An interesting article on Dr. Dean

[in_cog_ni_to]

I have never read this. I hope it's not a repeat.

<snip>Dean inherited a massive deficit in the state budget from Snelling. Refusing to raise taxes on wealthier Vermonters (and rendering the tax system more regressive than previously), Dean declared in his first State of the State address that it would be his mission to balance the state budget with some "tough" cuts. Even though Vermont has no law requiring a balanced budget, Dean promised, "The pain for Vermonters will be real."7

Dean slashed millions of dollars from all sorts of social programs, from prescription drug benefits for Medicare recipients and heating assistance for poorer Vermonters to housing assistance funds. In defending his cuts to social programs, Dean said, "I don’t think I have to shy away from that just because I’m supposed to be a liberal Democrat."8

Throughout the 1990s, Dean’s cuts in state aid to education ($6 million), retirement funds for teachers and state employees ($7 million), health care ($4 million), welfare programs earmarked for the aged, blind and disabled ($2 million), Medicaid benefits ($1.2 million) and more, amounted to roughly $30 million. Dean claimed that the cuts were necessary because the state had no money and was burdened by a $60 million deficit.9

But during the same period, Dean found $7 million for a low-interest loan program for businesses, $30 million for a new prison in Springfield, VT, and he cut the income tax by 8 percent (equivalent to $30 million)–a move many in the legislature balked at because they didn’t feel comfortable "cutting taxes in a way that benefits the wealthiest taxpayers."10 By 2002, state investments in prisons increased by nearly 150 percent while investments in state colleges increased by only 7 percent.11 <snip>

http://www.isreview.org/issues/32/dean.shtml

[Tom Rinaldo]

1. Be ready to reply to stuff like this

Because this is the type stuff that will be thrown at Dean by the Republicans if and when he gets the nomination. It doesn't matter if his more centrist past positions are closer to those embraced by the Republicans, they will try to show Dean as being hypacritical. I just checked out this artical, and it seems much better researched than most "hit pieces". I would like to read a Dean supporter giving a serius reply to the points it raises.

And no I don't feel that I am giving amunition to the enemy by discussing this, because Rowe and the Republicans know how to use Google just like we do, and they will be all over Deans record in Vermont, looking for "flip flops" to throw at him if Dean gets the nomination. They love ensnaring Democrats with their own prior words. They will attempt to portrey Dean as untrustworthy, willing to do ar say anything it takes to get elected. They will make Lieberman, Gephardt and Kerry seem gentle by comparison. So Dean supporters, I suggest you get very familiar with these aspects of his record, so that you can be prepared to defend your man.

This is a lesson I have had to learn the hard way here on DU having to learn how to respond to all of the countless threads about the Boards of Directors Clark has sat on, and everything conceivable negative thing the military has ever done that someone tries to prove Clark has been complicit in. Then there is always the matter of whether or not Clark was progressive enough 15 years ago. I've spent hours reading up on Clark so that I could intelligently respond to some of that crap.


That's hardball folks, opponents keep dredging up nuggets from the past to embarrass those in the present. In the case of the artical this thread points to, these are at least legitimate questions about Deans actual record in office that are being looked at.

[Donna Zen]

8. So are lefties...lefties at all.

If I were going to stir things up with the left, I would want to use moles who usually write the pro-progessive articles, but can be called upon when needed to do the dirty work. Afterall, we brush away charges made by Saffire, but not the Nation. Wouldn't it make sense to use someone who would carry some weight.

I've suspected that as the MO in Clark's case since the beginning. Although to be honest, some of the stuff was so poorly researched and written that why it was being cited at all was the question.

[blm]

2. That's Dean's true core. Centrist. A fiscal conservative who approaches

fiscal responsibility through the eyes of a conservative. Liberal programs get slashed first. Conservative programs and tax breaks are left in place.

[KittyWampus]

3. To Be Fair- The Prison Was Necessary

That's the only thing I'll defend about Dean's tax cuts and raises during Primary Season.

Vermont was farming out their prison population and it cost the state alot of money.

[Tom Rinaldo]

4. Thanks for that tidbit

I will admit that I was partially motivated to give this thread a "kick" by responding, after it initially sank like a stone, because I got disgusted reading yet another Clark is a corporate tool thread earlier. But I did think hard about kicking it first, and I decided that it would be better if this obvious stuff, that any good Republican intern will be able to dredge up inside 4 hours, got kicked around by us first. There is a good chance that Dean will be our nominee. If he is he will have to defend his record as Gov of VT, and he will have to gracefully deflect accusations that he changed political stripes simply to win the nomination. From what you say, there does seem to be a solid reply to the prison building queston, unless you feel that the prisons were overpopulated because the wrong people were being sent to them in the first place.

[_Jumper_]

5. So why are progressives backing someone who is more...

...fiscally conservative than Dubya?

[DemBones DemBones]

9. Because they're not really progressives?

Because they don't recognize a conservative unless someone else says, "Hey! That guy's a conservative!" ?

Because they don't believe anything unless it's reported by Dean's campaign?

Because they secretly want to lose in 2004 and give Bush four more years?

[KaraokeKarlton]

6. The same site also produced this "beauty"...

Despite this, no one should be fooled that Gore--should he win--will govern much differently than the Clinton-Gore administration. Gore's campaign is just as awash in corporate cash as Bush's is. The policies he stumps for hardly differ from the "centrist" Republican-lite policies of Clinton. And just in case Gore's populist phrase-mongering gives Corporate America the wrong idea, Gore chose one of Corporate America's chief water carriers, Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.), as his running mate. On August 22, Lieberman told the Wall Street Journal: "There is no rational reason why the markets should be in any way adversely affected by the positions and policies and programs of the Gore-Lieberman ticket." He told business not to worry about the campaign's rhetoric: "Political rallies tend not to be places for extremely thoughtful argument. You have some rhetorical flourishes."

Given this reality, it's remarkable--but hardly surprising--how quickly liberal interest groups and supporters have jumped on the Gore bandwagon. Weeks before the Democratic convention, the AFL-CIO made clear that it would have nothing to do with street protests about workers' rights and other issues during the convention week. For months, the United Auto Workers and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters refused to endorse Gore. They even flirted with supporting Nader. But on the eve of the Democratic convention, the UAW came back to the fold. And just after Labor Day, the Teamsters announced their backing of the Democratic ticket.

Meanwhile, the Democrats' "in-house" left--liberal figures like Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Rev. Jesse Jackson--used their credentials as sometime liberal Clinton-Gore critics to bash Nader. Their attacks on Nader amplified charges from the scribes of the liberal left, like The Nation's Katha Pollitt, In These Times' Joel Bleifuss and the editors of the American ProspectŸ All of these people showed that they treat criticism of Clinton-Gore as a parlor sport. When it actually comes time to do something about it--to vote for Nader--they scurry back to the Democrats.




http://www.isreview.org/issues/14/election_2000.shtml#socialists


It's quite clear that the folks running that site are not on the Democrat's team.

[Tom Rinaldo]

11. True

It is an "attack" on Dean from the left. If the Republicans use this material they won't profess similar outrage over Dean's record in Vermont, they would instead try to paint Dean as two faced.

[blm]

12. That's what I think. Not attacking him for what he used to think

but how he changed for primary support.

[ozone_man]

21. They don't have a leg to stand on.

They can't attack Dean on being a fiscal conservative. Look at the massive deficits Bush has acquired. A whole future generation of kids has been mortgaged by Bush. Dean is responsible with money, Bush is not, simple as that.

We (in Vermont) and probably most states will go through cycles of expansion of government, when times are good, to contraction of government, when times are bad. The liberal Gov. Kunin era in the 80's was followed by the Bush recession of 1990-1992, where a contraction of government occurred and a Republican Governor Snelling took over in 1990. Vermont and many states go in cycles.

I remember that Vermont was struggling to balance the budget and worried about their bond rating, which is very important in funding projects. Dean was knowledgeable about that and has kept our bond rating high (A or A+). Now we can fund civic projects, without incurring huge interest penalties.

Bush doesn't care about anything in the future, and the mounting debt will eventually force up interest rates, since foreign holders of our debt will demand higher rates. We will be paying interest on our debt, preventing social programs like S.S. I think this is what Bush wants, but it is not what Dean wants.

[PissedOffPollyana]

24. But what of that "beauty" is patenty false?

Ummm.... none of it.

Does anyone dispute that Al Gore shifted his political compass leftward during the primary and back toward the squishy middle for the GE? That Lieberman pointed it out, just in case anybody important (like the corporate powers that be) might get the wrong idea? And yes, plenty of liberals and progressives were cajoled into coming on board to deflecting uncomfortable truths and complaints about the same sort of Wall Street friendly policies that under Clinton helped blow up a few now-popping bubbles.

Pardon my naivete in taking issue with a source being debunked for not toting the party line, but how is it that their view is not valid? Because it's does not support the questionable thesis you are touting that suggests we run the same sort of ideological shell game again in '04? Because it does not elevate middle of the road policy to the level of 'progressive', a tag some campaigns would like to adopt without actually framing a shred of policy to suit the moniker?

KaraokeKarlton has expressed this mindset best in saying ,"It's quite clear that the folks running that site are not on the Democrat's team."

Whaaaaaa? Pardon me for being a stickler for journalistic integrity, but if they WERE on the Democrat's "team", they would be just as corrupt as the GOP shill news sources we criticize day in & out here. This is not a game & the press has an obligation to serve their constituencies too. Obviously, this site is a source of news for progressively minded people. Should their opinion be barred or disallowed because it reminds us of what progressive policy really is, does and serves?

Or should we just treat our elections like a great, big memory-hole pep rally?

[AP]

7. Typo?

"Refusing to raise taxes on wealthier Vermonters (and rendering the tax system more regressive than previously)"

For clarity: not raising taxes on wealthy THUS renders tax system more regressive (if you raise taxes from other sources, and/or people are getting wealthier and there's bracket creep at the top).

If Dean had raised taxes on wealthy he would have made the tax code more progressive.

Notice that Dean the Candidate for President still doesn't care much for progressive taxation.

[retyred]

10. Kick

george bush…pResident?

retyred in fla
“good night paul, wherever you are”
So I read this book

[Myra]

13. Kick

eom

[Tom Rinaldo]

14. I refrained from kicking this one

But since someone else just did, and it is back on the first page (or was when I started writing), this is a good chance to observe that very few comments have been made by any of Deans supporters to refute the thrust of thia artical. One person noted that the writers seem to have greater affiliations with the Greens than with the Deomocrats, and another noted that Vermont was wasting a lot of money shipping prisoners out of state

Again, this is not digging up dirt on Dean that is not on the public record and easily available to Republicans. If Dean wins the Democratic nomination we will all need to be informed enough about Deans record in Vermont to refute Rrepublican accusations that Dean changes his stripes to suit the crowd he is courting. I know for a fact that Clark supporters have had to prepare detailed debuunking briefs against negative articals written against Ckark. What is the response to this one about Dean?

By the way I think it is safer for grassroots supporters of candidates to raise legitimate potential objections and concerns about other candidates internally in forums like this, than it is for the candidates themselves to be throwing around charges against each other in higly public settings which are captured on tape and later used by the opposition. I don't know a great deal about Deans record as Gov of VT. My impression is that he was a moderate in that position. However it is also my impression that his rhetoric has moved to the left during the primary campaign, which runs the risk of putting some of his current statements and positions at odds with ones he made when he held office.

I would love to hear from Dean supporters who have read this artical about how they perceive it's descripption of him as Gouvernor relative to how Dean is running his campaign for President. I know it is a unbalanced artical written to attack Dean. Granted. But what is the best defence? Dean is not my first choice but right now he is still number two or three. I am prepared to support Dean and fight for him. Help me out here if you want me up to speed to defend Dean. Since I think there is at least a good chance that he will win the nomination I would love to have my doubts addressed. I find myself defending Dean sometimes in discussions with some who really don't like him (I do say he is not my first choice) but there are gaps in my arguments. His current persona does seem somewhat inconsistent with his actual record to me.

(Edited to insert a missing word in a sentance.)

[in_cog_ni_to]

15. I saw a talking head

on CNN the other night...can't remember his name, sorry...anyway, he said Dean is a "Primary Liberal" and in the GE will HAVE to "go back" to his conservative positions if he wants a "chance" at winning, and even then, it will be a very difficult feat.

I did NOT know these things about Dean. Did other Liberals who care about our social programs? This is TRULY disheartening.

<snip>On two separate occasions, once in 1993 and again in 1995, hundreds of welfare recipients, and elderly, impoverished, disabled and progressive Vermonters poured in to the capital, Montpelier, from all over the state to protest Dean’s cuts, comparing him to Newt Gingrich. In 1995, the protesters carried a banner reading: "Dean/Newt Robbing Poor Kids to Spare the Rich."

He was aligned with Newt Gingrich? <sigh>


Women’s rights

Dean has positioned himself as a friend of the women’s rights movement because of his support for abortion–even late-term abortions. But Dean’s "fiscal conservatism" often got in the way of his "social liberalism." When cutting the budget in the mid-1990s, Dean’s axe managed to find itself aimed at battered women’s services.28 And his welfare reform forced single mothers into mandatory jobs, hurting both the mother and the child. Moreover, although Dean himself is pro-choice, he has stated that he wouldn’t accept Dennis Kucinich’s challenge to make Roe v. Wade a "litmus test" for appointing federal judges.29<snip>

He WOULDN'T make Roe v. Wade a "litmus test" for appointing federal judges? WHY NOT? That has been a leading issue for WHO gets appointments.


The Civil Rights and Environment paragraphs are enlightening too. :(

[OneTwentyoNine]

16. Lets see,isn't this about the 5th time this has been posted?

I know it was on DU yesterday and others were talking that they'd seen it before. OK,I read it,I get the drift... but why do moderators allow the same story daily?

David

[in_cog_ni_to]

18. This is the same thread.

Same thread, same article that none of the Dean supporters will acknowledge. The truth is frightening, I know.

Let's kick...again. :kick:

[Scott Lee]

29. At least. Which means it's got about 20 more repetitions to go.

Before another member of ADJHS takes it over for another cycling.

[in_cog_ni_to]

17. These ending paragraphs

of the article should give pause to the Dean supporters.

<snip>What happens if Dean gets elected, puts all of his electoral rhetoric aside and pours more money into fighting terrorism, takes his axe to American social programs and dispatches more troops to Iraq? Will the left stand by its "antiwar" candidate and refrain from fighting against cuts at home and war abroad because "at least he’s better than Bush?"

That Dean will prove to be a conservative in office of is frankly admitted by BusinessWeek, which assessed Dean’s politics this way:

Dean had a knack for positioning himself and never lost an election. Those who know him best believe Dean is moving to the left to boost his chances of winning the nomination. "But if he gets the nomination, he'll run back to the center and be more mainstream," predicts Stenger. Says Garrison Nelson, a political science professor at the University of Vermont: "Howard is not a liberal. He's a pro-business, Rockefeller Republican."54

If Business Week can see Dean clearly, so should we.

[frustrated_lefty]

19. I'll take a stab at a few of these points

"Dean inherited a massive deficit in the state budget from Snelling. Refusing to raise taxes on wealthier Vermonters (and rendering the tax system more regressive than previously), Dean declared in his first State of the State address that it would be his mission to balance the state budget with some "tough" cuts. Even though Vermont has no law requiring a balanced budget, Dean promised, "The pain for Vermonters will be real."

My understanding is that when Dean became governor, the surcharge on upper bracket state income tax was the highest in the nation. Quoting from: http://www.prospect.org/print/V13/13/dreyfuss-r.html

"Sylvester explains, leaning back in his chair in an expansive office just off Lake Champlain. "One-quarter of 1 percent of Vermonters pay 16 percent of state income taxes," he says. "That's 829 people, and a lot of them are clients of mine. Four of them moved out of state rather than pay Vermont taxes."

Once the Vermont budget was approaching balance, Dean turned around and instituted income tax cuts across the board not once, but twice. You can disagree with his decisions, but based on that I think it's unreasonable to try painting him as a leader who arbitrarily protects the wealthy. If income tax on the highest bracket in Vermont was ALREADY the highest in the nation, it's at the very least understandable why the governor would hesitate to place even more burden on them at the outset.

Regarding Dean on Roe v. Wade and women's rights, taken from: http://www.baltimorefordean.org/democraticwings/archives/000068.html

"...Abortion is a deeply personal decision, which ought to be made between a woman and her physician. It's none of the government's business. "

"I have been a strong supporter of a woman’s right to reproductive freedom my entire life. I believe that the right to privacy is enshrined in the Constitution. As President, I would do everything in my power to preserve that right."

"... I understand women’s health, and I will defend the right of women to control decisions about their bodies."


Personally, I have no objection to this stance, it sounds as though he thinks of the issue as a medical professional rather than as a lawyer. And, simply put: it is between a woman and her physician, and it is none of the government's business.

I may address some of the other points as the day progresses, but that will have to be it for now, I'm already late for work.

[PBinOregon]

20. Just A Thought

Ask Democrats in Vermont what they think about Dean's record as a whole. Ask why so many of them are passionately backing his bid for the presidency.

When I read over his record, I agree with about 85% of what he has done as governor. To me, that's a pretty damn good record.

Will he be a perfect president? Nope. Neither was Clinton. But he has the chance to be a great president. I believe he sincerely seeks to find the right path to take at all times--sometimes the moves he makes aren't the ones I would make, but again, take a look at social services, health care, child care and education in Vermont under his leadership--how do they compare to your state? And check out the fact that Vermont has not had to do the vicious slashing of services currently happening in other states, such as mine.

I would love Vermont's record here in Oregon.

[AP]

22. And I'll stab back...

1) "top .25% paid 16%" -- that number alone doesn't tell you whether that rate was fair. You need to know if that segment controled or earned assets in proportion to what they contributed in taxes.

2) "That's 829 people" -- This is vermont, so, although that number is small, it doesn't mean it's unreasonable.

3) "moved out of state" -- CA has the most progressive of all state income tax structures, and they have a lot of rich people there. If people are moving out of vermont in search of a more regressive tax structure, I guess they're not moving to CA. If it's only 4 people, I say so what? And I'd like to know if they REALLY moved out of state because of taxes -- let's hear from them directly.

4) "they're my clients" -- that should tell you something about this guy's bias.

5) Your article doesn't say VT had highest top rates of income tax in the country. It just says that Dean lowered taxes on the wealthy. He lowered the rates accross the board, and VT still has a very regressive code. So, it was probably regressive before, it just taxed people in the top bracket more than it does today. That Dean made up for lower revenues through sales taxes shows that he was shifting the burden from the rich to the poor. That's not cool.

6) Interesting quote from your article:

In his fiscal conservatism, Dean has been guided for more than a decade by a behind-the-scenes kingmaker named Harlan Sylvester, a senior executive at Salomon Smith Barney in Burlington who chairs Dean's council of economic advisers. Sylvester praises Dean for forcing through a dramatic tax cut during his first year in office, over the objections of "the left of the party wanted to soak the wealthy," Sylvester explains, leaning back in his chair in an expansive office just off Lake Champlain.

[Tom Rinaldo]

23. Thank you

For a thoughtful reply, particularly on the first point regarding upper bracket tax cuts. I personally think Dean has nothing that needs defending vis a vis his stance on women's reproductive rights, he certainly won't lose many of our votes to Bush on that one.

I hope you find time later to respond to more points. I personally have some misgivings about Dean, a few centered on his record as Governor, but more about how he will handle charges that he shifts across the political spectrum in search of votes, when the Republicans train their big guns on him. Having said that, I prefer Dean to most of our candidates, and I am very serious about throwing myself behind his campaign should he win the nomination. In order to be effective as a potential Dean backer I will need more factual (not just emotional) lines of arguments to refute those types of attacks agaisnt him. And if there are weak areas in Dean's record I would rather they come out now than latrer.

[frustrated_lefty]

26. Sorry for the delay in reply, and thanks for being so cordial

Twas a busy day at work, and digging around for supporting info took longer than expected. Anyway, here goes:

Ok, back for another go.

The four primary thrusts that I see in this thread questioning Dean’s record essentially propose: 1) Given his record in Vermont, we should be concerned that he’ll attain the presidency and process to slash social programs; 2) he has previously pursued policies which might be considered regressive income taxation, requiring lower income tiers to shoulder a perceived disproportionate burden; 3) he refuses to use Roe v. Wade as a litmus test for judicial appointments; and, 4) he flip-flops.

Regarding slashing of social programs, what exactly did Dean do in his 11 years in office?

1) as of the year 2000, Vermont was rated 2nd best in the nation for the quality of medical care provided to Medicare beneficiaries
2) as of the year 2003, Vermont was ranked 3rd best in the nation for prescription benefits provided to Medicare beneficiaries
3) signed into law managed care consumer protections that are among the toughest in the nation
4) established the “Success by Six” program, in which Health care providers, social service agencies and others cooperate to connect parents with resources ranging from job training to parenting classes
5) overhauled Vermont's traditional system of paying for public schools with local property taxes, shifting funds from rich towns to poor towns through a "sharing pool," sparking an explosion in education spending,which has been up by 40% since 1997
6) ensured that virtually every child under 18 and more than 90 percent of adults are eligible for health coverage.
7) created the Domestic Violence Fatality Review Committee to identify strengths and weaknesses in the community response to domestic violence
8) established initiatives which included mandatory work requirements and lifetime maximum benefits, but were balanced by their support of children and their working parents with health care, child care, and job training (more at: http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ofa/ngachn/child~36.htm)
9) increased investment on Child Care Services by 176% since 1991
10) instituted the first state protocol for abuse investigations. In return, Vermont saw a 45% decline in physical and sexual abuse of children. This included a 64% decline in physical abuse victims ages 0-3 and a 43% decline in physical abuse victims ages 0-6.
11) increased human services funding by 33%, and education funding by 25%

I could go on. Based on a record like this, I find it hard to perceive him as a bungling idiot who intends to randomly slash social programs. What he HAS done consistently is show a willingness to tighten the budget for a purpose: balancing it. We’re not talking about “starving the beast” here, or making efforts to permanently cut programs. If anything, it seems to me he has a record for making short-term sacrifice in order to achieve a sustainable economy with adequate funding for social programs.

A few specific claims were made in the original post: “Throughout the 1990s, Dean’s cuts in state aid to education ($6 million), retirement funds for teachers and state employees ($7 million), health care ($4 million), welfare programs earmarked for the aged, blind and disabled ($2 million), Medicaid benefits ($1.2 million) and more, amounted to roughly $30 million.”

Did the cuts in state funding for education coincide with #5 posted above, for example? Or was it a short term cut made which he later corrected for starting in 1997? Either way, spending on education is up 40% since 1997. The author states he cut retirement funds for teachers and state employees. On the other hand, “signed into law agency fee protection for the state employees union, thereby providing union security for state employees” (http://www.nwaforchange.org/nwa/downloads/Election_Guide/09dean.pdf)

In any event, based on these observations, I think it fair to predict Dean would not run rampant slashing and burning social programs in the presidency.

Regarding “regressive” taxation:

1)again, when Dean entered office, the highest tax bracket in Vermont was paying the highest state income taxes in the country.
2)he cut income tax twice, removed the sales tax on most clothing, and reduced the state's long-term debt.
3)he raised the state's minimum wage twice during 11 years in office.
4)he created tax incentives to attract and keep new companies.
5)he created 41,000 jobs

In effect, he did one hell of a remarkable job for Vermont’s economy, and tax breaks like eliminating the sales tax on most clothing is the sort of thing that helps the average working man. Some of the benefits he offered to the average working man aren’t necessarily apparent at first glance.

On Roe v Wade and Women’s Issues, during his governorship:

1)he appointed more women to office than any other state governor
2)he signed an executive order enhancing state assistance to victims of domestic violence
3)he challenged the term "partial birth abortion" from a medical perspective, saying that it is a "code word" for extremism
4)pregnancy rates for young teens dropped 49%.
5)Vermont was the first state to institute a statewide protocol for abuse investigations. In return, Vermont saw a 45% decline in physical and sexual abuse of children. This included a 64% decline in physical abuse victims ages 0-3 and a 43% decline in physical abuse victims ages 0-6
6)He has consistently, irrefutably argued that what a woman does with her body is her own decision and none of the government’s business.

So, Roe v Wade may not be the litmus test he relies on, but it seems he is willing to fight for women’s issues in ways that actually work. What about this is there to criticize? One poster did raise an important issue, concern that stance on Roe v Wade should be the litmus test for judicial appointments. That’s valid. Unfortunately, I’ve had little luck tracking down info on his judicial appointments, other than their names (Jeffrey L. Amestoy 1997, Marilyn S. Skoglund 1997) and un-related issues.


Lastly, concern was raised that he flip-flops. Probably so, although it’s not unusual to find a person revising their opinion upon further consideration.

Anyway, those are more thoughts. Hopefully, they are non-inflammatory. :)

And the urls where all of this came from, for those who care to peruse the data and sources for themselves, are as follows:

http://ventura.fordean.org/ventura/
http://fordean.org/aa/issues/environment1.htm
http://www.nwaforchange.org/nwa/downloads/Election_Guide/09dean.pdf
http://www.ajs.org/js/VT_methods.htm
http://www.women.state.vt.us/legalrtw.html
http://www.politicsus.com/presidential%20press%20releases/Dean/112403b.htm

[Tom Rinaldo]

27. Thanks again for another well reasoned post.

"...Hopefully, they are non-inflammatory. :)"

Your comments are anything but inflammatory. They are helpful and add to the discourse rather than subtract from it. You said too much for me too assimilate tonight, I'm beat and about to head off to bed, but the type of work you just did is exactly what the Dean campaign must be prepared to do.

[in_cog_ni_to]

25. Thank You

for taking a stab at those.

I am concerned about whether a Dean appointed federal judge will uphold Roe v. Wade and find it curious that the appointee doesn't "necessarily" have to support Roe v. Wade? That's what I get from Dean NOT making Roe v. Wade a "litmus test". What exactly, I wonder, will he expect from his appointed federal judges? What if they are very Liberal in every respect except abortion? Will that be OK? As long as the president is appointing federal judges, Roe v. Wade MUST be an issue when appointing them. Look at what Bush has been trying to do for the last 3 1/2 years. PLUS, if Dean should happen to be elected, he will more than likely be working with a republican congress who would cut off their right arms to appoint anti-choice judges. This concerns me a lot. Why would he say "No, it will NOT be a "litmus test?"....why not? I would like to know.

Hell, he would be inheriting the largest U.S. deficit in HISTORY...NOTHING like Vermont's. :( If he cut programs in Vermont, why would he not do the same thing IF he is elected President? I am very, very leery of him now. Will we hear this again?... "The pain for Vermonters (U.S. citizens) will be real." The middle class and poor have suffered enough under the Bush regime. IMCPO

[frustrated_lefty]

28. Thank you as well. :)

See the above response for details, and feel free to disagree. I do understand your position on the judicial appointments. And, honestly, it's hard to tell based on his Vermont Supreme Court appointments, his focus in those appointments appears to have been devoted almost entirely to dealing with crime. If their stance on abortion or Roe V. Wade came up, it's not immediately apparent. Will dig around some more through decisions they've passed down to try and get an inkling.

See above for more re: cutting programs. I don't know if it will put your mind at ease, but it inspires confidence in me.

peace

[TLM]

30. A point about cutting programs and welfare...

One of the biggest BS tricks you'll see used in attacs on Dean is that he cut X amount from this program or that program.

Yet they never mention that he insituted other programs and expanded programs to take up the slack.

For example... Dean cut money for nursing homes. And so you see "Dean cut welfare programs earmarked for the aged, blind and disabled ($2 million)"

But what they do not tell you is that Dean put money into inhome care programs that allowed folks to live in their own homes, and retain their independance, instead of in nursing homes.

Dean would cut some waste in some programs, but he did pick up the slack by expanding other programs.

And Dean did push welfare reform but unlike that horrible crap Clinton got behind, Dean provided healthcare, job training, and day care for kids along with teh limits on how long an able boddied person could be on welfare. He did welfare reform the right way.

[frustrated_lefty]

31. He did welfare reform the right way...

That's certainly how it looks. I may try and put together a time-line, tracking all of these policies and executive orders. Still searching for a centralized source or sources with all the information, though. :(