitwit in chief wasn't runnin' against him back then. He could have stolen that election, too.

On second thought, that's not the case. Bernie beat a Dem. A gop couldn't even work themselves into the picture.

Pacquette may have lost but he wasn't a gop loser.

Somehow it only seems to bother you coalition of the clueless clowns when a Prog or a Dem moves here from somewhere else.

If you're not careful people who know which end is up, what day it is and who's on the ballot will start thinkin' you're the knuckle-draggin', fundamentally-dishonest frauds ya are.

Then again, that presumes you were able to pull the wool over their eyes in the first place, little fella.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 9:57 PM, January 20, 2008

"Are you saying that Tarrant is more of a "real" Vermonter than Bernie, little lyin' sack of gop-slop anonymous fella?

Moreover, are you saying that the people who vote for Bernie in overwhelming numbers are somehow less "real" Vermonters than the comparatively small majority of lunatic-fringe nitwits who don't?"

Um, no, Mr. Charming, I wasn't saying either of those things. Re-read my posting. All I said was that wheoever was elected to Congress from Vt. in 1958 sure wasn't the most liberal Congressman ever elected from Vt., as the poster said.

Now have a great medicated day, Mr. "race" vs. "the race"!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:16 AM, January 21, 2008

"the only remaining issue germane to the conversation is that you don't get to decide who is a real Vermonter, little nameless knuckle-draggin' nitwit."

Nor do you get to decide who is a Democrat in this state and who isn't, little fraudulent dishonest fella.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:19 AM, January 21, 2008

We would welcome newcomers if they would lose the superior attitude they bring with them and somehow fail to lose, even after spending more of their lives here that wherever it is they were from. When they accept that they are Vermonters, they will be accepted as such.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:10 AM, January 21, 2008

"We would welcome newcomers if they would lose the superior attitude they bring with them and somehow fail to lose, even after spending more of their lives here that wherever it is they were from. When they accept that they are Vermonters, they will be accepted as such."

So I am to take it that if they don't lose the attitude they can never be a Vermonter and as such not accepted in this state? I thought this was the land of the free and we welcomed all regardless of beliefs, opinions or attitudes. Or maybe this applies only to the other 49 states.

Cripes...what an attitude. I don;t know how to discribe it...bigoted, perhaps prejudice or maybe even as elitist like the newcomers you resent.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:02 AM, January 21, 2008

Why all the partisan sniping? Who cares what happened in the past? Let's get low income people some money and send the idiots home early. Do we not want Republicans to get credit for the idea so badly that we'll just leave people out in the cold? Jeez.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:10 AM, January 21, 2008

Cripes what an attitude. That's the problem. People who ave an attitude toward others are going to get a negative response. This is only natural. If newcomers would lose their attitude, they would be accepted. Why is this hard to understand? Is it because you can't accept that you are not superior and would prefer to have the excuse that others don't accept you? Why can't you accept that others are your equals rather than having to cling to an artificial superiority bases upon place of birth? Afraid to be labelled with your label of "hillbilly?"

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:33 AM, January 21, 2008

Send 'em home early and let's get some help to our friends and neighbors this winter.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:33 AM, January 21, 2008

The majority is so insecure in their lack of any accomplishment that they will not do anything that hints of a minority idea. $55,000.00 a day to let Alice Miller sleep is not a good use of taxpayer dollars.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:41 AM, January 21, 2008

Then vote her out. Isn't this the argument against the impeachment of the incompetent, crooked regime in Washington? How about that waste of taxpayer's money--the greatest in the history of this country!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:46 AM, January 21, 2008

Don't forget to factor in the fact that elections were skewed to benefit republicans up until 'one person, one vote' in the late 60's.

The fact is that the situation is poor.

Its easy for somebody like Komline to blow in to VT and criticize other legislators for working part time since she has no other commitments. Other legislators have other jobs that they need to maintain since the legislator position is a part time position.

This is also why you don't get too many locals participating in any level of government. Very few can keep a full time job while having the part time legislator job.

There shouldn't be any discussion about "when" people go home. They should stay there until the job is done. If that means that the position becomes a full time position with increase in pay, etc then so be it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:51 AM, January 21, 2008

"I think the concept of a citizen legislature is outdated and incapable of delivering anything but the partisan gridlock we have today."

Here's a thought: The framers (at both the state and federal level) were rather skeptical of giving too much power to elected officials who might be buffeted by the prevailing political winds of the day. So they enshrined basic rights in the Constitution and made the process of changing that or of adding additional statutory restrictions on those rights fairly difficult and time consuming.

These checks and balances and procedural roadblocks make the process of enacting law a moderating process that by nature is slower than many legislators (and voters) with an affinity for activist government would like.

So rapid, radical changes to policy and law are far more difficult to accomplish than modest, incremental changes are, in either direction.

Now couple the expectations of voters and lawmakers who expect government -- particularly at the state level -- to be highly responsive to every perceived "need" with that process, and with a citizen legislature almost entirely reliant on lobbyists and advocacy groups to serve as their staff, and you have our current status quo.

"Partisan gridlock" may be what the framers envisioned as the standard of the day, absent extraordinary conditions requiring a sudden and dramatic shift in the course of government that would dictate consensus.

If the expectation is for a few modest policy changes that have broad support, and for a balanced budget, then there's no reason to believe that even with a certain amount of election-year posturing the Legislature and Administration can't wrap up the session by May.

On the other hand, if you're looking for better performance in terms of a timely adjournment from a citizen legislature, you might need to pay for some professional staff for them.

Once you have a professional legislature, they'll be in session all year round, like Congress, IMHO.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:26 PM, January 21, 2008

This comment has been removed by the author.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:23 PM, January 21, 2008

JWCoop10 has left a new comment on the post "Not so fast":

Anonymous said...

"We would welcome newcomers if they would lose the superior attitude they bring with them and somehow fail to lose, even after spending more of their lives here that wherever it is they were from. When they accept that they are Vermonters, they will be accepted as such."

I don't give a damn if you welcome me here or not, schmuck. I don't seek or require your welcome any more than you or your ancestors allegedly did?

Assuming that you were actually born here, so what? You had nothing to do with it. People don't have any role in determining where they're born so ya can stop taking credit for something you had nothing to do with in the first place, punk.

You can stay or you can stay. I don't give a damn one way or the other. That doesn't change the fact that it's not your call who gets to come and who gets to stay or whether somebody is a "real Vermonter", so stop pretending you had some say in where you were born, schmuck.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 5:02 PM, January 21, 2008

"You can stay or you can stay. I don't give a damn one way or the other."

Classic.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:05 PM, January 21, 2008

Anonymous said...
"You can stay or you can stay. I don't give a damn one way or the other."

"Classic."

Yeah, so's the fact that you have no answer for it.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 5:08 PM, January 21, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Oh my God. You're such a dishonest arguer it's pathetic."

"I never said what I said."

"You shameless lying fraud."

That's right outta your post, punk. Unlike you, I don't need to manufacture quotes or fabricate evidence.

Once again, you've done all the heavy lifting for me and as always, I just want ya to know how much I appreciate it, little anonymous factless fella.

If I said what you claim I said, schmuck, then why can't you produce the quote to prove it.

How is it that you're never able to come up with the quotes or produce the evidence if I'm saying and doing all the things you constantly accuse me of saying and doing, little fella?

This place should be littered with quotes and evidence if I'm always saying and doing this stuff. How is it that it somehow vanishes every time I call your pathetic, ignorant, ill-informed, fundamentally-dishonest, sorry sack of gop-slop, lyin' ass bluff, schmuck?

You're a fraud, little fella. Ya got bupkis. You've always had bupkis and you always will have bupkis until you can come up with the goods and prove your bogus charges and allegations and demonstrate that you don't have bupkis.

You're just an off-the-rack wing-nut punk who doesn't know what year it is or who's on the ballot.

That's why this is always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 5:26 PM, January 21, 2008

"We would welcome newcomers if they would lose the superior attitude they bring with them"

The only people who don't welcome them are Vermonters with superior attitude.

These are the same folks who feel they are due entitlements based upon a false legacy. They complain about costs and taxes because they are in a bad situation due to being too stupid to realize that in order to succeed you have to fish and not cut bait.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:57 PM, January 21, 2008

I knew JW wasn't a Vermonter, you could just tell....

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:30 PM, January 21, 2008

"I knew JW wasn't a Vermonter, you could just tell...."

Why? Because he's not a republican? Aren't all real Vermonters republicans? Or perhaps because he doesn't agree with your self entitled take on the Vermont way?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:56 PM, January 21, 2008

The real irony here is that these Revolt and Repeal, taxrevolt.com, pro-business, lets get more IBM's and manufacturing corporations to move to Vermont are the ones responsible for Jersify-ing the state. And they're the ones crying trustfund flatlander foul when in fact their actions are the ones causing change.

IBM was and is staffed by New Yorkers. The vast majority of professionals who work there are New York transplants or 1st generation Vermonters who originated from liberal New York stock.

All "good" jobs in Vermont are taken by out of state workers and the few Vermonters who had the smarts to bootstrap themselves. Bring business to Vermont and workers will follow.

Same is true for other professional jobs (the good jobs) like medical and higher education. Ask your doctor, where he/she is from. Did your college professors grow up in Vermont? Sure, you'll find some Vermonters, but the vast majority will be transplants.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:12 PM, January 21, 2008

Anonymous said...
"I knew JW wasn't a Vermonter, you could just tell...."

Yeah, I've only been coming here since '68 and living here full-time since '72, little fella.

"Why? Because he's not a republican? Aren't all real Vermonters republicans? Or perhaps because he doesn't agree with your self entitled take on the Vermont way?"

I appreciate the gesture, pal, but save your breath and don't confuse the wacks with the facts.

They're not here to debate and discuss. They have neither the aptitude or the inclination and there's not a shred of good will, integrity or intellectual honesty in the lot.

The fact that they think they played some significant role in being born here should tell ya all ya need to know about their "thought" process.

It'd be like Shaq claiming he pulled himself up by his boot straps and taking credit for the fact that he's 7 feet tall.

Face it, they're ignorant, ill-informed, knuckle-draggin' nitwits and they like it that way.

Again, thanks for the defense and I appreciate the gesture but pretending we just have an honest disagreement with people of good will looking to debate the issues in good faith when they wouldn't be capable of it if they had the inclination to do so isn't doing anybody any favors.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 7:50 PM, January 21, 2008

I think JW should be a hockey fan instead of a politics fan. He can paint his face, rant, and call people names all he wants.

Why are we making it all about Komline, Miller, etc?

What it's about is that they only work from 9 am until 2 or 3 pm. Get it done earlier in the spring, get some people some heating assistance, and stop the partisan bickering.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:25 AM, January 22, 2008

"they only work from 9 am until 2 or 3 pm. "

You don't get it. It's easy for Komline and the minority party to throw that stone. For one thing, the minority party would rather get nothing done. The call to go home early is party bickering at it's finest.

Secondly, legislators like Komline have no other commitments so its easy for her to say "I was here until 5pm, but most left at 3". Of course they did, they have other jobs and commitments. She doesn't.

Thirdly, why not use the potential savings in some other manner? It's simple. Heating assistance is a fuzzy feel good wedge. When else do you see the republican party getting behind any social aid?

gimme a break.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:50 AM, January 22, 2008

How does Komline explain her absense on the Catamount health vote?

And what about Steve Adams who was absent for 4 crucial votes out of 9 in 2006.

Shaw of Derby and Livingston of Manchester missed 5 of 9 each !
Kainen,4.
Westman,Young, Brennan. Depoy, Dunsmore 3 each.
Houston, Helm, Parent, Johnson, Lavoie, Marron, Peasely, O'Donnell. 2 each

I guess if the republicans aren't going to be there anyway, it makes sense for them to call to end the session.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:31 AM, January 22, 2008

SEND THEM HOME EARLY - They don't get anything done anyway.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:38 AM, January 22, 2008

Yes, Let the republicans go home now. We can use all their pay for fuel assistance.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:58 AM, January 22, 2008

The arrogant people throwing *'hillbilly*' and other epithets at native Vermonters are the schmucks."

Is that so, little anonymous schmuck? Gee, that's a shame.

"*no they don't want acceptance, they believe they are the only ones to impart it to others."

Feel free to elaborate on just why you're of the opinion that anyone, anywhere would require or benefit from your acceptance, little nameless nitwit fella.

Moreover, what possesses you to think that acceptance is yours to bestow or withhold, sport?

"My point is merely that is they don't like the people around them, find some place where they are comfortable, perhaps the intellectual nirvana they were born in."

As humorous as I find your pathetic attempts to put on airs and pretend that you have a point, little fella, what you're saying is folks like me who weren't born here should love your knuckle-draggin' nitwit nonsense views of what constitutes a "real" Vermonter or leave it."

That's not your call, schmuck. I don't require or want your brain-dead benediction.

All things considered, I'd prefer not to have it given the rather questionable legitimacy of its parentage.

So, if you'd be more comfortable in Tennessee Taliban territory, then feel free to go. I don't give one way or the other. You're free to continue to spew your brain-dead blather just as I'm free to continually nuke your nitwit nonsense.

That said, either get used to the fact that your ignorant, ill-informed brain-dead, take back Vermont world view is destined for the dust bin of history and deservedly so, or get used to having your meshuggah slop battered from pillar to post by me on a regular basis.

Your fate is in your hands, little fella. Choose wisely.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 10:25 AM, January 22, 2008

*J* *W*

Time to get back to your Seven Daze article

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:09 AM, January 22, 2008

Anonymous said...
*J* *W*

"Time to get back to your Seven Daze article"

Time to get yourself a legitimate argument and some evidence, little fact-free fella.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 11:11 AM, January 22, 2008

Anonymous said...
*J* *W*

"Time to get back to your Seven Daze article"

Time to get yourself a legitimate argument and some evidence, little fact-free fella.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 11:11 AM, January 22, 2008

This comment has been removed by the author.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 11:11 AM, January 22, 2008

JW said..." Moreover, what possesses you to think that acceptance is yours to bestow or withhold, sport?"

JW, probably the same thing that makes you think everyone on this board owes you proof to earn your respect.

Interestingly enough, I had assumed the 'hillybilly' comment applied much more to you than others on this board. Just by reading your posts and your choice of language I had assumed previously you had lived in a trailer park somewhere in Alabama and the J in JW stood for Jim Bob.

oops.... silly me. My mistake.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:57 PM, January 22, 2008

Anonymous said...
JW said..." Moreover, what possesses you to think that acceptance is yours to bestow or withhold, sport?"

"JW, probably the same thing that makes you think everyone on this board owes you proof to earn your respect."

Actually, it's more an issue of you demonstrating you have a case and can back it up, little fella. Clearly, you don't and you can't.

There's not much chance you're gonna earn my respect, little fella. So, with that in mind, even though it's a long shot at best, ya should confine yourself to goals you have some small, slim, chance of achieving and eschew dreaming the impossible dream, sport.

While it would be a nice refreshing change of pace to see you come up with some evidence for once, no one needs to hear you sing.

"Interestingly enough, I had assumed the 'hillybilly' comment applied much more to you than others on this board. Just by reading your posts and your choice of language I had assumed previously you had lived in a trailer park somewhere in Alabama and the J in JW stood for Jim Bob."

Congrats, little couldn't hit water if ya fell outta the boat in the middle of the lake fella, your streak's intact. You remain 0-everything.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 1:16 PM, January 22, 2008

No one is asking for respect. It's simply an explanation for Vermonter's dislike of flatlanders which they seem to resent.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:53 PM, January 22, 2008

Anonymous said...

"No one is asking for respect. It's simply an explanation for Vermonter's dislike of flatlanders which they seem to resent."

That's their problem.

People who take credit for where they were born as though they had something to do with it and pass judgement as to just who and what constitutes a "real" Vermonter are ignorant trash and don't deserve any respect.

Case closed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:02 PM, January 22, 2008

JW, educate us please.

Other than youself of course, who qualifies as something other than ignorant trash, brain-dead blather and knuckle dragging nitwits? Who deserves your respect? Tell us please Mr. JW, sir.

From,
All your pals on this blog.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:16 PM, January 22, 2008

jw said:

"They're not here to debate and discuss. They have neither the aptitude or the inclination and there's not a shred of good will, integrity or intellectual honesty in the lot."

What single thing have you debated or discussed in the entire time you've been here? You haven't debated or discussed a single thing. The ONLY thing you've ever done is call people names.

Case closed.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:51 PM, January 22, 2008

"What single thing have you debated or discussed in the entire time you've been here? You haven't debated or discussed a single thing. The ONLY thing you've ever done is call people names.

Case closed."

F'ing hell yeah!!

Nothing like going off about Vermonters JW, you only live in Vermont, deal with it!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:30 PM, January 22, 2008

Anonymous said...

"JW, educate us please."

"Other than youself of course, who qualifies as something other than ignorant trash, brain-dead blather and knuckle dragging nitwits? Who deserves your respect? Tell us please Mr. JW, sir."

If they ever show I'll let ya know, little fella.

There's an anonymous fella out there who's got a shot. He/She'd be well-advised to get themselves a screen name to separate themselves from you anonymous nitwits, but that's up to them.

You can clean out your locker and turn in your playbook, little fella. Does that answer your question.

People who call credit for where they were born aren't real anythings, let alone real Vermonters.

Bubbles and the anonymous nitwits are counterfeit in the best of times. Clearly, these aren't the best of times for bubbles and the anonymous nitwits.

"From,
All your pals on this blog." aka bubbles and the little fella.

I'm not in the market for anonymous nitwit friends, little fella. My friends have names and brains and they're not afraid to use them.

We're just funny that way.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 8:49 PM, January 22, 2008

Anonymous said...

"What single thing have you debated or discussed in the entire time you've been here? You haven't debated or discussed a single thing. The ONLY thing you've ever done is call people names."

Actually, I'm in the pointing out when a nitwit proves they're a nitwit business. I don't have to call them anything. They've blown their cover already.

Like I've been tellin' ya since day one, little anonymous factually-challenged, slow on the uptake fella, it works like this:

I call you on your ignorant, ill-informed, gop-slop nonsense, you invariably provide the evidence to prove my specific point in addition to my larger point by illustrating the fact that you don't know what the hell you're talking about in general, at which point you invariably continue to make my case for me and prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt, I point out what ya just said and/or ya just proved, you go off the rails, blame me because you can't prove what you just said and can't prove, jump in the grave you've just dug for yourself and pull in the dirt behind you, while I thank my lucky stars, the Lord above and you and sit back and enjoy the fruits of your labor.

There's never any heavy lifting and it works every time.

Case closed."

"Nothing like going off about Vermonters JW, you only live in Vermont, deal with it!"

No, I go off on morons who take credit for where they were born before eventually giving up and moving to some trailer park on the redneck riviera and continue to bitch about people who've been in their new hometown less than 30 years 10 minutes after they're done unloading the truck without once grasping the irony of their words, actions and situation.

Big difference.

Vermonters don't take credit for where their born. I know. I'm married to one and the Father of two more.

Deal with it.

I know where I live, little fella. So do you. You, on the other hand, could be just another schmuck living in your Mom's basement in Lincoln Nebraska or Bismarck, North Dakota for all I know or care.

You're probably in Chittenden County somewhere, but, absent confirmation, there's no way of knowing.

Either way, you're a coalition of the clueless nitwit who doesn't know his ass from his elbow.

We're here to stay. Deal with it.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 9:35 PM, January 22, 2008

Hockey fan hasn't talked about the original thread in several comments.

Again, somebody's making it all about Komline. Because she brought up a ggood idea. It's all about the personal and partisan politics of smear, isn't it? Are all her ideas good? No. But this one's worth some merit.

Both sides miss votes. Sometimes it's for legitimate personal reasons. Many times it's part of a compromise to allow some political cover in exchange of r a vote on something else. Barak Obama did it in the Illinois Legislature, and Clinton's hammering him on it. It was how he got certain things done in Illinois. You folks can be excused for not knowing that. But CLinton can't, because she knows better.

People who have other obligations at 2 or 3 in the afternoon should let other people run for their positions. I understand we don't want all rich people. But we want dedicated people. Her point is a valid one. And I don't see it as a partisan phenomenon. There are lazy Republicans as well as lazy Democrats.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:54 AM, January 23, 2008

"There's an anonymous fella out there who's got a shot. He/She'd be well-advised to get themselves a screen name to separate themselves from you anonymous nitwits, but that's up to them."

No, he/she would be well advised to get "himself" or "herself" a screen name to separate "himself" or "herself," and it's up to "him" or "her," not "them." When you use the singular, as you did at the beginning of that sentence, the pronoun "them" is incorrect.

Nitwit.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:55 PM, January 23, 2008

"When you use the singular, as you did at the beginning of that sentence, the pronoun "them" is incorrect."

JW slept through English class at the Jethro Bodine Academy of Higher Learnin'...

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:44 AM, January 24, 2008

And, of course, jw never criticizes people for their grammar or even a typo, right?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:35 AM, January 24, 2008

"JWCoop10 said...

Actually, I'm in the pointing out when a nitwit proves they're a nitwit business. I don't have to call them anything. They've blown their cover already. "

JW..submit your qualifications to hold this position of judgement over the population of VT.

Otherwise admit you are the fraud we all know you to be and stand in line with all your fellow "nitwit posters".

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:31 PM, January 24, 2008

JW said "Vermonters don't take credit for where their born. I know. I'm married to one and the Father of two more."

Be afraid there are more at home like him

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:34 PM, January 24, 2008

Anonymous said...

"JWCoop10 said...

Actually, I'm in the pointing out when a nitwit proves they're a nitwit business. I don't have to call them anything. They've blown their cover already. "

"JW..submit your qualifications to hold this position of judgement over the population of VT."

Well, first of all, little nameless factually-challenged fella, I've got eyes that see and I smelled your ignorant ass comin' long before I could see ya. You're not gonna sneak up on anybody any more than ya can get 'em to buy your ignorant, ill-informed, slop.

Secondly, I'm not holding "this position of judgement over the population of VT." I'm just callin' ignorant trash, ignorant trash. You don't represent the State of Vermont by any stretch of the imagination, my little coalition of the clueless cretin.

Alas, you're merely the dying, decaying, nameless refuse of a dark, dreary, soon-to-be-forgotten age rapidly passing into a much-deserved oblivion along side the rest of the take back Vermont trash in the historical landfill of lunatic-fringe slop.

"Otherwise admit you are the fraud we all know you to be and stand in line with all your fellow "nitwit posters".

Nah, that's your rapidly-diminishing domain, little fella. You and bubble boy will remain the only nitwits in your brokebrain mountain cell.

Nice try, little fella.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:07 PM, January 24, 2008

Thanks for the kind words pal but you still didn't address the request. So, I can only conclude that you too are a member of the coalition of clueless cretins.

Welcome aboard. There is a seat available for you right between me and Bubba. Repeat after me "I like Bush", "I like Bush", "I like Bush".

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:18 PM, January 24, 2008

Matt Dunne for Governor.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:12 PM, January 24, 2008

"Matt Dunne for Governor."

Matt's mom is back blogging.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:09 AM, January 25, 2008

No, she is backing Jeb Spaulding.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:55 PM, January 25, 2008

"No, she is backing Jeb Spaulding"

signed,
Jeb's Mom