All of a sudden, the Senate needs an ethics committee

1 Reply

Less than two weeks ago, Seven Days‘ Paul Heintz revealed that Senate President Pro Tem John Campbell had gotten a job with the Windsor County State’s Attorney under what can only be called questionable circumstances.

Last year, Campbell actively lobbied for the job on behalf of the SA, who happens to be a neighbor of his. After the job went through, Campbell inquired about it, and was hired without any search process.

In the story, Heintz raised the issue of creating a Senate Ethics Committee, which currently does not exist. Campbell, sounding a lot like Bill Sorrell attesting to Bill Sorrell’s innocence:

“We really haven’t talked about it,” Senate President Pro Tem John Campbell (D-Windsor) said earlier this year. “I can’t remember the last time there was something that even came close to a question of someone’s ethics.”

Well, you can file that one in the Ron Ziegler Memorial “Inoperative” File. What’s changed?

Good Ol’ Norm, that’s what.

Continue reading →

I wrote a letter

1 Reply

On Sunday, I wrote a letter to Rep. David Deen, chair of the House Ethics Panel. I requested a review of Rep. Adam Greshin’s activities surrounding H.40, the RESET renewable energy bill. Greshin had proposed an amendment to freeze funding for Efficiency Vermont, and has vigorously campaigned for its adoption in both the House and Senate.

Greshin is co-owner of the Sugarbush ski resort. As I previously noted in this space:

The ski industry is a voracious consumer of electricity.

Efficiency Vermont is funded by ratepayers, with rates approved by the Public Service Board.

Do I need to connect those dots?

If the Greshin amendment is adopted, his ski resort stands to save a pretty penny on its utility bills. It’s already passed the House; it’s now pending before the Senate.

Potential conflicts abound in a citizen Legislature, and there’s a sizable gray area. The single act of voting for a bill, in my mind, is not in itself grounds for a conflict investigation.

But Greshin’s case is a whole different kettle of fish for two reasons.

Continue reading →

Fill up the dunk tank with Purell, please. I need to feel clean again

Leave a reply

Update: Seven Days has just posted a story with more unsavory details. See below.

Things are not looking bright for Good Ol’ Norm. More details came out Friday on the criminal charges against Sen. Norm McAllister; and if you’re not completely skeeved out by them, well, your Skeeve-O-Meter needs a tuneup.

The case against G.O.N. “suggest[s] that McAllister for years used his power over vulnerable women,” reports Seven Days’ Mark Davis:

In December 2012, a woman moved into a trailer home McAllister owned in Franklin and began working at his farm. From the beginning, he asked her for sexual favors in exchange for allowing her to keep her job and home, affidavits say.

Reminder: McAllister’s late wife was still alive when this got started. Extra bonus skeeve points.

There’s a whole parade of horrors in the police documents, with three women alleging nonconsensual sex with McAllister — oral, vaginal, and anal, on dozens and dozens of occasions, sometimes causing pain. And, according to a Sunday evening report on Seven Days, one of his victims may have been below the age of legal consent when the assaults began.

But the low point, IMO, was this:

McAllister also proposed transporting her to area farms so she could perform sex acts on “Mexican” farmhands. He proposed they split the proceeds. She refused.

Eeeeeeeuuuuuuuucccccch. And this is a guy who was an aggressive moralist in his politics.

Continue reading →

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.)

Good ol’ Norm, maybe not so good

Leave a reply

When a prominent figure is charged with a crime, as with Sen. Norm McAllister being accused of sexual assault and trafficking, it might turn out to be a well-concealed aspect of his personality. Everybody has secrets, and some do a really good job of compartmentalizing.

On the other hand, maybe the dam bursts and you start hearing stories. Like this, from former State Rep. Rachel Weston:

Weston/McAllister

Oh boy.

Is this the first of many “Norm the perv” stories to be told? If so, I have to say the Senate did an awful job of policing members’ behavior. Need any more reason to set up an ethics panel, Mr. Campbell?

It’s looking like the vaccine bill will get a vote — UPDATED

1 Reply

Although I favor repealing the philosophical exemption for childhood vaccinations, I’ve been predicting that the issue will be pulled from the House calendar due to (1) time constraints and (2) unwillingness to tackle yet another controversy.

Looks like I was wrong.

House Speaker Shap Smith was on WDEV’s Mark Johnson Show this morning, and he indicated that the vaccine bill (H.98) would be up for a vote on Tuesday. In his own typically oblique way; if pressed on his answer, I’m sure he’d say that he didn’t promise a vote on Tuesday. Here are his exact words:

It’s very possible that it could come to a vote on Tuesday in the House. It’s not a caucus issue; I don’t think it’s a caucus issue on either side. It looks to me that there is signifant support to remove the philosophical exemption; I think there’s some room around that to maybe give people time to address that. I don’t know when the implementation date will be for it, whether there needs to be a transition plan for schools. There are a number of internal issues that we’ve got to deal with, but it would not surprise me to see that come to the floor next week.

Cute. The guy who’s in charge of scheduling the calendar says “it would not surprise me” to see the bill pop up on the calendar. Hahaha.

Continue reading →

A Senator behind bars

Leave a reply

The mugshot.

The mugshot.

It’s gonna be an uncomfortable day at the Statehouse, what with yesterday’s arrest — at the Statehouse, no less — of Sen. Norm McAllister on charges of sexual assault and human trafficking, blecccch. His friends and colleagues should be prepared for questions about it.

Some free advice, then.

You can always start with a generic “not enough information” approach. That’ll fly at least until his arraignment. After that, you can fall back on the “innocent until proven guilty” mantra, but be very careful about how you frame it.

Avoid anything that shows more sympathy for the (alleged) perpetrator than the (alleged) victims. Avoid coming across like a man who’s never given a thought to the reality of women’s lives. Avoid an overzealous presumption of innocence: “I can’t believe good old Norm would do this.”

Be absolutely sure to avoid casting aspersions on the (alleged) victims. Nothing about skanks or tramps or lowlifes or entrapment.

Continue reading →

Here’s an interesting fact about vaccines

2 Replies

Earlier this week, we had the honor of hosting a real live ***KENNEDY*** right in our very own Statehouse. Yep, RFK Jr. regaled us with his scare stories about the evils of Thimerosal, a vaccine additive containing (a harmless type of) mercury. It seemed a stretch at the time because (1) the autism/Thimerosal “connection” has been thoroughly debunked, and (2) Thimerosal was eliminated from all but one vaccine years ago, and yet autism rates have continued to climb since then.

But here’s something I didn’t learn until today:

The one vaccine containing Thimerosal is not on Vermont’s list of required vaccines.

That’s right. You don’t need a philosophical exemption to avoid the imaginary taint of Thimerosal. Which means that Kennedy’s argument was completely irrelevant to our current policy debate.

In any event, Kennedy seems to have done his cause no good. There’s no sign he moved the needle (sorry); in fact, he may have turned off some undecideds with his overheated rhetoric. Like, for instance, the editorial board of the Times Argus and Rutland Herald:

Kennedy’s strident language added nothing to the debate. He had discredited himself even before he arrived in Montpelier by furthering the damaging and discredited notion that there is a connection between vaccines and autism. The author of the paper asserting that connection has himself admitted to scientific fraud.

But I think it’s worth noting for the record that Kennedy’s bugbear, Thimerosal, has no bearing at all on the philosophical-exemption issue.

Shumlin on vaccine exemption bill: No, but maybe, but yes, or possibly N/A

Leave a reply

Today, State Health Commissioner Dr. Harry Chen testified before the House Health Care Committee on H.98, a bill that would do a number of things but most famously end the philosophical exemption to childhood vaccines.

I’ll be writing about that hearing in a while, but first… After the hearing, Chen spoke with a small pack of reporters: Dave Gram, Paris Achen, me. Most of the conversation was about Gov. Shumlin’s position on H.98. And as Gram and Achen have reported, Chen characterized the Governor as “neutral” on the bill.

Which in itself was news, because in 2012 Shumlin blocked a bill to end the philosophical exemption. Instead, he supported a bill to improve data collection and educational efforts on vaccination.

Since then, he has said he wanted to allow time to let that law work before reopening the question. But this year he hasn’t closed the door to ending the philosophical exemption; he’s just expressed a desire not to have the debate.

So here’s what Chen said today, and it goes beyond mere neutrality.

I think the Governor’s position is that he’s neutral; he understands that the Legislature has decided to take this up, and will support whatever comes out of this Legislature. And if there are other things, you should ask him, not me.

I read that as an affirmation that Shumlin will sign the bill if it reaches his desk.

Of course, it was only yesterday that Shumlin told reporters “I don’t expect the vaccination bill to get to me.” Profiles in courage?

Right now, the House is considering whether to concur with the Senate amendment that would eliminate the philosophical exemption. After three days of testimony, the Health Care Committee has scheduled a public hearing Monday at 5:30. The Legislature is scheduled to adjourn on Saturday the 16th. House leaders could hold a vote on H.98 next week; they could also decide to kick the can down the road and save the Governor the trouble of deciding where he stands.

Shunned by the vaxxers

5 Replies

Was it something I said? Yes, I’m sure it was.

Sometime today, the Twitter voice of Vermont Coalition for Vaccine Choice cut me off. They blocked me from reading their Tweets.

Let me mark the occasion by reproducing the last Tweet I ever got from them.

Stay classy, folks. As your lobbyist Keith (my mistake, his name is Kevin, I know that, I’ve spoken with him often and have a lot of respect for him) Ellis is probably trying to tell you, you’ll attract more flies with honey than vinegar. Or as I Tweeted in response to the above:

And that’s when they cut me off.

Methinks the vaxxers are feeling the heat. The last rounds of the vaccine saga are playing out at the Statehouse this week and next. There’s one more day of testimony before the House Health Care Committee — including a long-awaited appearance by Dr. Harry Chen, Vermont’s Health Commissioner. After that, it remains to be seen whether H.98, a bill that would remove the philosophical exemption, will be heard on the House floor.

From what I hear, the votes could be had; but House leadership might decide to put it on ice for the year. They have the always-plausible “out of time” excuse in their back pockets, and Governor Shumlin has reportedly said he doesn’t expect the bill to reach his desk.

In which case, we’d wait till next year. Between now and then, either of two events would absolutely tip the balance against the philosophical exemption: a breakout of a vaccine-preventable illness, or a continuing decline in childhood vaccination rates. We’ll hope it’s the latter, not the former.