Activism Across America

The establishment Democrats in Vermont are playing the role of Republicans, trying to scare Vermont voters about higher property taxes.

In the following campaign video, independent candidate for Governor Anthony Pollina asks the question that the establishment Vermont Democrats don’t want asked: If you had to choose between cutting your property taxes in half and cutting your health insurance premiums in half, which would you choose?

If you’re like most people, cutting your health insurance premiums in half would save you more money. Thanks for seeing through the tax-scare charade, Mr. Pollina.

I’m of two minds when it comes to the Vermont Progressive Party. On the one hand, it’s nice to see a state where there is a genuinely progressive-minded political party that’s not mired in the mess that has become the Green Party. I like the Green Party in theory. In practice, the Green Party has been a lesson in lost energy and a vision of defeat-as-success.

On the other hand, I see the language embraced by the Vermont Progressive Party as it prepares for the 2008 race for Governor. Vermont Public Radio reports the unanimity with which the Progressive Party and Democratic Party of Vermont have agreed that there must only be one candidate facing the Republican candidate.

Practically, I understand the strategy. With a split vote between a Democrat and a Progressive candidate, the Republican could win without a real majority of votes. Functionally, however, how much of an independent political party can the Vermont Progressive Party be when it agrees that it has no choice but to coordinate with the Democratic Party of Vermont and avoid giving voters the choice between a Democratic candidate and a Progressive candidate.

Is the Progressive Party anything but an arm of the Vermont Democrats in a circumstance such as this? Can the Vermont Progressive Party be a model for the rest of America if it has been co-opted by the very Democratic Party with which so many American progressives are profoundly discontented?

As we think ahead to the presidential election of 2008, it does us well to think back to one of the low points of the 2004 presidential election. The Club For Growth paid a couple of actors to pretend that they were authentic, upset voters telling latte-sipping, Volvo-driving, New-York-Times-reading, Howard Dean to go back to Vermont, where he belongs. The advertisement was supposed to demonstrate just how out-of-touch with America Howard Dean was. The Club For Growth’s alternative, who was supposed to be in touch with the pulse of America: George W. Bush.

That’s really how the right wing sees things, though. As the right wing sees it, the big problems aren’t whether you break the law, trash the Constitution and lead America into unnecessary wars. The big problems with America, they say, are that too many people drink latte and read the New York Times.

Of course, that advertisement wasn’t just an insult to Howard Dean. It was an insult to Vermont. The idea was that Vermont was full of wacko liberal ideas that were too weird for the rest of America.

What are those weird ideas that people have in Vermont, anyway? Cleanliness is one. The people of Vermont believe in keeping their state and their country clean. When it comes down to it, that’s what environmentalism is really all about: Picking up after yourself.

The clean politics of Vermont are revealed quite well in the record of the state’s congressional delegation, as analyzed in the National Environmental Scorecard put together every year by the League of Conservation Voters. In the most recent National Environmental Scorecard put together by the LCV, red state delegations, from those states that voted to re-elect George W. Bush in 2004, earn an average score that’s between 20 and 30 percent. Vermont, however, is the only state in the Union to earn a 100 percent rating for the politicians it sends to both the House and the Senate.

Vermont liberals are focused on keeping America clean and in the clear, far and away outperforming states that voted Republican in 2004. That’s a good reason to, the next time you see a latte-sipping liberal from Vermont, pull up a chair and listen for a bit. You just might get some good words of advice.

(Source: League of Conservation Voters, National Environmental Scorecard, 2006)