Good article: Attacks on Dean may leave voters dizzy

[CMT]

This is from the St. Petersburg Times editorial by Philip Gailey:
I wish Howard Dean's opponents would make up their minds. First they told us the former Vermont Governor was a reincarnation of George McGovern, a scary anti-war liberal, who if he won the Democratic nomination would take the Democrats over the cliff, now; some of his opponents are suggesting he is Newt Gingrich's soulmate...

He later goes on to suggest that given Wesley Clark's "probably" flip flop on the war that most anti-war Democrats will stick with Dean.

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/09/28/Columns/Attacks_on_Dean_may_l.shtml

[Larkspur]

1. Yes, it's a excellant article

I posted it in GD

Yes, Clark did Dean a favor by waffling on the Iraq War.

The best part of this column was that the columnist at the end said that Dean's popularity and Clark's entry signalled a vote of NO CONFIDENCE in the Washington Dems -- Kerry, Edwards, Gephardt, Lieberman, and Graham. This is so true. This election is about restoring the health of our democracy, not only from Bush and the Reichwing of the Republican Party, but from meadhead Dems, like the Washington Dems who voted for Bush's War and tax cut policies.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

2. What about the 'attacks' on Dean that don't characterize his position,

but just publicize it? lol

Like pointing out his positions and record on Medicare, due process, the environment, family farms, campaign finance?

Dean's record is pretty straightforward. If you just look at it there isn't much confusion about where he stands on the issues or whether he is 'liberal' or 'conservative'. The confusion comes when people start to try to reconcile his words with his actions and his hypocrisy starts to show.

[tsipple]

3. Oh, We'll Be Happy to Talk About Dean's Record

For example, under Dean's leadership Vermont ranks #1 in providing childhood health insurance coverage, according to the U.S. Census.

I'm busy working on a piece on his excellent environmental record, actually. EPA rankings put Vermont as #52 in pollution emissions (including DC and PR). Or, to put it succinctly, it's the cleanest state in the country. Dean helped lock up almost 8% of Vermont's lands to save them from development during his tenure, by the way. (That's right. The State bought over 470,000 acres. That's excluding an additional 100,000 acres of preserved farmland.) Vermont is also one of only a few states (California/Northeast) with automobile emissions standards that exceed federal EPA rules.

Civil rights? Civil unions ushered in unprecedented rights for GBLT couples in Vermont. Only California now has comparable rights, and only partially.

Education? Among the very best according to rankings, and the state has aggressive cost-sharing between wealthy and poor cities and towns, so that it doesn't matter where you live within the state as much as it does in other states. Vermont also has aggressive early childhood intervention programs which are lauded.

Crime? Among the very safest, and Dean brought Vermont inmates back to Vermont, to be closer to their families and consequently better able to return to society without repeat offense.

Farming? There are 120 more organic farms in Vermont -- which are mostly small scale family farms. There are more than double the number of farmer's markets, for family farms to sell directly to consumers and earn more money. The Dept. of Agriculture now can regulate large farms -- it couldn't before 1996.

Due process? Vermont allows jury trials for traffic tickets! The GBLT community also was able to win a landmark case in the Vermont Supreme Court for civil unions, and educational advocates won unprecedented (and controversial) equal funding rules from the same court.

Campaign finance? Dean is raising more money from more small donors than any Democrat, by far, and is not dependent on large donor money. He's succeeding within the new McCain-Feingold rules through game-changing strategy. He's also reducing the importance of money by establishing new lines of communication (Internet, Meetups, etc.) which will be studied by political experts for years. His campaign has more grassroots, non-Washington, non-big donor aid than any campaign. (Contrast with John Edwards or Joe Lieberman, to pick a couple examples.)

[Feanorcurufinwe]

4. Dean on Factory Farms: "This isn’t my problem."

Vermont has established a system of regulating agricultural operations that places sole authority in the Commissioner of Agriculture. Complaints about any and all agriculture-related activities get directed to the Department of Agriculture, Food and Markets. Governor Dean’s responses to Vermonters with concerns about health, safety, economic impacts and other problems with neighboring agricultural operations are brief and unhelpful, and pass the problems to Commissioner Leon Graves. On a memo about George Trickett’s problems, Governor Dean made the notation, “Leon, Phil: This isn’t my problem. I can’t fix this. H.” Senators Patrick Leahy and James Jeffords, and Congressman Bernard Sanders write more thoughtful letters and even have their staff make phone calls, but eventually the problem is passed along to Commissioner Graves. Problems with idling trucks causing diesel pollution, pesticide run-off polluting state’s waters, pesticide drift causing health effects, impacts on town roads – all complaints are referred to the man who has ultimate authority, the Agriculture Commissioner, who has the powers of a Czar. Leon Graves has been Vermont’s Agriculture Commissioner since late 1995.
Crisis in Agriculture in Vermont A Special Report about Governor Howard Dean s Agriculture Department From Vermonters for a Clean Environment

Of course this one quote doesn't tell the whole story. You need to read the article to get that.

[tsipple]

5. You're Quoting Annette Smith's Group?

You do know "Vermonters for a Clean Environment" is headed by Annette Smith, right?

Do a Google search at least, OK? We're talking someone opposed to electricity. VCE tried to fight natural gas fired power plants! (What do they suggest? Coal?)

[Feanorcurufinwe]

6. Attacking the messenger?

This has to be one of the most undisguised cases of attacking the messenger I've ever seen.

You can't deny the facts so you try to discredit Vermonters for a Clean Environment.


Folks, go to their website, read about the work they have done and are doing to protect Vermont's environment and judge their credibility for yourself.

Are they out to 'get Dean'? Or are they out to protect Vermont's environment?

[tsipple]

7. Uh, Yeah, I Am Attacking the Messenger

Because their message is ridiculous! And, yeah, I'm all for doing your homework on VCE (and Annette). It ain't no Sierra Club!

You quoted Annette Smith, not me.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

11. Dean favored big money factory farms over Vermont residents.

That is a fact. I guess an undisputable fact, otherwise you would dispute it.

[tsipple]

13. Oh, Hah

You quoted a crackpot, not me.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

14. You have yet to even attempt to deny the facts.

I wonder who you hope to impress with your namecalling?

[tsipple]

17. If you believe Annette Smith...

You'll believe anything. No hope. (So very much like the attacks on Bill Clinton in 1992, actually. Find some wacky person in Arkansas and run with it. Didn't work then, and it won't work now.)

But try this site if you like.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

21. You have no answer, no defense, because Dean's record is indefensible.

[Nicholas_J]

26. try the Howard Dean. Leon Graves. Lucien Breton Connection

DAFM is a poor regulator
Vermont's agriculture is in crisis, and not just because the Northeast DairyCompact was not renewed. The state has not developed a strategy to promote healthy, sustainable farming. Once called Department of Agriculture whose mission was just about farmers and farming, DOA is now DAFM, Department of Agriculture, Food and Markets and the agency’s mission is all Vermonters. The written mission of DAFM is “to provide consumers and the Vermont agricultural community with the highest level of service possible including ensuring and enforcing quality standards for agricultural products, regulating pesticide use, providing information, technical and marketing assistance to farmers and producers and developing new markets for Vermont products.”

DAFM is not responsive, is not providing a high level of service, is not regulating pesticide use, is not providing information, and is not supportive of Vermont's dairy farmers. Something is terribly wrong when our agriculture policies expose Vermonters to unhealthy pesticides and infringe on the economic viability of our family farms. Vermonters should have a right to farm, but no one, not even farmers, have a right to pollute the waters of the state, nor do they have the right to expose neighbors to the increased risk of birth defects or cancers by their misuse of highly toxic pesticides. The right to farm that DAFM is protecting in Highgate is factory food production, at the expense of the family farm. Allowing collateral damage is not acceptable agricultural practice.

The legislature set up the Vermont Pesticide Advisory Council “to suggest programs for wise and effective pesticide use that lead to an overall reduction in the use of pesticides in Vermont.” In its 15 years of existence, VPAC has not dealt with the subject of the use of pesticides in agriculture.

Our Governor, our legislators and our courts have failed to protect Vermonters from the big money, corporate farming and chemical company interests whose agenda is being carried out by the current Agriculture Czar

http://www.vtce.org/deancrisisagvt.html

Leon Graves Should not be re-confirmed as Commissioner of Agriculture
Commissioner of Agriculture Leon Graves has lost the respect of both farmers and the consumers of this state. By his actions, he has shown disdain for small farmers, thumbed his nose at laws set by the legislature and sold out to corporate special interests. The issues are many, but the common thread is that unprecedented amounts of lobby money have been involved and Graves has always moved in the direction of the money. For these reasons he should not be reconfirmed as commissioner.

The Vermont Egg Factory in Franklin County is a prime example. The Vermont Egg Factory has spent $11,000 in 1996 for lobbying. The Department of Agriculture knew about this project for at least a year before the public found out. There was ample evidence that this would be of great concern to the public. . In Maine and Connecticut, odor, traffic, fly infestation, environmental degradation and taxpayer costs have become the community's burden. And yet Graves has insisted on his option to use a complaint driven policy that gives him absolute power. Both section 4495 and the Large Farm Act take away local control and give it to exclusively to the commissioner.

Mr. Graves has worked closely with the owner of the Vermont Egg Factory: Mr. Breton, and his agents, helping them to anticipate problems. He went as far as skewing testimony at the Environmental Board hearing on behalf of Mr. Breton and factory farming in general. Mr. Graves created his own data to make the facility seem smaller. The plans filed with the Department of Agriculture show the final phase with a total of one million chickens; this was never mentioned in Mr. Graves' testimony.

Aerial spraying of Vermont's forests became an important issue when Mr. Graves did not follow the Agriculture Department's own rules for allowing a public review process, including advisement from the Vermont Pesticide Advisory Council. These rules were created to reduce pesticide dependence and usage in Vermont. Were Monsanto and Champion influencing his opinion?

http://together.net/~wudchuck/987_watchman_34.html

Graves, a Dena appointee. following Deans policies.

[clar]

25. There are no factory farms in Vermont

None. Zero. Zilch. That's right, there aren't any. There's one large (by Vermont standards) and unpleasant egg farm, but by no criteria would it qualify as a factory farm. Come here. Search the state. You won't find a factory farm.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

27. The facts belie your assertions.

“He is a business man with big money. He is not a farmer. He doesn’t care about the people or the environment. He doesn’t care that the air stinks or that there are flies everywhere. He doesn’t care that his trucks ruin the roads and make it unsafe for your children to ride their bikes. He doesn’t care that he destroys your way of life, and unfortunately the state of Vermont doesn’t care either.”
–John Tremblay, native Vermonter, neighbor of egg factory who moved his family to New Hampshire

The DAFM cannot use the “pre-existence” tactic to justify their actions in the agricultural conflict occurring in Highgate, Vermont. Multi-national Canadian multi-millionaire Lucien Breton and his egg factory were invited into the dairy farming community by DAFM in 1995. Surrounded on four sides by multi-generation Vermont-owned dairy farms of 80 to 300 cows, the proposal by DAFM-backed “Vermont Egg Farms” was to construct 7 buildings, an egg packing facility and possibly a composting facility. Eventually, the $8.5 million project would house 700,000 hens laying 150,000,000 eggs per year with a wholesale value of .80/dozen for gross annual sales of $10,000,000, virtually all of which would leave Vermont. The completed factory would also produce a ton of dead birds per week, the “general” mortality rate for factory-housed egg-producers.

Vermont’s DAFM replied to the Canadian egg producer that “Vermont does not have regulations regarding such an installation and you do not have to obtain a permit,” and “if new regulations are enacted in the meantime, your project will likely be grandfathered.”

In their initial proposal, Vermont Egg Farms promised to “be a very clean and low-impact operation. The project’s promoters, the Breton family, are experienced, serious operators, and are dedicated to being good neighbors to the citizens of Highgate.”

The neighboring farmers, who pre-existed the egg factory proposal, gathered facts and information about egg factories throughout the country and about Lucien Breton’s hog factory operations in Canada. They were alarmed by what they learned about potential problems with flies, noise, odors, traffic, air quality, threats from disease, chemical exposure, loss of property values, increased stress and significant impacts on water. Maine had already rejected Breton. But Vermont’s Agriculture Commissioner Leon Graves welcomed the Canadian who had no ties to the community, to bring all his chickens and grain from Canada, sell almost half the eggs back to Canada with the rest going to New York, and leave behind, as it has turned out, the severely damaged lives of Vermont’s dairy farmers.
http://www.vtce.org/deancrisisagvt.html

It doesn't matter whether you call this a 'factory farm' or not. Dean's agriculture department sided with this out-of-state agricultural company against the farmers who'd lived in Vermont for generations. Why? Only Dean has the real answer but we do know that small family farmers don't have the same kind of money for campaign contributions that big agribusiness does... am I being cynical? Perhaps. But what is the alternate explanation?

[Nicholas_J]

28. The percentage of farms in Vermont During the Dean adminstrations

Comprised of small Family Farms prior to Dena was 70 percent of the total of Vermont Farms. After Dean the percentage dropped to 56 percent.



ADM and MONSANTO were brought into Vermont by Dean.

You know, ARCHER,DANIELS, MIDLAND, "FOOD FOR THE WORLD" corporation

ANd Monsanto with its large genetically modified foods devision in Vermont.

Deans policies led to the loss of 36 percent of small family farms in favor of large corporate entities.



"Dean's attempt to run for president as an environmentalist is nothing but a fraud," Smith told Seven Days. "He's destroyed the Agency of Natural Resources, he's refused to meet with environmentalists while constantly meeting with the development community, and he's made the permitting process one big, dysfunctional joke."

Those are not the words you'd expect to hear from an environmentalist if you relied on the mainstream press for your news. The Burlington Free Press, for example, has spent the last week putting one coat of varnish after another on Dean's tenure, including a rather smarmy salute to his eco-record. The word from those quarters is that Dean is a friend of the environment and has done nothing but anger the business community by slowing development and stymieing growth.

His record, however, shows just the opposite. Remember, when Dean took office there were 36 percent more small farmers in Vermont; there were no Wal-Marts, no Taft Corners big boxes, and no 100,000-hen mega-farms. Sprawl was not the issue du jour.

Interestingly, Dean told the Free Press last week that he wished the rest of the country was "more like Vermont." But it seems he's allowed Vermont to become more like the rest of the country.

http://www.vtce.org/deanenvironmentomya.html

[Feanorcurufinwe]

12. Dean tried to PERMANENTLY remove funding for Vermont's public financing

This wasn't a case of one-time shuffling of money to meet a budget crisis. Dean attempted to permanently kill funding for Vermont's Campaign Finance Fund.

Governor Dean's Plan to Remove Funding

Early on in the 2002 legislative session, Democratic Governor Howard Dean targeted the public financing provision of the law for elimination. VPIRG led the effort to preserve funding for public financing of qualifying candidates. The Governor claimed that the law was not working and therefore should not be funded until a final court decision has been reached. Working with Republicans, Progressives and Democrats, VPIRG was able to keep public financing alive (although hundreds of thousands of dollars were taken for other unrelated uses). Read more on this issue.
http://www.vpirg.org/campaigns/financeReform/cfr_page111.html

[tsipple]

16. Um, Actually...

That web link you provide lists the Democrats (Dean), Republicans, and Progressives as all opposing Vermont's campaign finance law.

Is everybody wrong?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

18. Is Dean wrong to side with Republicans on Campaign Finance?

Yes.

[Nicholas_J]

32. They opposed the loophole in the law

that allowed Dean to get away with opting out after he opted in, not the law itself.

Governor Howard Dean Pulls the Plug on Democracy
Governor Howard Dean has proposed to permanently gut Vermont's campaign finance reform law eliminating our landmark public financing option for governor and lieutenant governor. VPIRG opposes removing any money from the Fund because it sets a dangerous precedent for undermining democracy in Vermont and limits the legislature's options to strengthen the law in the future.

The Governor's move will simply open another door for access by corporations and other wealthy donors seeking generous tax breaks, permission to pollute our air and water, boondoggle electric rate contracts and other special interest perks. As Lieutenant Governor Doug Racine said at a public forum on December 11th "I do believe money is corrupting the political process."

The Campaign Finance Fund was created by the state Legislature in 1997 to allow ordinary Vermonters, those without personal fortunes or wealthy connections, to run credible campaigns for office without becoming indebted to large donors or special interest lobbyists. Specifically, the law allows qualified candidates, regardless of political party affiliation, to run for governor or lieutenant governor using only clean, public dollars. The funding comes from voluntary contributions and corporate fees. There is no cost to Vermont taxpayers.

Opponents of campaign finance reform falsely say that Vermont's public financing system does not work because there are no limits on how much a candidate can spend to run for office. VPIRG supports two simple measures to fix the campaign finance reform law: closing the loophole allowing unlimited donations by a political party to a candidate and creating a matching fund system similar to the one in place in Maine.


http://www.vpirg.org/campaigns/financeReform/deangutcfr.html


Or how about:


In Vermont, Governor Howard Dean is attempting to de-fund Vermont’s clean money bill by siphoning off money set aside for public financing to other parts of his budget. Governor Dean has always claimed to support public financing. But in this coming election year, public financing might hurt the Democratic Party. So he’s trying to gut it.

To be sure, Vermont Democrats do have a dilemma or, perhaps, had a dilemma. Republican Cornelius Hogan’s surprise decision on Wednesday to run for Governor as an Independent may have totally recast Vermont’s race for Governor.

The Democratic problem begins with Progressive Anthony Pollina who may make another run for Governor. Running in the last election with public financing, Pollina got almost 10% of the vote and almost sent the governor’s race into the legislature. Many of Pollina’s supporters, fearing the election of right-wing Republican Ruth Dwyer and admiring Governor Dean’s courageous stand on civil unions, abandoned Anthony. In the coming election, fear is not a factor. The Republican candidate James Douglas is a Jim Jeffords-like moderate. So is Con Hogan. Vermonters can vote their consciences without the dread of unintended consequences.

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0215-02.htm

Or:

But Markowitz's proposal quickly ran into criticism from people who saw it as a partisan strategy to help Democrats in the next election.

"I'm surprised at the lengths she and others are willing to go to to keep me and other Progressives out of the race for governor," Anthony Pollina said after he heard about Markowitz's proposal.

Pollina, the Progressive Party candidate, was the only participant in last year's governor's race to use public funding. He had $300,000 to spend.

Meanwhile, the two major party candidates, Democratic Gov. Howard Dean and Republican Ruth Dwyer, each raised close to $1 million.

In the end, Pollina didn't hurt Dean as much as some Democrats had feared. But in another three-way race, Pollina is more likely to pull votes from the Democratic candidate than the Republican.

http://www.rutlandherald.com/legislature/mar26/markowitz.html

But finally:

He also led the statewide effort that resulted in the Vermont Legislature passing the nation's most comprehensive campaign finance reforms. His work led Governor Howard Dean, when signing the law, to refer to Pollina as "Mr. Campaign Finance Reform."


http://www.ourcampaigns.com/cgi-bin/r.cgi/CandidateDetail.html?&CandidateID=131

Even Dean refers to Pollina as spearheading the campaign finace reform that Dean later gutted to prevent his opposents from benefiting.


Polling opposed the loopholes in the law that kept Dean able to use dirty money

Yes to democracy
August 11, 2000

(from the Editorials section)

Even so, the ruling set aside an additional restriction on out-of-state contributions because that restriction was not founded on a concern about corruption, which is the constitutionally permitted purpose for limiting contributions. Rather, the out-of-state limit was a sort of misguided chauvinism, seeking to isolate Vermont from the larger political world.

Voluntary spending limits like those accepted by Anthony Pollina, the Progressive candidate for governor, and Gov. Howard Dean are still legal. Pollina and Dean now must consider whether to continue to campaign within those limits.

By accepting campaign funds from the state, Dean and Pollina are freed from the need to raise their own campaign money. But neither of the two Republican candidates has accepted state money, and they are not bound by the voluntary spending limits that come with state funds. Dean and Pollina will have to consider the possibility that the likely Republican candidate, Ruth Dwyer, could outspend them in a big way.

It may happen, however, that contribution limits serve as a backdoor limit on spending. If candidates can accept money only in relatively small amounts, they may end up with less money to spend.

http://rutlandherald.nybor.com/Archive/Articles/Article/11261

Pollina opposed the loophole that allowed out of sttem money to be unlimited.

In the last campaign in which Dena first took money and THEN opted out, 65 percent of his campaign financing came from OUTSIDE OF VERMONT.


In June 1997, Vermont passed one of the most comprehensive campaign finance reform laws in the country, and the signing of the "Clean Elections" bill was a generally festive occasion. Democratic Governor Howard Dean was on hand for congratulations and photos with the bill's main architect, Anthony Pollina, whom he enthusiastically dubbed "Mr. Campaign Finance Reform." Little did Dean know that he might become the law's first casualty.

This year the Vermont governor's race will be decided for the first time on a financially level playing field, and the state Progressive Party, which has selected none other than Anthony Pollina as its candidate, is mounting a serious blitz on Dean. With nearly twenty years of grassroots organizing in the state, Pollina is a familiar face in Vermont politics. In Vermont's 1984 congressional race, Pollina ran as a Rainbow Coalition candidate and won the Democratic primary. He lost the election but garnered 20 percent of the vote. "He's experienced and very well respected." remarked April Jin, longtime Vergennes Democratic Party Chairman who recently resigned her post to join the Progressive Party. "There's no doubt he can pull over a good number of liberal Democrats."

The campaign now has the money, $265,000 in fact. Aside from prying open the political spectrum to underfunded outsider candidates, Vermont's clean elections law is taking politics from the hands of big donors and returning it to its proper place among voters. "It's great. All of the sudden, office seekers actually have to campaign to win. They have to talk and listen to real people rather than just fund raise." remarked Garrison Nelson, a University of Vermont political science professor. "I think Dean had some serious learning to do." Clearly, Dean is a quick study, since he too qualified for the public funds. But in the process it forced him to reform his constituency from that of his 1998 campaign in which he received 1200 total contributions and 51 percent of his money out of state. No longer could he rely on fat checks, like those that he previously pulled in from health care interests totaling $44,000. Where airing statewide TV commercials used to suffice, the geographic distribution and small individual contribution requirements of the new law now required more canvassing and actual small-venue speeches. "Sure it was difficult," Governor Dean told me of meeting the qualifying standard. "It was also the right thing to do."

But doing the right thing just got risky and Dean is now forging a different path. In August, federal judge William Sessions III ruled against parts of Vermont's clean elections law, including limits on spending and out-of-state contributions. The case is being appealed but in the meantime those candidates who do not take public funding are free to raise and spend without restriction. Stating his regret, Dean announced that he would be returning the public money to raise private funds because he feared getting out-spent by his Republican contenders. "I am not going to fight this campaign with one arm tied behind my back," he remarked from his Montpelier campaign office.



http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/3626

In the end, Dean killed the legislation, and then took the money from the fund in order to try to balance the budget (2 million of the ten million dollar suplus came from gutting the fund)

Yet the decision of Federal Court Justice Session DID NOT make the Vermont Clean Money law unconsitutional. It simply stated that money from outside of Vemront could not be subject to the same limits that money inside Vermont would be subject to.

It states that politicians can still limit their campign funds and accept public funding. N0 thing changed...But Dean.

[Meshuga]

8. The fact that Dean...

is anti-war along with the perception that he is weak on defense (i.e., read his Meet the Press transcript) may help Bush with his re-election. I don't have much against Dean and I don't dislike him but I'm really scared if he wins the nomination. In fact I was a big Dean supporter but now I'm not sure...

I want Bush out of the White House and just the fact that Dean wants to raise taxes may help Bush.

BTW, none of Dean's opponents suggested that Dean is Newt Gingrich's soulmate. And he is no McGovern, although Dean might get the same number of electoral votes as Mcgovern in 1972 if he wins the nomination.

[tsipple]

9. 1 Post?

Come on, dude.

[Meshuga]

10. So what?

Here is a second post for you.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

15. Mondale also promised to raise taxes on the middle class.

Do we want a repeat of the 1984 election?

[tsipple]

19. No...

Don't want a repeat of the 2000 election, either. Or 1952, 1956, 1968, 1972, 1980.

Of course, Jesus himself would have lost to Ronald Reagan in 1984, but you just want to tear down a Democrat today, right?

Go for it. Have fun. Knock yourself out.

Everyone else visit Trolls for Dean.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

22. Why are you completely unwilling to discuss the issues?

All you can do is attack anyone who raises the issues.

Dean wants to raise taxes on the middle class. That is his stated position.

I say, it is a losing electoral strategy now, just as it was in 1984.

[Larkspur]

23. Repealing Bush's tax cuts is NOT raising Middle Class taxes

As a single and child-free middle class taxpayer, I did not get a tax cut, but my property and state income taxes are increasing, thanks to Bush's federal tax cuts.

Anyway, Dean's position is in line with Paul Krugman's, who doesn't even think that repealing all of the Bush tax cuts will solve our gigantic deficit problem.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

24. Taxes go up on the middle class, but it's not 'raising taxes'

Medicare has less money, but it's not a 'cut in Medicare'.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/09/13/dean_backed_medicare_cuts_in_1995_gephardt_says_boston_globe


Removing funding for Vermont's Campaign Finance Fund is not 'an attempt to gut public financing'.
http://www.vpirg.org/campaigns/financeReform/deangutcfr.html

Underfund the public defender's office, but it's not because you believe "95 percent of people charged with crimes are guilty anyway so why should the state spend money on providing them with lawyers?"
http://www.counterpunch.org/jacobs08292003.html
http://rutlandherald.com/Archive/Articles/Article/31792


At least the doublespeak is consistent.

[dsc]

29. Is Kerry increasing taxes?

He claims he isn't but under your standard he is. You can't have it both ways. Either all of our candidates are increasing taxes or none of them are. The same action isn't an increase when applied to middle class people but not an increase when applied to rich people.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

30. Dean is the one promising to raise MIDDLE-CLASS taxes.

If what you are saying is that Kerry is going to raise taxes on the richest of Americans, you are correct. Yes. When taxes go up, that is a raise in taxes, whether you are rich, poor, or middle-class.

As President, Kerry has pledged to repeal the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans but he believes that we should keep the middle class tax cuts that Democrats fought for in 2001 and 2003, which increased the child tax credit, increased the child care credit, reduced the marriage penalty and lowered tax rates. He strongly disagrees with Democrats who want to repeal these tax cuts, which would cost many middle-class families with two children nearly $2,000.

<snip>

(1) PROTECTING MIDDLE-CLASS TAX CUTS TO HELP CHILDREN

Keep the Full Child Tax Credit: Raising children costs a lot these days and many working families are struggling to make ends meet. The child tax credit provides benefits to 521,000 Maryland households and John Kerry believes we should keep it that way. He fought for this provision in the 2001 tax cut and worked to make the credit partially refundable. Kerry supported a further expansion of the child tax credit that could have provided benefits to an additional 114,000 children in Maryland, but the proposal was cut out by Bush and the House Republicans in a midnight deal.
Don’t Reinstate the Marriage Penalty: John Kerry will not repeal the accelerated reduction of the marriage penalty, which benefits 552,000 married couples in Maryland.
Accelerate the 10-Percent Bracket Expansion: John Kerry will not repeal the expansion of the 10-percent bracket. This expansion benefits 1,459,000 married couples and single tax filers in Maryland.

Expand the Dependent Care Tax Credit (DCTC): The DCTC assists families in meeting the costs of child and adult dependent care by allowing taxpayers to offset a portion of their employment-related child and dependent care expenses. The new law increases the limits on qualifying expenses for determining the credit from the current $2,400 to $3,000 for one child or dependent and from $4,800 to $6,000 for two or more children or dependents. The new law increases the qualifying expenses from the current 30 percent of expenses to 35 percent. The credit will increase by up to $804 for families with two or more children or dependents ($402 for families with one child or dependent).

Improve the Earned Income Credit. The 2001 tax bill simplified EITC and made it more generous by excluding nontaxable employee compensation. It also eliminated a provision that reduced the earned income credit by the amount of an individual’s alternative minimum tax. Finally, the bill made the Earned Income phase out rate more generous for married people. John Kerry believes we have more to do to make EITC better for working families – and that should not start with rolling back the progress we have made.
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/09_08_03taxcuts.html

[Nicholas_J]

33. Yes Kerry is raising taxes

But like a GOOD democrat, he is ONLY raising them on the rich, the top two percent of Amiercan citizens who got 65 percent of the 1.6 TRILLION dollar total of the Bush tax cuts.

Dena is going to raise taxes on the rich who do not need the money, AND the middle class who DO need it and WILL need it until democrats refincing the states can result in a roll back of local taxation.

Before that happens, Dean will be placing an ENORMOUS burdnet on the working class, hut by increased local taxation, thenm seeing a decrease in theiw weekly paychecks if the cuts roll back.

Can Dean absolutely ENSURE that the taxes raised at the local level will be rolled back, even if he starts sending more money to the staes (which he WILL NOT DO, regardless of what he says, in light of his comittment to balance the budget in his first term).

HE will NOT commit to lowering taxes at the local leve, and by law, he cannot make them do so in any way, nor can he hold funbding the states aagain a carrot to waive before them or deny funding to states based on their rolling back local taxes.

Not ONE economist approves of Deans ideas of rolling back all of the taxes nor do the public. Many state it would be devestating to the economy. 35 percent of the public approve only of repealing the tax cuts to the wealthy and dsapprove of rolling back the middle class portion.

[Meshuga]

20. That's my fear!

I fear that Dean will be another Mondale!

Kerry and Clark are more electable against Bush.

[sandnsea]

31. You're right, I think

I would like to say he's in the mainstream of the Democratic Party but not the American people; that really isn't true either. Still, his anti-war stance, raising taxes, and a health care plan that is ailing; I don't think Americans are going to buy it.

And TSipple, you're on ignore, just so you know why I don't respond. Dude.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

34. The premise of this article is just totally false.

I wish Howard Dean's opponents would make up their minds. First they told us the former Vermont governor was a reincarnation of George McGovern, a scary, antiwar liberal
http://www.sptimes.com/2003/09/28/Columns/Attacks_on_Dean_may_l.shtml

I just don't know what he is talking about. Dean is conservative -- too conservative to lead the Democratic party in my opinion. Everything I don't like about Dean on the issues has to do with the fact that he is too conservative. And his support of Biden-Lugar shows him to be no pacifist, either -- so on the one issue that makes him look liberal, the reality is he is a centrist - which I don't mean as a criticism - it is just the reality.

QUESTION: What do you think of Gov. Dean's record?

POLLINA: I think his record is spotty. He is a relatively conservative Democrat and I think as with any candidate, particularly one with a long record, citizens around the country should really look beyond the surface to get a better idea of who he is. There are some things that he should be proud of, but there are a lot of things that are of concern to those of us who live in Vermont.

So he goes around the country and talks about universal health care. Well frankly we don't have universal health care in Vermont. I heard him once on the radio say I don't understand why we can't have universal health care in America like every other industrialized country does. Well that's a theme that a lot of us have sounded for years here in Vermont and he has been resistant to that. So what I hear him saying sometimes on the national level is not completely reflective of the Howard Dean that I know. Again that's not to say that he has certainly done some good things.
http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/dean/dean0702/pollinaint.html

[JohnKleeb]

35. I am not gonna take sides here

but those who attack Dean as the next McGovern are different than those who attack him from the left.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

36. Have you heard any DEMOCRATS saying that? I haven't.

It is just spin from the Dean campaign that some journalists have taken up as far as I know.

Does anyone know of any instance where one of the candidates "told us the former Vermont governor was a reincarnation of George McGovern, a scary, antiwar liberal" (http://www.sptimes.com/2003/09/28/Columns/Attacks_on_Dean_may_l.shtml)

Which one of Dean's opponents said that? When? Where?


This supposed 'attack' on Dean is actually a backhanded effort by the Dean campaign as far as I can tell. It's the one charge they want to have to keep denying -- because, first of all, it is not true, and second, to have to keep replying to it makes it seem as if Dean DOES actually share some of McGovern's liberal credentials -- but the facts show otherwise.

[DrFunkenstein]

37. There Is No Contradiction

The people calling him McGovern were not talking about policy. They were talking about someone who appeared radical. It is kind of the opposite of Bill Moyers - he says some things that are pretty far Left, but says them in a way that sounds like common sense.

Dean, on the other hand, is a centrist on many issues, but sounds like he is the second coming of Che Guevara. Which to me is the worst combination imaginable. In his defense, he does make some excellent points, but he does so in a VERY polarizing way.

People occupying that pole may love it, but I don't think a country desperately searching for a sense of security are going to go for someone who appears unstable.

http://www.gop.org/Newsroom/RNCResearch/TLvideo2.htm