A Vermont case in point:

The late Dick Snelling used to tell the story of the media consultant he hired for his first run for Governor. The guy was Bob Goodman, who helped get Spiro Agnew elected Governor of Maryland with the sprightly jingle “My kind of guy/Ted Agnew is/my kind of guy….” (I think Goodman literally had been a soap salesman.) Well, Snelling recounted how he fired Goodman after about a month and claimed, “He gave me only one good idea and that was to blow-dry my hair.”

So, you might say Snelling was less than enamored, and Goodman went packing back to Baltimore and Mt. Olympus, which actually is a great Greek deli located in the wonderful Lexington Market.

This is me (Julie Waters): http://juliewaters.com/

Please proofread your articles as to report my name accurately.

Thanks,

Julie Waters, who was not in any of the Harry Potter movies.

This could effectively put us OUT of the loop of national and federal election campaign money and politicize less Vermont politics. I haven’t really come to grips as to how we’d elect a parliament, but send Senators and Representatives to Washington. Regardless, the concept is an interesting one.

To the first section of your musing today, I was surprised to see you pick up on what happened in Newport. (For the record, Vermont should be English-French at the state level and in education.) I don’t know if it’s just what I and other have managed to experience out of sheer luck, or if it’s a growing trend, but Vermonters of French-Canadian origin aren’t looked too highly upon. Seeing it with my own eyes and hearing the stories my late Perepere told me, it seems that we’re about to cross into the same kind of Vermont that existed back in the early 1900s. That’s not only worrisome, but almost terrifying to the French people of this state.

While procedural reforms often result in less progress than they promise, I agree that, at least in Vermont, we might be able to become a laboratory for a different kind of democracy. (By the way, I also tend to view the so-called secessionist movement as little more than an adolescent tantrum.) In my mind, a parliamentary system has the potential for some ideological/policy discipline that can lead to demonstrable accountability within the caucus and at the polls. Yet, if we get splintered into too many parties, we might end up with coalitions with short shelf lives and a steady stream of new governments. (Viva, Italia!)

We nevertheless should begin a discussion, and it would be fascinating to see how Vermonters might handle a constitutional convention, which would be necessary to move toward a parliamentary system.

Somehow, though, I cannot envision these kinds of changes taking place. The inertia of our body politic is so powerful. Here are some examples that dampen my optimism:

– Years ago, Neal Peirce, when he was with National Journal, wrote a piece speculating that fifty states were too many for America; instead, he recommended a new configuration of states comparable to the locations of the Federal Reserve districts, which number twelve. A look at a map of the present districts illustrates some geographic logic (http://www.federalreserve.gov/otherfrb.htm). It was an interesting idea to consider, but consider this as well: If some states fight so hard to keep the Confederate flag, what would they do in the face of dissolution?;

– John McClaughry and Frank Bryan had a provocative idea in their book, The Vermont Papers, which advocated the devolution of state control to the authority of a number of shires throughout Vermont. While I don’t agree with the extreme decentralization they seemed to embrace, can we imagine intra-state administrative units that might be fewer in number than our existing counties but also might have more delegated responsibility than our counties have now? Still, the fight of school district consolidation does not fill me with optimism; and

– Then again, there is always Essex Town, where I am a selectboard member, and the Village of Essex Junction, a municipality within a municipality. (Good people!) The long-time squabbles over whether to merge are legendary, and we remain stymied by a failure to transcend old ways of thinking that inhibit our ability to optimize our governmental systems and economize municipal services.

Don’t give up, Jon. A few years ago, there was a debate in the State House about whether Vermont should secede. Maybe now is the time to hold a debate down there about your idea or perhaps even a mock Vermont Constitutional Convention. Why the heck not? It would be one hulluva study in the capacity of modern human beings to grapple with fundamental decisions about how they organize as communities in the face of serious contemporary and seemingly intractable problems.

1. How prevalent is corruption in both business and government? Do I have to bribe people to do business in this location? (Vermont: No. Chicago: More so. New Jersey: Even more. Baku: Yes.) [Corruption is a tax with no benefit.]
2. Does the state have an efficient and cost-effective legal and judicial system? [Vermont: Yes. Chicago: Less so. New Jersey: Even less. Baku: No.]
3. What is the level of social capital (a measure of trust in society)? Is there a climate of trust or distrust and suspicion?
4. What is the quality of life generally?
5. What is the level of education in the population generally? [Vermont has the second highest high school graduation rate in the country.]
6. What educational infrastructure is available (public schools, colleges and universities, available continuing education resources) [Vermont has 26 colleges and universities located throughout the state, including a medial school and a law school.]
7. What is the work ethic in general?
8. Do business organizations exist that support and encourage the development of socially responsible businesses and otherwise assist business leaders in growing healthy enterprises? [VBSR is the oldest and largest regional organization of socially responsible businesses in the country]
9. Are government officials (elected and professional) accessible? [Not only can you speak directly to Governor Douglas; but it is likely he will know your name.]
10. What is the transportation and communication infrastructure like?

With respect to regulations and taxes, the appropriate inquiry is what we receive in exchange, that is, whether the benefits exceed the costs. As Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, “Taxes are the price we pay for civilization.” How much civilization do we get in Vermont for what we pay and how valuable is it for business?

It is no accident that “made in Vermont” enhances the value of Vermont businesses. Many regulations help protect the Vermont brand, making our products more competitive throughout the world. Other regulations help make the state a great place to live and a destination for tourists, who contribute significantly to our economic prosperity. For example, Act 250 may be a pain at times, but it has helped preserve an environment all of us enjoy. Act 60 is not perfect, but it has brought us closer to the equality of educational opportunity required by our Constitution and by simple decency. In Vermont, we experienced a less severe unemployment crunch from the recent recession than most of the rest of the country and are recovering faster. I suspect that our good governance and business climate helped make that possible.

Similarly, the issue with taxes is not how high or low they are, but rather what we receive in exchange. Are we getting the best bang for the buck? For example, Sweden, which like Vermont has a thriving business culture, has a total tax cost far in excess of anything we have in Vermont or the United States. But the people of Sweden enjoy one of the highest standards of living anywhere in the world. Taxes alone do not make that possible, but taxes enable the people to purchase education, transportation, health care, safety, and other common goods that make working and living there quite enjoyable. They have made a choice, in effect, to pool resources through taxes to assure a higher quality of life for all.

Like Mr. Margolis, I hope we can develop a more differentiated understanding of what makes a state attractive to business–or not. Although we have room for improvement (we need universal broad band access, for example), on the criteria that count, our State is one of the best places to do business in the country.

Mike Palmer
EthicsByDesign.com
Cornwall

The migration from rural to urban areas has tilted the balance of power that once existed. The Urban areas of Douglas, Sarpy and Lancaster Counties combined have enough votes in the Legislature to insure that urban issues almost always win out over those of the rural areas in the rest of the state. All issues are framed in a way that creates an urban rural split. As a result Nebraska has the dubious distinction of having some of the poorest rural areas in the nation outside of the very worst areas of the Southern U.S.

In the past there were members of the Legislature that had developed areas of expertise. They knew how various departments of the state government operated, and more importantly, they had developed relationships with people in those departments that they could depend on for good information on legislation. The voters of Nebraska struck a fatal blow to that critical part of the process by passing term limits. Two four-year terms is not enough time to develope the expertise and relationships that aided in making wise decisions. In a State with two houses term limits might be viable. At least there would be some retained institutional memory with representatives moving from one house to the other. With term limits, the balance of power has shifted to lobbyists and department heads appointed by the governor. Our first term ligislators don’t know what’s going on, and our second term legislators don’t give a damn. With no prospect of moving on or up in government the second termers are inclined to bend to the will of lobbyists in the hopes of finding a position when they leave office. It’s no accident that special sessions of the legislature have become a regular thing. With no institutional memory retained by long term representatives the consequences of bad legislation are rarely anticipated.

It may not cost as much in dollars and cents to operate a one house legislature, but the end results may not be worth the imagined savings.

I really, really, would like to see our state look seriously at the debilitating effects of a two party system with limited third party representation.