The Dean Deception

[cryofan]

Here are some excerpts from a footnoted article showing what Dean is really all about...Read 'em and weep:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

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

....


Most of the Democrats in the legislature rebelled against Dean over the budget cuts, and he ended up depending on Republican votes to pass most of his proposals. At the time, a local Vermont newspaper wrote, "The biggest items on Dean’s agenda for next year are likely to provoke more opposition from the Democrats than the Republicans. Nevertheless, Dean said he feels no particular pressure to deliver the goods to his party or to promote the Democratic agenda."15

In the mid-1990s, Dean even aligned himself with the likes of Republican Newt Gingrich on his stance on cutting Medicare. He opined at the time, "The way to balance the budget is for Congress to cut Social Security, move the retirement age to 70, cut defense, Medicare and veterans pensions, while the states cut everything else."16

....

The Rutland Herald described how one protestor, Henrietta Jordan of the Vermont Center for Independent Living, "said it would be much fairer to raise taxes on people with expensive homes and cars, children in private school and a housekeeper at home than to cut programs that helped the 66,000 Vermonters living with disabilities."17 Dean responded callously, brushing off the pleas of Vermont’s most vulnerable by saying, "This seems like sort of the last gasp of the left here."18


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The rest of this large, detailed article is here:
http://www.isreview.org/issues/32/dean.shtml

[frustrated_lefty]

1. Fine

Reposting:

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. ļ

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

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[frustrated_lefty]

13. This isn't going away.

How are you and your candidate helping my kids? I have a world class resume, your words don't even touch it, just what are you doing for my kids?

[cryofan]

20. I can hear where you are coming from, but you are negotiating poorly

read this thread, and the URLs for my answer:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=920274

[frustrated_lefty]

23. k, I'm diggin through it

It's a lot of info to read through, but I'm reading through it.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[spychoactive]

45. why do ya gotta be like that?

regardless, dennis kucinich has sparked the imaginations and captured the hearts of many people, do you oppose what he stands for, or is it just that he's not your guy, so the heck with him? personally attacking someone does not make your candidate look any better to me, i came to the DU two months ago without a candidate, i researched their respective positions, and found DK to be the candidate best mirroring my beliefs and viewpoints...

foxnews is currently running a piece debating whther or not dean is the "angry candidate"...his supporters sure seem angry sometimes (not all mind you) but that doesn't do anyone any good...

*sigh*

one love
spike

[frustrated_lefty]

3. Apologies, apostrophes

and parentheses don't translate between my word processor and the DU forum.

[mzmolly]

5. Awesome reply

:toast:

[Ardee]

15. awesome in its inaccuracies

If one bothers to read that article one finds:


Dean claims to have a health plan that will guarantee insurance for all Americans modeled on the system he set up in Vermont. In reality, according to his own Web site, his plan would leave at least 10 million Americans uninsured. And that is only if he actually implements his plan–he is determined that "nothing will happen on health care…until he works out a plan to balance the budget."24 If he does model the national health care system on Vermont’s system, it won’t be pretty.

Vermont actually doesn’t have universal health care. It is true that almost all children under the age of 18 are covered, but U.S. Census Bureau figures show that 10—12 percent of Vermonters remain uninsured. This is only a little better than the national average of nearly 15 percent uninsured.

For those Vermonters who are insured under Dean’s plan, their access is extremely limited. Dean’s plan requires families to pay monthly premiums for government-subsidized health care. Because services are provided through private insurers, however, premiums have been steadily increasing while care has been steadily deteriorating. Over the past 10 years, employee health insurance costs have increased by 400 percent.25

Dean has also cut basic services from the health plan such as X-rays, dental services, physical therapy, psychological care and cheap prescription drugs. As Dean explained to the Rutland Herald in 1991, one of the main assets of his health care plan is that "it definitely keeps people out of the emergency room."26 It seems his main concern was not so much universal coverage as cost-cutting. In his first State of the State address he moaned:

We spend too much money in this country and in this state for unnecessary medical procedures. We must reduce the combined pressures of professional liability, consumer demand and reimbursement mechanisms which encourage providers to administer more care and to order more tests.27

In other words, health care under Dr. Dean means paying more for less.

----and-----

Education

Dean has lambasted Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act as a fraudulent misnomer. But Dean is no champion of sweeping education guarantees. When he was making his budget cuts, financial aid for higher education was first on the chopping block. According to Ellen David Friedman, organizer with the Vermont National Education Association, Dean was not necessarily sympathetic to teachers. Friedman recalled in an interview with the ISR how during contract negotiations, "Dean would make public statements encouraging school boards to shift more of the cost of health care onto teachers."31

While Vermont’s school system is funded relatively equitably through a general fund set up under the Act 60 legislation, this, like the civil unions, has little to do with Dean’s efforts. It too was born of a Supreme Court ruling that had virtually no previous support from Howard Dean.

According to information released by the Vermont State Colleges office, during Dean’s tenure, from 1991—2000, state funding per Vermont student decreased by 13 percent.32

....which directly contradicts the suppositions of Lefty

[Rose Siding]

16. Some may remain uninsured because it's a voluntary program

He doesn't advocate forcing anyone to take the plan, which is also explaned on his site, but apparently didn't serve your argument.

[Mairead]

61. Who would opt out? The poor? The sick? Hardly.

It would be the privileged healthy. Which means that his healthcare scheme would be like public education today: inadequate for the poor, marginal for the middle, and attacked relentlessly by the wealthy.

Such a deal.

[frustrated_lefty]

19. I would appreciate some links

to support these claims

[sandnsea]

30. Vermont plan - federally funded

The prescription drug program, federal waiver programs. The expansion in health care for children, SCHIP. Dr. Dynasaur in 1987, federally mandated. Vermont had the benefit of a population with less uninsured children and higher incomes as the federal govt enacted various medicaid laws beginning in 1987. Dean could therefore increase coverage more than states like Alabama could. And even with that advantage, the actual coverage in 2002 wasn't significantly higher than the national average and the program has run a deficit since at least 2000.

Dean's plan was more about cutting costs than providing real services. Everything he did with it makes it clear. His first choice in the mid-nineties was HMO's. I'm not surprised.

[loyalsister]

48. If federal funding is all it takes

and the congressional candidates running for office are to be credited as I assume you are trying to imply here, Mass, NC, and MO should all have universal healthcare. However, here in MO where Gep weilds considerable power over the party, picks the candidates, etc. AND we had a Democratic house Senate AND governor throughout much of the nineties YET still we have crappy health care. Despite those magical federal funds.

BTW: What do you think it means when people say "we spend more in this country than in other industrialized countries. What are we paying for?" If you're going to provide coverage on a large scale you have to cut costs.
One of the biggest problems we have is having to bail out hospitals because people aren't getting proper maintenance care. When large numbers of unisured ineligible for medicaide coverage go to the ER for ear infections, it creates a strain on hospitals eventually. Providing services is all about cutting costs, hospitals can't "offer services" for very long in the red, you see.

[Mairead]

63. "you have to cut costs"

Well, the biggest wasteful cost is profit and overhead: 31c of every dollar. Why is Dean opposed to eliminating that cost?

[stickdog]

93. Because he lives in the real world.

You know, the place where DK is lucky to get 3% of the vote.

[Rose Siding]

10. Thanks, fl

good stuff.

Re: Progressive taxation- Dean supported Plan 60 (I think that's what it was called) but it was ultimately changed. The plan made funding for schools equitable- sending more money to the poor areas that needed it. I really like to see states develop that kind of taxation.

[sandnsea]

22. Most states do

Most states have had it since the 80's. Most states have seen the cost of education rise because it's no longer tied to what the local tax base can support. Most states are in a serious financial crunch because of it, in part at least. And again, this was under court order like it has been in every other state. So this isn't anything Dean did, it was probably something he didn't want to do based on the problems other states were already having. But he didn't come up with a better solution either.

Kerry has the National Education Trust to permanently fund the federal portions of education. That's a real solution. That will make the states' portion of funding predictable and easier to budget for.

[frustrated_lefty]

24. Just, as my daughter says,

'keepin it real.'

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SahaleArm]

4. International Socialist Review - Journal of Revolutionary Marxism?

Weren't these the folks who were touting Cuba as a shining example of revolutionary Marxism? I think it was in the 1996 presidential voter pamphlet.

[cryofan]

7. ad hominem logic....how refreshingly quaint, though not unexpected....

....how about refuting their POINTS? Or is throwing around labels the extent of your debating skills?

[SahaleArm]

11. Am I attacking you? And no Dean is not left nor progressive n/t

[burning bush]

36. If you would like to talk about debating skills...

then we should begin with your signature line...

"A CENTRIST IS HALF REPUBLICAN AND HALF DEMOCRAT, THEREFORE A CENTRIST IS A REPUBLICRAT...WILL YOU VOTE FOR A REPUBLICRAT IN 2004??"

False assumption. A centrist is not half Dem, half Repuke. In fact, one dictionary definition of a centrist reads:

supporting or pursuing a course of action that is neither liberal nor conservative.

The rest of your faux maxim falls apart from there, and your question becomes moot.

A centrist is a centrist. In fact, it could be said (I'm not saying this, but rhetorically, it could be said) that only a centrist is a complete candidate, that a Liberal represents only the left side, and a Consertvative only the right side of that complete whole.

Therefore, it may be more correct to say that Libs and Conservs are each the incomplete halves of a Centrist.

Just the opposite of what you propose. :)

[TLM]

41. It shows how far out into lala land dean bashers have to go to find

folks who share your opinions of Dean as some sort of evil conservative.

And see post #2 for full refutation of this rehashed dean bashing.

[SahaleArm]

8. Found it - Socialist Workers Party

PARTY LINE: "Our campaign points to the historic necessity of overthrowing the rule of the exploiting class and fighting for a workers' and farmers' government that will run society in the interests of the majority of humanity, like revolutionary Cuba."

http://archives.thedaily.washington.edu/1996/110496/pres.vg.110496.html

[Scott Lee]

6. How many times will this be posted?

Lets see, give the topic a rest for a few days and then post again? I read this practically verbatim some days ago and it was just as stupid and empty.

[cryofan]

12. Empty?! Dean's own words show him for exactly what he is!

Read his words!

[RetroLounge]

17. No, but your words sure do...

( This thread is )poop.

[frustrated_lefty]

25. Hey

I did hard research to make a cut and paste reply to attacks against Dean. Please don't call that "poop," cuz I really did research the points.

[bearfartinthewoods]

46. BARF

[flpoljunkie]

54. Dean: "This seems like sort of the last gasp of the left here."

These words by Dr. Dean reveal his character--that of a man who maligns those who seek help for those in need--and of the needy themselves.

How hypocritical from the candidate Dr. Dean, who said yesterday, "This campaign needs a little character transplant."

Is this really the candidate we want to represent the Democratic party as our nominee for president in 2004--a Republican lite posing as a faux populist to win the early contests in Iowa and New Hampshire?

[AntiCoup2K4]

57. No, we would be much better off with a guy who claims to be Liberal but

..is a Skull & Bones member who hires PNAC'ers to advise his campaign and wants James Baker in his cabinet. Republican lite indeed.

[flpoljunkie]

60. The level of defensive vitriol from Dean supporters is rising...

Surely you can mount a better defense than this.

[Nazgul35]

65. once Kerry supporters

come up with better attacks....

Seems like the Kerry campaign has run out of ideas and gone back to square one....

I.E. see Kerry's call for a one on one debate with Dean....ignoring the fact that he has many other candidates between he and Dean who would have a better claim for a one on one debate.....

[Scott Lee]

75. His words? They're almost always RIGHT. As that what's bugging you?

I understand, I really do. But let me take you aside and give you some brotherly news.

DK, as much as I admire him, is not going to be the nominee. Neither is Kerry or Clark. Or Lieberman, or Gephardt. It's going to be Howard Dean. The sooner you comfort yourself to this fact, the lower your blood pressure is going to be.

Mark it in your calendar.

[bearfartinthewoods]

92. not unless he can get over his problem with the black community.

as long as he is forced to have white people holding AA for dean signs he is not going to be president.

ooopsss...my bad you were talking about the primaries....the play offs. i'm talking about the general elction....

[Zomby Woof]

18. awesome work

:thumbsup: Thanks for posting!

[Egnever]

21. Work?

Cut and paste of a hit piece and you calkl it work. WEEEEEE

[Zomby Woof]

26. it's the effort that counts

I was referring to his overall work in getting the word out on Dean. ;-)

Every bit counts - cut, pasted, or original.

Hey, relax. If Dean is destined to be our next president, why exert such energy on people like us who obviously can't influence the outcome, hmm? :D

[frustrated_lefty]

29. Egnever

My job limits what I can do in researching candidates. I spend every spare waking hour trying to honestly examine our candidates. Dean, I think, is our guy. I have put together the start of a cut and paste answer to attacks against him. Whomever we put forth will face attacks. I want our guy to have a headstart.

[frustrated_lefty]

27. Thank you Zomby,

I know we disagree. I hope you understand when I post a thought, it's one I've studied, given some thought to.

[KaraokeKarlton]

28. As someone who lives in Vermont I find this article offensive

It portrays Governor Dean falsely. Howard Dean was governor for 12 years. Very early in his governorship he did have to make a few cuts because the state was deep in debt and a fiscal disaster. He did what all governors and presidents have to do...make tough decisions which sometimes included unpopular cuts.

He also made a lot of changes to programs that made them more cost effective and saved money. Cuts don't always mean a loss in services. Sometimes it simply means ways were found to do the same things for a lower cost.

And as for the prison...we HAD to build one because a lot of the budget cuts Dean did have to make came from having to send Vermont prisoners to Virginia because we didn't have room for them here. One prison had to be closed because it was in ill repair. There was already an overcrowding problem that had been ongoing before that closure resulting in the Burlington prison's gym having to be used as a big open dorm for inmates. The state knew it had to build a new prison but had to find a place to build it where the town would accept it. It couldn't repair and expand the one that was closed because it sat right in the middle of main street in Woodstock, VT. There wasn't any land to expand on. So, the new prison was just completed not very long ago. It hasn't even been open for a year, in fact. So, for a number of years, Vermont has had to pay a lot of money to send the prisoners to Virginia and there was NO avoiding building the prison. Part of the cost for that prison also went to building a brand new state of the art high school in the same town with a tech center and state college annexes. The town got a new state offices building for social services agencies and the DMV, child support, public health dept, WIC, etc. They also got a community center for the town from that money.

I see the article leaves out the fact that Dean paid off a $65 million debt, raised the minimum wage twice, made 99% of Vermont's kids eligible for insurance, reduced child abuse by half, sexual abuse by over 70%, protected more of Vermont's undeveloped land than all other Vermont governors COMBINED, was the ONLY politician in the country to grant gay couples equal relationship rights, balanced the budget, built up a $100 million surplus, among many other things.

Some of Dean's choices here haven't been all that popular, but no one would argue that those very choices didn't turn out to be the right ones and paid off in the long run. Our state is in better financial shape than about any other state in the country, and Governor Dean can be thanked for that.

And the Social Security and Medicare quotes are butchered bits out of larger quotes. If the article provided the FULL quotes it would be obvious that what Dean actually said and what the article implies is two entirely different things. Gephardt was lying the first time he brought this stuff up and no matter how many times he repeats the nonsense it doesn't make it any less false.

[bearfartinthewoods]

47. since you live there, is it true that in the year that he balanced the

budget, approx 21% of the cost of gov was paid for by the federal government? and if so, how will he pull that off nationally?

[KaraokeKarlton]

49. What do you mean by the "year"?

He balanced the budget EVERY year. And I highly doubt the federal govt paid for 21% of Vermont's entire operational costs, programs, education, and everything else. Every state qualifies for the same program funding as every other state. Do you have a link to show who's making that claim? I'm sure I could find the actual figures if you provided a link to these lofty claims so I can see exactly what is being said.

[bigtree]

67. the nation is has more less well-off folks than Vermont

It will be hard to replicate what he did in Vermont nationwide. And all of the inequities of his budget approach magnify.

[Nicholas_J]

78. Actually

KaraokeKarlton has referred to Dean utiizing waivers to pay for some of his program. What are "waivers", you ask?

A waiver is permission to use federal money left over from one program, and use it for another purpose. Dean did this often. For example, Vermont received federal funds to improve its state universities, and rather than spend it all on the universities, Dean gave the universities very small budgett increases (a total of 7 percent for the 11 years he was in office), and thn took this money and transferred it to other programs.

So the federal government pays a great deal of the cost of running any particular state. As the residents of each state pay various excise taxes at the federal level, (such as the excise tax on autombile tires) the federal government returns a portion of the revenues collected by these taxes for the state of Vermont to build roads. Same thing with Medicaid. A state that offers medicaid only pays 40 percent of the cost of running that program. The Federal Governmet pays 60 percent. Overall, all Dean did was to shift medicaid coverage from poor singles, elderly couples on a fixed income and the disabled on a fixed income, to children. And he used federal waivers to increase the amount of money that the state had to pay to put into medicaid, as the money from other programs under waivers are not considered federal money once the waiver is granted. When the waiver is granted, the state gets to put the money into its own general fund, and tranfer it to the programs allowed to operate under that waiver.

On the while Dean quadrupled the number of children covered under medicaid in Vermont, the overall percentage of people who were uninsured stayed at the same levels as they did before Dean was in office. Which meand if Dean quadrupled the number of children covered in Vermont, he cut the same number of people who recieved coverage in other groups.

The Uninsured in Vermont
Joint Fiscal Office - Revised December, 2002

Introduction
One of the most-watched measures of health care financing systems is the uninsured rate.This is the percent of the population that lacks any coverage at all for health care expenses. Although there is no “gold standard” measure of the number of uninsured in
Vermont, by available measures the state has one of the lowest uninsured rates in the country. Based on an annual survey by the Bureau of the Census, the U.S. uninsured rate has climbed from 12.9% in 1987 to a high point of 16.3% in 1998, fell to 14.0% in 2000
and rose to 14.6% in 2001. Using the same survey, Vermont’s rate is consistently below the national rate. Vermont’s rate has fluctuated substantially, but appears to have a long-term rate of around 10%. Using a state-sponsored survey, Vermont’s rate was 11% in
1993, 6.8% in 1997, and 8.4% in 2000.

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/jfo/Vermont%20Uninsured.pdf

This report contins tables that indicate while Dean was Governor, there was not striking decrease in the number of people who did not have health insurance.


Also Dean is falsely given credit for eliminating the 65 million dollar deficit that he inherited from Richard Snelling. Snelling, under pressure from Vermont Democrats, allowed a three tiered progressive income tax to be temporarily instituted, in which the wealthy paid the largest part of ther taxes to reduce the deficit, and pay for government programs. The tax was scheduled to be rolled back and eliminated after 4 years. Dean allowed the rollbacks to occur as as scheduled, in direct opposition to the Vermont Demcratic Party and Vermont Legislators:

Those who know Dean say he’s no classic liberal
By ROSS SNEYD

Associated Press Writer

...The state was in a fiscal crisis at the time, working its way out of the biggest budget deficit in its history. Then-Gov. Richard Snelling had pushed a series of temporary tax increases and budget cuts through the Legislature and Dean took up that austerity plan as his own.

To the anger of more liberal members of his own party, he insisted that the tax increases be rolled back on schedule and then went on to work for additional tax cuts later in his tenure...

http://premium1.fosters.com/2003/news/may_03/may_19/news/reg_vt0519a.asp

Dean and his supporters frequently give Dean credit for having performed fiscal miracles, which Dean played little part in. In after the Snelling tax was tolled back however, Dean began facing budgets in which deficits were projected, and rather thna use the same solution that worked well during his first few years, under the Snelling Tax Plan, Deans own methods for balancing the budget revolved simply around cutting government social programs:

Howard Dean: Education Cuts to Balance the Budget
In January 1993, Dean proposed level-funding state aid to
education...

Headline: "Hidden Tax Hikes" (editorial)

An editorial by the Rutland Herald pointed out that "It would be a
mistake to believe that Gov. Howard Dean's proposed budget contains
no tax increases. There are tax increases in several areas... But
the increases are not immediately visible...

"Level funding of state aid to education would also shift more of
the tax burden to the property-tax burden to the property-tax payer.
In order to maintain the present share of support for education, the
state would have to increase its state aid by $7 million. Otherwise,
local school districts will either have to raise property taxes or
cut spending."



Headline: "Budget Cuts 'Could Hurt Children'"

Dean's 1992 budget "include a $6 million cut in state aid to
education and a small reduction in monthly benefits under Aid to
Families with Needy Children." This cut
was enacted.

Headline: "Dean Defends Cuts in State Aid to Education"

As a mid-year addition cut, Dean proposed a $2.1 million reduction
in state aid to education, which was not ultimately enacted: "Gov.
Howard Dean on Thursday defended his decision to cut state aid to
education..."

The Burlington Free Press editorialized, "Instead of reforming and
restructuring, the Dean administration is cutting... Some cuts - as
in state aid to education - pass the pain along to towns and school
districts."


*****

Howard Dean: Cuts to Aid for the Aged, Blind and Disabled (AABD)
In 1995 Dean proposed a state budget cut of $920,000 for Aid to the
Aged, Blind and Disabled (AABD) Program

About 13,000 Vermonters received aid from the program, 10,000 of
whom are disabled.


Headline: "A Thousand Cuts"

"At first blush, a cut of $12.21 might seem like an inconsequential
nick in the budgets of those Vermonters who typically receive a
monthly SSI check of $517... But resistance to these small cuts
continues at the state and federal level because of the belief that
our needy citizens are being nicked, not just by one cut, but by so
many cuts that their lives will be driven to a desperate extreme."


Headline: "Dean Cuts Are Stirring Ill Feelings"

"State Senator Jeb Spaulding made note of the fact that Dean had
tried repeatedly to cut AABD and each time the legislature
refused. 'This is one (reduction) that the legislature has said 'no'
to for the last three or four years in a row.'"

After a legislative panel rejected the cuts by a vote of 5-2, Dean
said, "I'm not getting any help at all from the rules committee
dealing with this budget crisis, so we will go it alone." Rutland Herald, 10/25/95]


****


Headline: "Legal Aid Suit Seeks to Block Dean Cuts to AABD"

Vermont Legal Aid attorney Thomas F. Garrett filed a class action
suite on behalf of 5 AABD recipients against Governor Dean.

"Garrett said the Legislature rejected the governor's plan to cut
AABD benefits (in the spring)... He noted that that Dean
administration issued a bulletin on July 7, 1995, promulgating the
AABD cut 'in order to address a projected shortfall in general fund
revenues for fiscal 1996.'"


In the end, Judge Meaker of the Washington County Superior Court
ruled to give an injunction ordering Howard Dean to restore the cut.

Headline: "Court Restrains Dean on AABD Cuts"

"Gov. Howard B. Dean lost a round in the battle for power Tuesday as
a Superior Court judge blocked his plan to cut benefits to 13,000
blind, aged and disabled Vermonters...

"The Dean administration planned to trim $920,000 from the 1996
state budget by reducing benefit levels in the state's Aid to the
Aged, Blind and Disabled program beginning Jan. 1... the cut was
intended to help reduce a state deficit that is expected to top $40
million by July."

Superior Court Judge John P. Meaker said in his decision, "Any
decrease in benefits for individuals living in the 'grip of poverty'
potentially deprives them of the ability to obtain essentials such
as food, clothing or housing."



Burlington Free Press says that "it shouldn't have taken a court to
tell Dean" not to cut AABD.

"Meanwhile, it shouldn't have taken a court to tell Dean it was bad
policy and bad law for him to deny a small cost-of-living raise to
Vermont's blind and disabled - when legislators had previously,
emphatically and repeatedly said they should get it. And it
shouldn't take a lawyer to tell him now that it will be bad politics
to appeal."

*****


Howard Dean: Medicaid Cuts to Balance the Budget
In August 1993, Dean worked to cut Medicaid funding by $1.2 million,
to help balance the budget. The $1.2 million in cuts meant:


Eliminating dental coverage for 12,600 adults

Ending Medicaid benefits for 1,700 Vermonters aged 18 to 21

Ending vision, medical equipment and other benefits for 2,500
elderly and disabled Vermonters

Ending the practice of holding seniors' nursing home beds for 10
days while they are in the hospital



Seniors and advocates for the poor rallied to oppose the cuts, and
Vermont Legal Aid filed suit against the Dean administration. Dean
relented on $963,000 of the cuts in November.

Headline: "Hundreds Turn Out to Protest State Cuts In Medicaid
Program"

"A grassroots coalition of elderly and disabled Vermonters is
turning up the volume in its battle with Gov. Howard Dean over his
plan to cut $1.2 million in Medicaid benefits... nearly 300 people
packed a gymnasium at the State Office Complex to oppose the cuts."

"Michael Sirotkin, a lobbyist who has represented the interests of
the Coalition of Vermont Elders for 12 years... 'I have never
seen, in the history of the Vermont Legislature for as long as I
have been there, a more horrific cut than the one that is being
proposed today."


Howard Dean on those protesting his cuts: "There are interest groups
that are far larger than 200 people. These people were put on a bus
by the advocates."


*****


Under pressure of a lawsuit filed by Vermont Legal Aid, Dean
scrapped $963,000 worth of the cuts that week.

"The governor said, 'the clincher' came when his legal advisers told
him that the Legal Aid lawsuits that challenged the constitutional
grounds for making the cuts could drag on until April. Dean said he
was confident that the state was on sound legal ground." Argus, 11/5/93]


*****


"In his budget address in January 1993, Dean had proposed
eliminating Medicaid coverage for those aged 18 to 21...Estimated
savings would be $149,000." Dean was stopped by the legislature.


.

"The budget, a 3 percent increase, does not include any major cuts
in programs. But the state's most expensive programs - welfare,
Medicaid, state aid to education and special education - won't
increase."



In another mid-year budget cut in 1995, Dean proposed eliminating $4
million from Medicaid.



Headline: "Medicaid on cutting board"

"The proposal affecting the 4,000 senior citizens is one of the most
controversial. State administrators have suggested reducing income
eligibility from $741 monthly to $681 for a single person to qualify
for Medicaid. Officials said Vermont's income level is $108 higher
than Connecticut, the New England state with the income requirement
most similar to Vermont's. 'The cut is huge and affects almost
exclusively elderly women living alone,' said Michael Sirotkin, a
lobbyist who represents older Vermonters."

"One of the big losers would be the Starr Farm Nursing Center in
Burlington's New North end. The 100-bed nursing home won approval
for 50 new beds from the state in 1991, but now the state has
proposed not sending an additional $1.1 million a year in Medicaid
dollars it had promised the facility."





So from Deans earliest years, the legislative tool to eleiminate the deficit was provided by legislation before enacted before he became Governor, and the means by which Dean balanced the budget each year relied primarily on Dean cutting medicaid coverage and legal aid...

And Dean continued to use the methods of cutting social spending in order to balance budgets , which are methods that are opposed by the Democratic Party in all of its own platform statements. Literally, up until Deans last days as Governor, his ideas about balancing budgets revolved primarily on cutting funding to social programs. such as healthe assistance to the poor, and cuts to education:

Medicaid cuts will affect thousands of Vermonters
January 23, 2002

By DAVID MACE

Vermont Press Bureau



...Under Dean’s proposal, those people — about 3,200 are currently enrolled — would be required to pay half the costs of their drugs, though they would not have to pay more than $750 out of pocket in a year. This would save the state an estimated $800,000.


Under Dean’s proposal, those people — about 3,200 are currently enrolled — would be required to pay half the costs of their drugs, though they would not have to pay more than $750 out of pocket in a year. This would save the state an estimated $800,000.

And Vermonters who get help paying for drugs under the Vermont Health Access Plan, or VHAP Pharmacy, which covers all drugs and requires only a $1 or $2 co-payment, would also have to pay half the cost with a $750 limit.

Currently, about 10,300 people get such assistance, which is available to people with incomes up to $12,888 for a single person. The savings from making them pay half is estimated at nearly $2.7 million.

Finally, some 21,000 residents who get help paying for other medical care under VHAP’s programs would see the services they get reduced and co-payments increased, such as a $250 co-payment for hospital treatment.

All Medicaid patients would see some benefits curtailed because the state would no longer pay for dentures, chiropractic, or podiatry services, and would limit prescription drug choices more severely...


http://timesargus.com/Legislature/Story/41169.html





In order to avoid facing a deficit approaching 70 million dollars in the fiscal year 2003 budget(the last budget that Dean presented to the state of Vermont), the Progressive Party's legislators, with wide support from Vermonmt Democratic Party legislators, presented legislation that would restore the Snelling Tax plan which got rid of the deficits that existed when Dena first took office. Dean did not approve of this idea, as he stated that the highest income tax bracket was too high (translation....the Rich are already taxed too much):


Progressives call for higher taxes for rich
January 25, 2002

By JACK HOFFMAN

Vermont Press Bureau

MONTPELIER — Vermont Progressives renewed their call Thursday for higher taxes on the wealthy in order to avoid some of the budget cuts that Gov. Howard Dean outlined earlier this week.



The Progressives, with support of a couple dozen Democrats and one Republican, proposed two new income tax surcharges. Taxes would go up 12.5 percent on taxable income between $43,000 and $158,000. On taxable income above $158,000, taxes would be increased 25 percent.

In 1991, then-Gov. Richard Snelling, a Republican, and the Democratic Legislature imposed surcharges on upper-income Vermonters to dig the state out of a huge budget deficit. Those surcharges were temporary, and they were lifted after the shortfall was repaid.

The Progressives said their proposal was designed to mirror the surcharges adopted during that last budget crisis, but they have not proposed an expiration date for the new surcharges.

Dean reiterated his opposition to raising the income tax shortly after the Progressives unveiled their tax plan. Dean contends Vermont’s marginal income tax rate — that is, the top rate paid by those in the highest income brackets — already is too high.

http://timesargus.nybor.com/Legislature/Story/41293.html

Finally when the Democrats in Vermont decided that they would no longer allow Dean to balance budgets by hurting the most vulnerable members of the states population, they simply ignored Dean, and restored critical finds to programs that were critical tobthe health and well being of these members of the states population:

Senate adds money to budget, angers Dean
May 9, 2002

By ROSS SNEYD The Associated Press

MONTPELIER — Senators passed a 2003 state budget Wednesday that the governor made clear he would veto if it ever reached his desk...


Even the governor’s closest allies in the Senate ignored him. Sen. Nancy Chard, D-Windham, recommended restoring $440,000 to one of the pharmaceutical assistance programs and the Senate voted 22-7 to go along with her.

“I’ve become convinced that we have a philosophical difference between the governor, the Republican House and this Senate,” said Senate President Pro Tempore Peter Shumlin, D-Windham.

“The governor and the Republican House want to balance this budget on the backs of our most vulnerable Vermonters. The Senate wants to balance this budget on the backs of the pharmaceutical companies who are charging too much for drugs.”...

http://timesargus.com/Legislature/Story/46513.html

To sum it up, Dean deserves almost no credit for getting Vemront out of its fiscal crisis in he early 90's. The plan that Snelling passed early in 1991, was a program that any Democrat or Progressive could find acceptable. It worked very well.

After phasing out this plan, Deans own ideas for balancing budgets and funding social programs did not work well at all. As Dean was unable to both balance the budget, and provide social programs. Dean did not find more efficiant ways to provide health care.

As noted:

All Medicaid patients would see some benefits curtailed because the state would no longer pay for dentures, chiropractic, or podiatry services, and would limit prescription drug choices more severely

Dean did not manage to more effectively provide the services noted above to the citizens in his state. He completely eliminated the services, so trying to state that Dean balanced the budget by finding mmore efficient ways to provide services is simply not true.

As noted by the Vemront Assembly of Home Health Providers, Dean did not balanced budgets by finding more efficient and cost effective ways of providing services. He balanced budgets by cutting services. Pure and simple, Dean did not proved better services to most of those who needed thme in Vermont.

The Dean budget for FY 2003 is $891 million in state spending, one percent more than the state expects to spend this fiscal year but nearly 3% less than the budget passed last year ($916 million). Revenues this year are expected to be $50 million below budget. Dean wants to use the "Rainy Day" fund to cover some of the $50 million shortfall but does not want to tap that fund for FY 2003. Next year’s budget is based on revenue estimates of $893 million.

If passed as presented, Dean’s budget would:

Eliminate the VScript Expanded Program.

Reduce the Vermont Health Access Plan pharmacy benefit.

Increase the co-pay up to $750/year for medicines under both the VScript and VHAP pharmacy programs. (Those eligible now pay only a few dollars for each filled prescription).

Eliminate the Medicaid dentures, chiropractic and podiatry programs.

Reduce the adult dental programs (cover pain and suffering only, not preventative care).

Add a 50% co-pay to adult vision programs.

Add a $250 co-pay per admission to VHAP inpatient hospital benefit.

Reduce the hospital outpatient payment by 10%.

Establish a hospital outpatient co-pay of $25.

These cuts would save about $27 million, $11 million in state money. Few advocates for the elderly are happy with the budget and have vowed to restore the money lost to these programs. A coalition of over a dozen advocacy groups held a rally and press conference at the Capitol building to denounce the budget cuts.

http://vnavt.com/vahhavoicewinter2002.htm

[dsc]

31. Lying liars of the left

there isn't much I can check out in their article but what I could was false.

Here is one example.

By 2002, state investments in prisons increased by nearly 150 percent while investments in state colleges increased by only 7 percent.11



Ed. note. Commissioner of Finance and Management Sean Campbell provided the following information:
General Fund Appropriations FY 1993 FY 2003* Percent Change
Corrections $31,218 $73,916 137 %
State Colleges $14,470 $21,361 47 %

*Note. Does not take into account any recissions made in August 2002.
And, according to 2002 Fiscal Facts, from FY 1998 to FY 2002 General Fund appropriations for Corrections increased by 75.4 percent ($47.2 million to $72.8 million) and those for state colleges increased by 27.3 percent ($15.4 million to $19.6 million). Also, keep in mind that state colleges are but one part of the state's spending on higher education; for example FY 2002 appropriations for UVM were $34.2 million.

This was in the very same article they site. Mr. Pollina, who ran against Dean, is not identified as having done so. They present the 'facts' of an opponent, don't label him one, and then leave out the correction of his lies that the original interviewer supplied. There is a word for that, lying.

I can't directly check the source for this quote:


and he cut the income tax by 8 percent (equivalent to $30 million)

They may accurately report what was said by the source. But someone is baldly lying to you. He didn't cut taxes by 8%. The numbers show that isn't the case.

When Dean became governor he inherited a tax rate of 28% federal taxes. He lowered it to 24%. That is a 4% reduction if one looks at it by subtraction. The top rate federal rate back then was 39%. To compute the % reduction in tax we would use .39 * (old-new)/old * 100. That is 39 *(28-24)/28 which is 39* (4/28) or 39*(1/7) or 39/7 which is 5 4/7 or 5.64% also not 8%. Someone baldly lied to you. Shame on them.

As a general rule lie to me once (the prison college example) shame on you. Lie to me twice (the tax example) shame on me. You don't get a third time.

[cryofan]

32. umm....governors deal with STATE taxes, not FEDERAL taxes

I don't think I will bother with a counter-rebuttal, but the (seemingly obvious) fact that the article was talking about state taxes should be enough to alert any onlooking lurkers of the value of your rebuttal....

[sandnsea]

34. He "unhooked" it from federal

Probably a better word to use, but that's where the federal figures come into play. I think the complaint was that he reduced those top margins and cut social programs as the same time. I'm not 100% sure on that thought. I'm mostly responding to why DSC quoted federal figures. Vermont's taxes had been "hooked" to the federal rates and Dean "unhooked" them. Again, that's the wrong word.

[dsc]

55. Thank you

I am not sure of the proper word either but he did change the system in response to Bush's cuts. But that was a very slight increase in taxes not a cut.

[dsc]

51. The way Vermont calcualates its state taxes

is by charging a percentage of the federal taxes. It goes to show just how little research you actually do. Until 2002, for a Vermonter to figure out his or her state tax bill they took their federal one and multiplied by .28 in 1992, .25 from 1993 to 1999, and .24 in 2000 and 2001. Then due to Bush's cuts Vermont changed to a fixed system. So want to try again.

Here is my proof

http://www.state.vt.us/tax/majorvttaxes.htm

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/reports/tax/tax.htm

The first one discusses taxes from 1998 to now the second covers from the late 1980's to 1995. So again, want to take another stab. Want to offer an apology?

[AP]

82. It's VT property taxes, not VT income taxes which seem to be the problem.

[dsc]

88. The property taxes could be 1000%

and my statment still would have been accurate and the article wrong. We have gone round and round on the property taxes before and I don't feel like hijacking the thread. Bottom line, the article claimed income taxes were reduced by 8%, they weren't. My methodology was challenged due to my using a fed tax rate. I was right to do so. It is that simple.

[AP]

89. You have a study that says that VT taxes became more regressive.

You discount it because you refuse to accept that a person making 10K a year could spend 4K on items that incur sales tax.

That report showed you that sales tax and ESPECIALLY property tax are a huge cause of VT's tax code regressivity. So you focus your argument on income tax.

[dsc]

91. I focus my argument on the income tax

because the article did. Blame them not me. The poster then basicly accused me of being an idiot for used a federal rate. Blame him not me. Finally, you still haven't explained how someone would have that money to spend. Again I am not going to hijack this thread. But I showed with very detailed figures that a person would have about $40 left for food, clothing, medicine, and all insuracne aside from auto to spend that money the way they claim. And no, I don't think a person can do that. I sure know that I haven't been able to. Heck just a gallon of milk every two weeks, a loaf of bread every week, a lb of ground beef every week, a dozen eggs every two, some soft drinks, snacks, and mac and cheese would eat through that. Hardly Robin Leach time.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ibegurpard]

35. I doubt that

n/t

[Clark Can WIN]

37. Don't be so quick

I do not like Dean at all ....... BUT....... I still believe that he would be better than what we have in there by FAR. Less people will die, if any of our Dem candidates are in the oval office.

I would hope that voters in hot states and swing states would hold together and vote for the Dem nominee no matter what. You can never tell though, can you?

I live in Nebraska. They don't call it Big Red for nothin'. But we have had Democratic Governors. Well respected and good ones like Bob Kerry. But you know what? Never, ever, in a million gazillion years will the state of Nebraska swing for Dean. The sun will burn out first. Fish will ride bicycles and snowflakes will do the can~can in hell. So if Dean gets the nom I will follow the state polls from all sources and if it looks like the 86% landslide I would expect I will write in my candidate as a protest.

[ibegurpard]

38. You are assuming other meanings to my post

I cannot say more than that.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

39. Maybe, uh, *second* party?

[TLM]

43. Sure you will...

so we all just better ditch Dean so we don't lose your vote.


We wouldn't want to lose that demographic.

[cryofan]

40. The rebuttals here are of such low quality....

This is really sad....what meanspirited, intellectually bankrupt and puerile rebuttals this thread has yielded.

In an effort to show you all how to be fairminded (or at least my interpretation of it), I am going to post a link from that same source (International Socialist Review, which is BTW an EXCELLENT SOURCE) which puts the screws to my chosen candidate, Kucinich:

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

[burning bush]

42. An "attack" on your own candidate

doesn't make your argument against Dean legitimate. And btw, Frustrated Lefty's rebuttal was very well posted.

It was not bankrupt in any way, puerile, nor meanspirited. Your saying so does not make it so...

[TLM]

44. Here's a thought.... maybe your socialist source...

HATES DEMOCRATS?


Several posts in this thread debunked that lame hit piece. One from someone who lives in Vermont.

[deutsey]

59. I'm no "revolutionary marxist"

but I do lean very much toward the form of socialism that is espoused by some Marxists and is reflected here:

"Real change in America has always come when masses of people take to the streets on their own initiative–the civil rights movement, the women’s liberation movement, the labor movement, the Vietnam antiwar movement. The problem so far is that these kinds of movements have never coalesced into a lasting political party that could offer an alternative to the twin parties of American capitalism. Rather than argue for a vote for someone who is sure to repay our support by cutting our living standards and promoting American power abroad, progressives and socialists would do better to argue for a break from the Democrats, focus on building the struggles that make all real progress possible–and create the political alternative that can embody them."

Contrary to the point of this article, however, this is one of the reasons I support Dean, or the approach his campaign is taking. Let me explain.

I think anyone on the left should know quite clearly that Dean is not a leftist. I am always surprised to hear people claim that we on the left who support Dean are being deceived. Two of our most popular liberal presidents, JFK and FDR, were not leftists either, as leftist historians like Howard Zinn point out (see People's History of the United State). You can also check out the World Socialist Web Site's analysis of the meaning of JFK's presidency and assassination: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/nov2003/jfk-n22_prn.shtml

Both FDR and JFK, as liberal as they were, still sought to preserve American capitalism. As WSWS points out:

"American liberalism, both politically and intellectually, was founded on a lie. It had survived the social tumult of the 1930s and 1940s by striking a Faustian bargain with political reaction. Anti-communism became the prevailing ideology of the US establishment, embraced by Democratic and Repubican politicians alike."

James Weinstein, long-time editor of the leftwing In These Times, says the same thing in his book The Long Detour: The History and Future of the American Left. In it he says that genuine socialism, the kind that inspires working people to form their own political alliances against the ruling classes like the kind that was developing in America in the late 19th century and early 20th, was derailed by the 1917 revolution in Russia. What the Soviets did was not real socialism, according to Weinstein, because it stifled this grassroots element of working people coming together to form their own power blocks. Instead, it took on Tsarist authoritarianism as its political framework and even adapted corporatist models of organizing production. http://www.thelongdetour.com/

However, whatever criticisms one can have of FDR and JFK, an argument can be made that they both still drew a lot of their political strength from the American socialist agenda of the early part of the century, the agenda that sought to make America a more fair and equitable place for workers and other groups traditionally excluded from the economic and political power structures of the United States. (Even Clinton, in '92, made this a part of his campaign, and held conferences with "real" American citizens as advisors that he said he'd continue to do as president...I believe he soon abandoned the idea not long after his inauguration). And both, especially JFK, helped to inspire a grassroots activism that probably would have baffled or unsettled JFK had he lived.

However, there has always been a very real tension between Democratic officialdom and the grassroots activists. If you know anything about the 1964 Democratic Convention, you probably know how the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party was a grassroots movement to replace Dixiecratic delegates at the convention with popularly elected civil rights delegates. The Democratic power structure, afraid of alienating white Southerners, supported Dixiecrats.

Even when liberal Democrats embrace grassroots activism, it usually creates a government program or structure that, very nobly and despite its flaws, tries to serve and protect the interests of workers, minorities, women, etc. This "victory" of activism, however, eliminates the need for grassroots activism because it is now the power structure has assumed control. William Raspberry, I recall, once wrote a column saying that the victories of the civil rights movement to transform American society and government ended up diminishing the need for grassroots activism, the very thing that had fueled the movement and its accomplishments, and created a dependence on government to do everything for us.

I think for too long the Democratic establishment has operated this way, and has displayed a kind of paternalistic "We know what's best for you" attitude toward the rank and file, and we, in our complacency, have gone along with it. Just make your contributions, show up at rallies and the polls, and, if you're really movitated, here, take these enevlopes and stuff them with campaign literature for us, will you? We'll select the candidates for you to vote for and tell you when to write letters in support of our projects.

Whether Dean truly understands what he's doing in terms of re-igniting grassroots involvment in politics, his campaign is planting the seeds that, I believe, can not only take back the White House, but set into a motion renewed people's movement with which to fight a renewed fight against the corporatists and oligarchs. Or, to put in the terms of the article you cite, Dean's campaign (probably without even realizing the magnitude of what he's unleashing, just as JFK, a cold warrior who dragged his feet on civil rights, helped to inspire a generation of anti-war and civil rights activism) is helping to ignite "real change in America" by motivating the "masses of people (to) take to the streets on their own initiative".

No other candidate that I see is doing that. Kucinich would probably like to do that, but, unfortunately, his campaign is not doing it as successfully as Dean is. In my heart of hearts, I agree with the WSWS in its conclusion that

"In the end, the many millions of people opposed to the Bush administration’s policies of militarism abroad and social reaction at home will find no real alternative in Dean or in any other Democratic candidate. Such an alternative is possible only through a break with the two-party system and the emergence of an independent, mass political party of the working class." http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/dec2003/dean-d20.shtml

Unfortunately, that is not going to happen between now and November 2004. Until we can rally together to create such an alternative, Dean has shown me that he is the only candidate planting the grassroots seeds that could bloom into the kind of real change in this country that I yearn for.

[stickdog]

94. You are WAY out there.

Aren't you?

[Octafish]

50. Isn't that the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party?

You know, help the rich by showing the poor the door?

[quaker bill]

53. No that would be taxing the rich

to fund schools for the poor. Like Dean actually did, rather than the lies and bovine excrement posted above.

[Octafish]

64. Dean acts Republican in a lot of ways.

For instance, he de-funded the Vermont public defender's office. He built more prisons. And he supported suspending stuff like the Bill of Rights in the days after 9-11.

Other than that, he acts like a Republican.

[Rose Siding]

71. No, he didn't

support "suspending the Bill of Rights". That is flat out false. He said we'd be re-evaluating them and there would be a debate. He was right- that's what happened.

He built A prison because VT was having to ship prisoners out of state and existing prisons were deteriorating.

Which repub signed civil unions and provided health care? Which one has fought consistently against the bush doctrine? Which one has invested in early childhood programs that cut child abuse in half?

Or was he acting like a repub when he balanced the budget like that *repub* Clinton!

[Octafish]

90. That's nice. Dean is very conservative...when it comes to Justice.

Sorry to burst the bubble of those who believe Dean supports Liberal ideals — like equal justice under the law. In fact, it seems at one time Dean didn't think the poor even deserved access to legal representation. From the Rutland (Vermont) Herald:

For the Defense

Dean chose not to reappoint (Robert) Appel for a third four-year term as defender general, the state official who heads the state’s public defender program. In appointing Valerio, of Proctor, the new defender general, Dean had kind words for Appel. But Appel had clashed with Dean on numerous occasions in his efforts to secure for his office the resources necessary to fulfill his duties conscientiously.

Just two years ago Dean tried to prevent Appel from accepting a $150,000 federal grant aimed at assisting defendants with mental disabilities. For Dean to block a government agency from receiving federal money was unusual in itself. But Dean’s openly expressed bias against criminal defendants provided a partial explanation.

Dean has made no secret of his belief that the justice system gives all the breaks to defendants. Consequently, during the 1990s, state’s attorneys, police, and corrections all received budget increases vastly exceeding increases enjoyed by the defender general’s office. That meant the state’s attorneys were able to round up ever increasing numbers of criminal defendants, but the public defenders were not given comparable resources to respond.

The problem with giving a disproportionate share of state resources to prosecution and enforcement is that it throws the justice system out of kilter. A just result occurs in court only when the prosecution and defense both are ably represented. Thus, Appel felt compelled two years ago to notify the court that the Rutland public defender’s office would take no new cases unless the defendant was in jail. The Rutland office was so short of staff that case backlogs threatened to overwhelm the public defenders.

CONTINUED...

http://rutlandherald.com/Archive/Articles/Article/31792

Here's a resource-filled thread of Olde:

Dean Underfunded Public Defender's Office (prior to 9-11)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=23188

[quaker bill]

52. The "facts" you cite have already been debunked

So I will not attempt to go farther in this regard.

However, the fact that the International Socialist Review is not a fan of Dean policies suits me just fine. I would have concerns about any candidate that they hold in high regard.

Perhaps you could find a more honest and mainstream point of view to cite in the future.

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mzmolly]

69. Read the thread for starters.

:smoke:

[arewethereyet]

62. the more you learn the less you can bear to hear

the guy is a train wreck, pure and simple.

[Nazgul35]

66. did you even read post #1

or did you trip over yourself with the need to post this insightful thread?

Perhaps people should spend less time looking for data that supports their own biases and more time working to get their person the nomination.....

Hey, that's an idea....work for the campaign....but wait, that would mean I actually will have to get off my ass and do something!! Screw that! I wanna watch the survivor reruns and than the football game comes on later...and oh, yeah, forgot the Sorprano's rerun tonight....love that little Paulie!!!! Than tomorrow, we have monday night football....but if the teams suck, i'm sure I can spend a few hours searching through the channels looking for something to watch....

[arewethereyet]

73. perhaps you can fill me in on the sopranos

too busy working for Edwards

and HBO is a little beyond my means

[cryofan]

68. here is my method for determining who is a good candidate

If the media is falling all over him/her, and writing all sorts of articles about him/her, then I shun him/her, and stay far far away.

The corporate-owned media represents people whose interests are
directly opposed to my own. They are not about to give much publicity to candidates who would act in my own best interests.

[dsc]

70. I take it that I am never going to get an answer

to my answer to your uninformed and snarky post. Mind you I am not shocked but for the record, is an answer forthcoming.

[spychoactive]

72. what if DK becomes the candate they suddenly start 'falling over'???

what then???

while i recognize the media bias, i think yoiu are giving them too much 'control' when you approach things in terms of what they do...

now i am not flaming you, just stating my position...i am tiptoeing because the crap was flying around pretty hard last night in here...i am pre-coffee and haven't tested the waters today...

;)

kucinich rocks
spike

[cryofan]

74. just because they ignore a candidate does not make him/her a good one

Being ignored is not the only criterion. If they start publicizing Kucinich like they did Dean, without him winning a SINGLE PRIMARY, then I would probably dump him. But if he comes out of the blue, from absolute obscurity (from where he is now, IOW), and wins or comes close to winning some polls, then of course he would DESERVE media publicity, and that kind of publicity is fine. But to my eyes, Dean is a republicrat insider and the media is pumping him up before he has won anything, because that is part of what the advertisers want them to do. The media has manufactured the Dean candidacy. He is the Chosen One, chosen by the elites.

I am not emotionally invested in kucinich, despite being a volunteer. I do think he is the best one out there, but I differ with him in many many ways.....

If I thought a Green or socialist party candidate could win--or even get on the ballot everywhere and had a chance to come close--I would vote for them instead of Kucinich, even if Kucinich got the nomination.

[Mairead]

77. "I do think he is the best one out there"

That's my position as well: he's the best one on offer--miles in front--but very far from perfect.

The supporters of other candidates who behave like religious acolytes furious with unbelievers leave me shaking my head in revulsion. Support for a candidate should be based on dispassionate evaluation, not raging hormones.

[Scott Lee]

76. Lousy method. That means you let the media play you.

I heartily encourage another criteria by which you try your potential leaders. You have just opened yourself up to being played by a GOP pokerface and it's media allies.

[stickdog]

95. Wow! That's great!

Losing is fun!

[cryofan]

79. kick

[mzmolly]

80. "Read 'em and weep"

nice non-inflamatory respectful way to state your case. :toast:

[mzmolly]

81. Well well well, look what I found here.

"Read 'em and weep" :hi:

I dont like to trash the candidates, but I do believe in considering the source and responding when my candidate is trashed.

(snip)

The Dennis Kucinich phenomenon~Candidate of the left?

Regarding Israel and Palestine, Kucinich argues against violence on both sides. He gained some Arab support inside the U.S. for declining to vote in favor of a bill proclaiming solidarity with Israel and for his support of a two-state solution. Yet Kucinich’s criticism’s of Israel are hardly radical. As he told Tikkun magazine, "I support the existence of the democratic state of Israel, for what it represents as a beacon of hope and as a bastion of democracy. I also support the creation of a Palestinian state."2 While his position is to the left of many other Democrats, Kucinich doesn’t deal with the fact that there is no way to achieve peace without complete justice for Palestine–which means withdrawing support for the state of Israel. A state founded on the expulsion of another people, in which the military occupies their land and the state excludes from equal status Palestinians living inside Israel, cannot be defined as a "bastion of democracy."

Kucinich has been a long-time opponent of abortion rights for women. His voting record on abortion has earned him a 95 percent score with the National Right to Life Committee. As Katha Pollitt points out,

In his two terms in Congress, he has quietly amassed an anti-choice voting record of Henry Hyde-like proportions. He supported Bush’s reinstatement of the gag rule for recipients of U.S. family planning funds abroad. He supported the Child Custody Protection Act, which prohibits anyone but a parent from taking a teenage girl across state lines for an abortion. He voted for the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which makes it a crime, distinct from assault on a pregnant woman, to cause the injury or death of a fetus. He voted against funding research on RU-486. He voted for a ban on dilation and extraction (so-called partial-birth) abortions without a maternal health exception. He even voted against contraception coverage in health insurance plans for federal workers–a huge work force of some 2.6 million people (and yes, for many of them, Viagra is covered)…. He voted specifically against allowing Washington, D.C. to fund abortions for poor women with nonfederal dollars and against permitting female soldiers and military dependents to have an abortion in overseas military facilities even if they paid for it themselves. Similarly, although Kucinich told me he was not in favor of "criminalizing" abortion, he voted for a partial-birth-abortion ban that included fines and up to two years in jail for doctors who performed them, except to save the woman’s life.3

Kucinich also supported banning funds for female prisoners seeking abortions.4

After a long "personal journey," which conveniently coincided with his run for president, Kucinich now claims that he opposes abortion but supports a woman’s right to choose. In an effort to show how much he means it, and to outflank his opponents–Dean has always been pro-choice, while Kerry and Edwards also took the personal journey to arrive at their pro-choice position–Kucinich boasts that he is the only candidate to support choice as a "litmus test" for Supreme Court nominees. Kucinich also acknowledges that his thinking will continue to "evolve" on the issue, which suggests that he could change his mind again at any time.

Kucinich also changed his mind on the issue of gay marriage. Whereas in his 1996 congressional campaign he opposed changing the law to allow for gay marriage, he currently supports gay civil unions.5 When asked about the turn-around, he simply replies that the issue wasn’t important in the 1996 race.

Kucinich’s record is also less than consistent regarding racism and criminal justice. While Kucinich was reprimanded for being one of the many Democrats to skip the NAACP convention this year, he is campaigning on support for affirmative action (including quotas for university admissions), opposition to the death penalty and to key elements of the racist criminal justice system.

Yet in 1997—98, he voted in favor of a juvenile justice bill (HR 3) that would allow children as young as 13 to be tried in adult courts and sent to jail in adult prisons.6 He also introduced an amendment to another juvenile justice bill in 1999 (he ultimately voted against the bill, which passed) that called for expanding record keeping and broad dissemination of information about juvenile offenders. The amendment–which was strongly opposed by the ACLU and other human rights and civil liberty groups but supported by the Fraternal Order of Police–instituted statewide computer systems for compiling and sharing youth offenders’ records. The new system helped spread youth offenders’ records to federal and state officials including the FBI, the National Crime Information Center, courts, police and schools around the country–including schools to which offenders sought admission.

Read on here...and remember, always consider the source :spank:

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

[dsc]

83. Good find

but to be fair, they have atleast a couple of errors. Kucinich was doing his job when he didn't attend that forum and I don't think Kerry was ever pro life.

[mzmolly]

84. Like I say, consider the source...

;) I found that 'ditty' on the site the OP referenced. Also the article discusses DK's pro-life record. There is no doubt that Dennis was pro-life/anti-choice depending.

Hated to 'go there' but...??

[Bucky]

85. I "always consider the source", thank youl Here's what your source says

:hi:

Your source says: "Kucinich doesn’t deal with the fact that there is no way to achieve peace without complete justice for Palestine–which means withdrawing support for the state of Israel"

Then they criticize Kucinich for a bill that they admit he voted against. Huh? Who are these people at the IS Review? Ah, they're International Socialists! That's newspeak for Communists. No wonder they don't like Dennis. He's a moderate compared to them. And we all know that gradual change is a direct threat to revolution.

[mzmolly]

87. My source, it's the OP's source...

let's clarify mmmk? The point of my post was that the OP should consider his/her sources more carefully.

[WillyT]

86. Y-A-W-N ...

:hurts:

[Moderator]

96. Locking

Please continue the discussion here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=16930


DU Moderator