Sue Minter has taken a step toward sharpening her political profile, in an interesting and timely way. From the Vermont Press Bureau:

Minter, one of two Democratic candidates for governor, has come out strongly in favor of requiring universal background checks for all firearm sales in Vermont, regardless of the nature of the transaction.

Well. That should get her a heapin’ helpin’ of backlash from the gun-rights crowd. And if Minter continues to push the issue, it will be a test of what the pollsters say: that there is broad support for universal background checks, but a very loud minority keeping the issue off the table.

For his part, fellow Dem Matt Dunne was notably more circumspect, saying only that he would be “open to discussing any strategy that would reduce gun violence.” Which kinda means exactly nothing.

The two Republican candidates, as you might expect, are against any changes to state law. Bruce Lisman asserts that state law isn’t broken and “doesn’t need to be fixed.” For his part, Lt. Gov. Phil Scott seemed a little unclear on the concept of of “universal background checks.”

“We already have universal background checks. I’ve been through them myself.”

Er, sorry, Phil, we don’t. (He seems to be having trouble with this policy stuff.) But pray continue.

As a Vermont boy myself, trading one off with my neighbor or a family member is a right I think we should have,” Scott continued. “Vermont has one of the lowest crime rates in the country and I think we are searching for an answer for a problem that doesn’t exist.”

Wrong.

Continue reading →

One week ago today, Vermont Republican Party Chair David Sunderland publicly embarrassed himself in an attempt at some cheap publicity. He sent a letter to Secretary of State Jim Condos complaining that an Elections Office staffer had posted a comment on a “hyper-partisan, far left blog” (I blush) revealing “a concerning political bias.”

He simultaneously released the letter to the media and posted it on the VTGOP website without giving Condos the opportunity to respond. By doing so, Sunderland made it clear that he was looking to stir up trouble rather than seek resolution.

Condos almost immediately replied, and it was a complete smackdown of Sunderland’s complaint. Condos had been aware of the posting before Sunderland, and had already spoken to the employee, asking him to respect the office and its need to be even-handed in conducting electoral business. There is, of course, no legal way to constrain state employees from exercising their free speech rights, so Condos merely asked for some discretion. And, as Sunderland himself admitted, he has frequently dealt with the administrator and has never seen a hint of partisan bias in the man’s work.

Well, Sunderland isn’t the kind to give up on a controversy just because he’s wrong. And indeed, he sent Condos a follow-up letter earlier this week and simultaneously released it to the media. This time, the media wisely ignored the thing.

Condos replied to Sunderland the following day; I received Condos’ letter through a public records request.

Sunderland’s second missive makes it clear that his real target is not the administrator in question; indeed, he drops any demand for action against the administrator. What he really wants is to fabricate an issue to use against Condos, a Democrat who has been the closest thing to unbeatable since he first won the office in 2010.

Continue reading →

I didn’t attend Matt Dunne’s campaign launch on Monday. (Didn’t make Sue Minter’s on Tuesday either.) But I have looked over his prepared remarks and his updated platform, and here are some thoughts.

Overall: He’s positioning himself as the outsider, using some pretty strong language about the current crowd in Montpelier. He’s also positioning himself as the candidate of new, fresh ideas; to some extent his platform delivers on that. There are disturbing whiffs of New Democrat (a.k.a. Republican-Lite), but not enough to make a definitive judgment.

Before diving into details, let me emphasize that these are early impressions. I don’t have a horse in this race; I could see myself backing any of the three Democrats. Plenty of time to achieve clarity. That said…

His speech can be viewed online; I don’t see the text posted anywhere. (I received the text in a media email blast.) It’s pretty standard stuff, connecting his own experience to the issues in play. Indeed, there’s an almost comical bit of job-description tailoring:

We need new leadership with different experience, experience that reaches beyond the traditional structures of state government ot incorporate the best of the public, private and nonprofit sectors.

Leadership that is grounded in Vermont, but has had experience around the country to understand what can be done to move our state forward.

That definition fits Dunne with a startling precision, and conspicuously excludes his Democratic opponents. And Phil Scott.

As for policy, Dunne is clearly making economic development the centerpiece of his campaign.

Continue reading →