Category Archives: Campaign finance

Everybody in the pool

3 Replies

So the news broke on Labor Day: Phil Scott announces that he will announce he plans to announce a run for governor.

It’s more than a year till Election Day, and we’ve already got extremely competitive races on both the Democratic and Republican sides. Pop quiz for Vermont history buffs: when was the last time that happened? If it ever has?

And I do have a prediction. Not on the winner; aside from Scott wiping the floor with Bruce Lisman in the GOP primary, it’s way too early to pick winners. But I can say, without much trepidation, that this will be the most expensive campaign for a state elected office in Vermont history.

Heck, there may be more money spent in the primaries alone than in any previous full campaign.

Continue reading →

The Littlest Boondoggle

3 Replies

A few days ago I heard, second-hand, of a brief encounter between an anonymous Vermonter and one of the state’s town clerks. The gist: the clerk was talking about a three-and-a-half-day workshop coming up this week. The clerk saw it as kind of a waste of time and taxpayer money, especially since it would be held in the tony precincts of the Jay Peak resort.

The session iis being held by the Secretary of State’s office, and is designed to teach clerks about the new integrated software system currently being implemented. Okay, fine, but does it really take three and a half days? And why Jay Peak, of all places? Doesn’t that cost a lot?

Questions worth asking, I thought. So I went to the source, Mr. Secretary Jim Condos himself. What I found out is that the unnamed town clerk was telling the truth, at least technically; but there were reasonable explanations for all of it. A little disappointing for political scandalmongers, but a story worth telling nonetheless.

Continue reading →

Seven Shades of Nothing

2 Replies

After a couple of big surprises Wednesday morning, the rest of Campaign Finance Filing Day was rather a damp squib. Nothing much was revealed. Unless, that is, the “nothing” is in itself significant.

And I wouldn’t be a political blogger if I couldn’t make something from nothing.

And so, theVPO presents the top seven nothings and what they might mean.

In the race for Governor, four of the five top prospective candidates did nothing. A marginal hopeful did the same. As for the potential Democratic faceoff for Attorney General, neither incumbent Bill Sorrell not declared challenger TJ Donovan reported any new activity.

None of this is terribly surprising. Among those potential gubernatorial candidates, only Matt Dunne had an existing campaign structure (dormant since 2010) to accept donations. And by Vermont standards, it’s still extremely early for anyone to be beating the bushes.

The two likeliest Democratic candidates for governor not named Dunne, Shap Smith and Sue Minter, didn’t seek funds for a corner-office run. Smith reported a bit of fundraising for his State House campaign kitty, easily transferable should the need arise. This leaves Dunne with a sizeable lead — but there’s a lot of time to catch up. In this regard, Dunne’s dollar total is less significant than his ability to quickly sign up a brace of top-tier liberal donors in Vermont and in Silicon Valley.

On the Republican side, the losing 2012 nominee, Randy Brock, didn’t report anything. The putative front-runner, Lt. Gov. Phil Scott, didn’t do any new fundraising — but he has nearly $100,000 left over from his 2014 campaign, so he’s definitely in no hurry.

And then there’s Dan Feliciano, former Libertarian turned kinda Republican, who’s been pondering a second run for governor.

Continue reading →

Matt Dunne lays down a marker

Leave a reply

There are still many reports yet to be filed, but it looks like the big news from today’s midyear campaign finance deadline will be Matt Dunne’s hefty, and heavy-hitting, finance report. The former State Senator and onetime gubernatorial candidate reports $115,000 in fundraising — but since the report was prepared, he says, he’s added another 20K to the total, bringing his tally to $135,000.

Which is particularly impressive when you consider that he’s done almost all of that work in the last ten days. “Governor Shumlin made his announcement [of non-candidacy] only four or five weeks ago,” he said. After that, Dunne deferred to his political mentor, Congressman Peter Welch, who announced he would not run for governor on June 26 — the very day that Dunne was going out of town for “a long-planned family vacation.”

And yes, if you scan his list of contributions, the earliest date you’ll see is July 6. And the first names on the list: the heavy Dem donors Jay and Caroline Canning. Jay owns the upscale Hotel Vermont. Dunne kept his virtual rolodex* spinning as he contacted well-heeled Vermonters and his many acquaintances in Silicon Valley; Paul Heintz has many of the details in his “Fair Game” column. Suffice it to say that he’s cut a swath through the roster of deep-pocketed Democrats. (A couple names not mentioned by Heintz: Will Raap of Gardeners Supply, the Growald family of Woodstock, and from across the river, former Democratic Party National Committeeman Peter Burling and members of the Taylor family. Dunne’s wife is the author Sarah Stewart Taylor [hi, Sarah]; it’s always nice when you can marry well.)

*Come on, you don’t think a Google executive has an actual Rolodex, do you?

It’s hard to interpret this as anything but a strong marker — a sign to other potential candidates that Dunne is dead serious and has a lot of support, in spite of his nearly five-year absence from statewide politics. Absence, at least as a visible part of the process; he says he’s been heavily involved in various endeavors in Vermont that have kept him very much in circulation.

Continue reading →

Deep-pocketed Lieutenant Governor hopeful stakes his claim

Leave a reply

Well, here’s an interesting tidbit from Campaign Finance Reporting Day. (July 15 is a deadline for campaign finance reports.)

Brandon Riker, Brattleboro resident and (as far as I know) the only declared candidate for Lieutenant Governor, has raised over $100,000 for his campaign.

That number almost made me shoot Vermont Coffee Company coffee out my nose.

And then I looked down the list of major donors, and one name dominated the list.

“Riker.”

Young Brandon has given his own campaign $58,500. Other people named Riker (Brent, Craig, Julia, Leslie, Barbara, Dale, and Stephanie) have kicked in $28,000.

Nice to be a member of a family that can spare 86 grand on a newcomer’s first political campaign.

Continue reading →

Kremlinology III: the public and the private

Leave a reply

Not to beat a dead horse, but something just occurred to me about Bill Sorrell’s presence and/or absence at recent gubernatorial signing events.

To recap, on Monday I noted our Eternal General’s conspicuous absence at two recent events, and the even more conspicuous presence of Sorrell’s once and (perhaps) future challenger, TJ Donovan. Three days later, the Governor’s office released a photo of Shumlin signing a bill in the presence of Sorrell and many of his staffers.

But there’s one huge difference between the latter occurrence and its predecessors.

The two non-Sorrell signings were public events with the media on hand. Thursday’s signing was a closed affair in the Governor’s office. No reporters, no video, no pictures except the official one.

The obvious explanation: there’s no way in Hell that Governor Shumlin wants to stand next to Bill Sorrell in the presence of reporters. We’d ask a few courtesy queries about the issue of the day, and then we’d bombard both men with questions about Sorrell’s ethical troubles. Shumlin would have to stand close by while Sorrell tried to explain himself; and even worse, Shumlin would have to give his take on the whole affair. “Do you stand by the Attorney General?” “Do you think he should continue to serve?” “Is it proper for The People’s Lawyer to accept free travel, accommodations, deluxe meals, and political donations from law firms that do business with the state?”

Etc., etc., etc.

The Governor would decline comment because of the ongoing investigation, but boy, would it be uncomfortable.

It’s a profoundly weird situation when you think about it: the Governor and the Attorney General, both elected officials from the same party, can’t appear in public together for fear of embarrassing questions.

Tom Little: The right choice for the job

1 Reply

I’m sure it’s a coincidence (paging Mr. Coriell), but Governor Shumlin chose today to announce his choice of independent investigator to look into Eternal General Bill Sorrell’s campaign finance activities. On a Friday, and on a Friday when a sitting State Senator did a perp walk after his arraignment on sex-crime charges.

But the hiring is noteworthy, and from all appearances, Shumlin made a fine choice. Tom Little appears to be above reproach in his personal conduct, and even-handed in his political dealings. The only drawback — and to some it’s a very significant one — is that he doesn’t have any experience as a prosecutor. His legal practice has mainly been in corporate and real estate law.

Little served ten years a Republican State Representative. He distinguished himself greatly in the fight for civil unions. In this age of widespread marriage equality, that might seem like ancient history; but it was only 15 years ago, and at the time it was a legal milestone and a red-hot controversy. An August 2000 profile piece by Seven Days’ Kevin Kelley called him “the single most influential figure in steering the [civil unions] legislation to narrow passage.” As chair of the House Judiciary Committee, Kelly writes, he “helped persuade other moderate Republicans to vote on their conscience, not their fears.”

He’s currently a top exec at the Vermont Student Assistance Corporation, and he’s got a list of public service activities as long as your arm. And someone with much more knowledge than I characterizes Little as a “straight shooter, non-corruptible.” But here’s the point where my cynicism threw in the towel: according to a bio I’ve seen, he “currently serves as Chancellor of the Episcopal Diocese of Vermont.”

Good grief. Who is this guy, the reincarnation of Jimmy Stewart?

I don’t know Tom Little, never met him. But apart from the lack of prosecutorial experience, it’s very hard to find any fault with the choice. Not bad for a Friday newsdump. (Sorry, Scott.)

Phil Scott asks some dumb questions

2 Replies

Apparently our humble & lovable Lieutenant Governor still has a bug up his butt about public financing of election campaigns. You may recall that Phil Scott had never uttered a word about public financing* until Dean Corren qualified for public funds last year, forcing Scott to actually put some effort into his campaign. The experience was traumatic enough that it birthed a “philosophical objection” to public financing in Scott’s mind.

*Correction: I’ve been informed that Scott has voiced objections on previous occasions. Sen. Joe Benning: ” I first heard him expressing his disagreement with public financing of campaigns when I met him back in 2010.” I thank the Senator for taking the time to write. I’d still like to know if Scott had ever expressed his disagreement on the public record, but clearly his concerns precede his 2014 campaign.

On Tuesday, Scott grabbed an opportunity to again state his “philosophical objection” to public financing, and raise a series of far-fetched questions about the law’s workings.

His testimony before the Senate Government Operations Committee drew no attention in the media because it was immediately followed by Attorney General Bill Sorrell’s appearance, in which he belatedly acquiesced to calls for an independent probe of his campaign finances. Yeah, that kinda overshadowed everything else.

Also, Scott’s remarks were immediately dismissed by the committee, which had convened to consider a single technical change in the law; there was no time for broader questions.

But before it vanishes into the mists of history, let’s recount some of Phil Scott’s testimony.

Continue reading →

VPR and Sorrell: It got worse

5 Replies

Okay, so Vermont Public Radio got my worst grade for its coverage — or should I say “complete absence of coverage” regarding the campaign finance scandal threatening to engulf Vermont Eternal General Bill Sorrell.

VPR didn’t even send a reporter to Tuesday’s Senate Government Operations Committee hearing, at which Sorrell reversed course and endorsed the idea of an independent investigation of his campaign activities. Something he had consistently refused to do since the fall of 2012, mind you.

And then today, the big guest on “Vermont Edition” was none other than Bill Sorrell himself.

I gave VPR its bottom-of-the-barrel grade before I head the Sorrell interview.

Now I have. And VPR just fell below the bottom of the barrel.

First of all, having devoted no perceptible airtime to the allegations against Sorrell, they give him the VPR platform for a solid half hour?

And then, even worse, they spend the first 20 minutes of the interview NOT talking about campaign finance, but the GMO labeling law and this week’s developments in the case. Jane Lindholm’s intro didn’t even mention Sorrell’s troubles; there was a single passing generic reference to “campaign finance.”

Talk about ignoring the elephant in the room. We have one of our top elected officials having to accept an independent investigation of his activities — something that has rarely or perhaps EVER happened in Vermont history — and you don’t lead with it? You didn’t even mention it?

Continue reading →

Somebody’s ethical compass needs a tune-up

1 Reply

Congratulations to Governor Shumlin for finding the time in his busy schedule to do something about Eternal General Bill Sorrell.

Like Sorrell, the Governor couldn’t see the seriousness of the situation on his own; he had to be dragged kicking and screaming. I hope his moral compass is truer in other areas, though I fear not.

Also, the next time he pleads a lack of time to deal with an inconvenient issue, we’ll know it’s bullshit.

But that’s not my primary topic for this missive. No, that would be the Vermont media’s widespread failure to address the Sorrell story until it smacked them between the eyes.

Not all are equally guilty, and I’ll offer a ranking below. But their failure in the Sorrell case is sadly typical of the Vermont media’s myopia when it comes to the foibles of the powerful. There’s a presumption of innocence, a reluctance to challenge, that’s uncharacteristic of the media at its best.

Let’s take John Campbell, for instance. In late February, Seven Days’ Terri Hallenbeck wrote about the Senate President Pro Tem having “quietly increased his office’s staffing and more than doubled his payroll.”

The response from the Vermont media? Crickets.

Admittedly the dollars involved are not large — we’re talking roughly $55,000 before and $110,000 after — but big stories have been spun out of smaller stuff. Usually involving a nameless functionary, not an elite officeholder. (Anybody ever hear of William Goggins until this month?)

Why did Campbell get a free pass? I have no idea, but it reflects poorly on our fourth-estate watchdogs.

Continue reading →