Barack Star!

** Cross-posted at Mulish Behavior **

I've been remiss in not posting sooner on Sen. Barack Obama's tidal wave/tsunami/earthquake (choose your metaphor) in South Carolina. This was a victory he desperately needed - most important it showed he can take a punch (Bill's, not Hill's), absorb it, counterpunch, and win. Nice.

Obama's star is on the rise after a huge victory in South Carolina and being handed the key to Camelot by the Kennedys.

Not only did he take apart the Clinton machine in South Carolina (a stunning 55%-27% victory), but he laid claim to the Democratic establishment's mantle of leadership. The real Democrats. Remember how Bill and Hillary were the "New Democrats" (you know, the ones who "ended welfare as we knew it" and declared "the era of big government is over"?). Well, the "Old Democrats are back. And, they're back with a vengeance. Sen. Ted Kennedy (along with Caroline and Rep. Patrick Kennedy) gave perhaps the best (and most damning, as far as the Clinton's are concerned) endorsement speech of the year so far. At least that's certainly what David Brooks thought.

Obama is reaching out to Americans... and has them believing again.

Can he restore our faith in government? Kennedy's speech was good. Obama's was better. This guy is good. I'm starting to believe. See for yourself:

Letter to the Editor: Brad Denny

Great letter to the editor in yesterday's Times Argus by Brad Denny. As the primaries and town meeting day (and later on, the general election) get closer, I encourage you to do as Mr. Denny has done and take pen to paper, or keyboard to email box and send your own letter on Democratic issues or themes.

CC
*********************

George Bush asks for perseverance from the American people. The president himself is the best evidence for our capacity to "persevere."

We have persevered through seven years of inept, misguided, dishonest and destructive policies promoted by an administration which he leads.

We have persevered through one high-sounding moralistic pronouncement after another designed to cover up the reality of policies that have had no higher purpose than securing more wealth and power for the already wealthy and the already powerful.

We have persevered through the loss of 4,000 American lives, 150,000 Iraqi lives, 10 times that number of shattering injuries, hundreds of billions of dollars in wasted war expenses and a crippling loss in American prestige and good will around the world, all in a war that has accomplished nothing and should never have been fought.

If we can persevere through seven years of George Bush as president, we can persevere through anything.

Brad Denny

Rep. Maxine Grad: Legislative Update

It has been a busy few weeks in my committee. The following is a summary of the bills we are currently working on.

H.617 Guardianship. This bill is a product of a study commission’s rewrite of our current law. The bill recognizes that people who are under guardianship, which is a court ordered relationship, are some of the most vulnerable Vermonters. It also recognizes that if a person is under guardianship, it does not mean that the individual should lose all of his or her rights. Instead, the guardian’s goal is to help the person under guardianship to maximize his or her potential and function as best as he or she can. Generally, there is consensus on this bill from the mental health advocates, legal community and administration.

The one area of disagreement is the ability of the guardian to consent to the administration of involuntary medication.

We took testimony from Judge Mary Teachout for the need for the legislature to clarify the authority of the probate and mental health courts in involuntary medication cases where the patient refuses medication but the guardian consents. This issue arose out of recent cases where Judge Teachout’s ruling had the effect that involuntary medication decision should be made by probate courts instead of the family court. The state mental health agency disagreed. According to mental health law, these cases are decided in family court. The probate courts generally do not have a role in these proceedings. There are no due process standards in probate court for making these decisions. Further, Probate court tends to defer to the wishes of the family that isn’t always consistent with patient’s.

This issue is of great concern to the mental health community. The Vermont Supreme Court recently held that involuntary medication is an even greater intrusion on a patient’s autonomy than involuntary commitment to the state hospital. We will continue to consider which court is the most appropriate.

H.203 Surviving Spouse’s Rights When There is Not a Will. Most people assume that if a person dies without a will, the surviving spouse gets everything. Currently, unless there are no kindred—i.e. cousins, kids, etc. the surviving spouse is not entitled to the whole estate, but one third. We need to recognize that seeing a lawyer for a will can be very expensive. When people do wills on their own, the wills are often not executed properly and are therefore invalid. We will continue looking at how to remedy this.

H.180 Qualifications for the Attorney General, States Attorneys, Assistant Attorney Generals and Deputy State Attorneys. Currently the attorney general does not need to be a lawyer. This bill would require it. It would also require that the other listed positions be attorneys who are licensed in Vermont. According to the Executive Director of the State’s Attorneys, “We would be crippled if we had nonlawyer state’s attorneys” given our case law. The Attorney General testified that he takes no position on whether his position should be an attorney. He said he has so many layers in his office; it would not present a problem if we continued with current law.

H.615 Juvenile Proceedings for children In Need of Supervision and Care Due to Abuse or Neglect and Delinquent Children. This is a rewrite of our juvenile laws that I have discussed in my articles before. We continue to spend each Tuesday and Thursday learning about the contents in the bill with the testimony of Administrative Judge Amy Davenport and representatives from the department for children and families and the juvenile defenders office. All of them served on the committee that proposed the bill. Here are some of the things we reviewed this week:

1. Bill changes the name of the emergency hearing where a child is taken into state custody from detention hearing to care hearing. This is a national trend that recognizes that detention is more like prison and the criminal system, which this isn’t. We noted that schools are still using the term detention for violations such as not having homework done.

2. Changed the manner a child is taken into custody—used to be always to court, but is this the best thing for a baby or small child? Is there a better place to take an infant or young child than the courthouse? The goal is to minimize trauma to child.

3. A hearing must occur within 72 hours of issuing an emergency a care order. Attorneys are appointed for the child and parents. Judge Davenport discussed the challenges of our rural areas and lack of cell reception's impact on the ability to obtain counsel ASAP.

We will continue our work on this very important issue.

We are also working on a bill that looks at when there has been embezzlement or crime committed by a municipal official or sheriff. In the next few weeks, we will take up bullying in schools and cyber bullying.

Thank you to Brenda Cruickshank for coming to the State House in her capacity as Legislative Liaison for the VFW. Ms. Cruickshank has been a mentor and advisor to me on veteran affairs.

Congratulations to the Moretown Town Hall committee for a great event on Saturday. The Town Hall is a jewel of the community. Thank you to the town and committee for its leadership in helping to p reserve this vital resource.

Please stay in touch. maxjg@wcvt.com. 496-4244 (home) or 828-2228 (State House). It is an honor to represent you.

Galbraith Dips A Toe Into Gubernatorial Waters...

Anthony Pollina's day just got a little worse... and Jim Douglas probably thinks he's got it made (although that false sense of security may be his undoing) as Peter Galbraith takes another step towards running for Governor.

Today Galbraith sent out an email touting his "Vermont Leadership Fund" which will support candidates at all levels, but presumably serves as the official "dipping of the toe" into gubernatorial waters. "Interesting," as Peter Freyne would say. You can check out the message and contribute at: http://www.vermontleadershipfund.org/.

Maybe this guy CAN give Douglas a run for his money. At least he's got the guts not to be scared off by Douglas and/or Pollina (yet). The conventional wisdom that Douglas cruises in a 3-way race. But the conventional wisdom is wrong: Douglas has it much easier in a head-to-head race against Pollina.

Here's why:

For starters, there are a large percentage of old-guard Democrats who simply WILL NOT vote for a Progressive, regardless of how much courting goes on, and regardless of whether the Democratic leadership could convince someone from running to give him a free pass (which won't happen). In that case, Douglas either picks up those folks ("Douglas Democrats"?), or they take a pass on voting in that race. So, Douglas stands to win with anywhere from 55%-45% (best case for Pollina), or perhaps in a landslide somewhere around 65% or 70% to Pollina's 35% or 30%) (more likely).

Second, in a 3-way race, the Democrats will vote, and turnout will be high in a hotly contested presidential election year. So, it does provide the opening to keep Douglas with a plurality of the vote - either throwing it to the legislature and allowing the 3rd place candidate to make a public appeal to throw their votes to the 2nd place candidate), or at a minimum hampering him by denying him a mandate.

Lastly, might I suggest that if the Dems put forth aggressive energy and health plans this session and Douglas vetoes them, or if the economy continues to worsen, OR, any number of other X-factors come into play (suppose Galbraith outraises Douglas using his national/international connections - who knows?!), then perhaps, just perhaps, the Democrat finishes first. Not entirely outside the realm of possibility if all the stars align.

A Tiny Constituent's First Visit to the Statehouse

Yesterday was my son's four-month check-up at the pediatrician. After braving the elements and a round of immunizations, we trekked up to the Statehouse for his first visit to our fine capitol. There, we checked in with some of the movers and shakers, including our own Rep. Maxine Grad. Based on the hustle and bustle in the building, we could already see there will be plenty of action this session.

My son, William White Curtis ("Will") is David W. Curtis' grandson. Since his grandfather was a former state representative, State Party Chairman and longstanding member of the Vermont Democratic Party, it was only fitting that Will become acquainted with the building. He was made to feel right at home.

Here's little Will with Rep. Bill Lippert (D-Hinesburg), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee - the same committee our own Maxine Grad sits on (see her report below):

And, with Rep. Jason Lorber (D-Burlington):

He's a little shy, and he didn't say much during our visit, but this little Northfield resident later told me that he's hoping that Vermont Democrats will make sure there is a strong economy, health care for all, and a reliable energy plan for the future!

I'm certain that if we work together we can accomplish those goals to secure his, and every Vermonter's, future.

Rep. Maxine Grad's Legislative Update

My committee, House Judiciary started in full swing this week. The following is a summary of issues we began to consider.

Boating While Under the Influence: The Vermont Supreme court recently issued a decision that calls into question charging and sentencing within our BUI laws. The court stated that when there is one incident of BUI and multiple deaths, a person could only be charged with one count of boating while intoxicated with death resulting even though there is more than one death. The court called on the Legislature to clarify the law.

The Supreme Court’s decision was in a case that involved the tragic death of two children while watching fireworks at Basin Harbor on the 4th of July. The court’s result, according to the prosecutor and the family of one of the children who died, sent a message that their child’s death didn’t count. During testimony, the example came up that if a drunk driver hit a school bus and 20 children died, there should be the ability to charge the defendant for each death.

There also isn’t any law regarding BUI with serious bodily injury resulting as we do in DUI law. We also discussed the need to distinguish in our law penalties for serious bodily injury and death.

Further, there is law prohibiting driving while intoxicated while operating a commercial vehicle or school bus, but nothing for commercial drivers of boats. The committee is considering changing that.

Additionally, the question of snowmobiles arose. Current law brings snowmobiles into the DUI laws. We heard testimony that boats and autos present the same risk and should be consistent, as they present similar threats to public safety.

Judiciary Budget

We heard testimony from the court administrator that the judiciary is 2 million dollars in the red. As an attempt to remedy this, certain important positions like judges, family court staff and educational and outreach staff positions are not being filled. The committee is very concerned that if our judiciary isn’t properly funded it seriously undermines our citizen’s access to justice and the courts, a foundation of our constitutional system.

Police Line Ups, Photo Identifications, Custodial Interrogations of Suspects and Preservation of Evidence in Criminal Cases Study Committee Report:

The committee is comprised of members from the law enforcement, victims, legal and defense community. The need for the report came out of my committee’s work on the Innocence Protection Act.

1. Eyewitness Identification of Suspects: While listening to this testimony, I realized I watch too much Law and Order! In Vermont, law enforcement rarely uses line-ups. We simply do not have the population base to find enough people that look like the suspect to eliminate any possibility of suggestiveness.

Photo line-ups aren’t used very often either. The committee did however recommend that there should be policy regarding the use of a neutral law enforcement officer, one not involved with the case to show the victim or witness the photos. Body language and unconscious messages are very common and could prejudice the integrity of the procedure and lead to suppression of evidence and dismissal of the case.

The committee is concerned that as Vermont becomes more diverse, cross-racial misidentifications will become an issue.

2. Custodial Interrogations: currently there isn’t law on mandatory videotaping of when a suspect is in police custody and is being interrogated. The best practice is to at a minimum audio record the interview, but also videotape. The committee stated that videotaping should be used whenever possible, is part of the best practice, but should not be mandated. However, if the technology fails, which it often does, failure to have the taped interrogation could lead to problems in court with suppression of evidence. The committee requested that adoption of best practices through some sort of policy, not legislation.

3. Best Law Enforcement Practices for Preservation of Evidence. Currently, there is not statewide policy on preservation of evidence. The proper preservation of evidence can make or break a criminal case. The committee recommended that the procedures taught at the police academy should be recognized as best practices. The committee also said that ideally, there should be one, new statewide evidence repository, with climate control, specialized support, and for budgetary reasons, be housed in an existing facility.

My committee will continue to look at all of this. We have a series of options from having shed light on the issue through the report and this week’s testimony, to enacting legislation, recommending policies, and working with the Judiciary and or the executive branch to adopt a rule or policy. Other states have done it many different ways. I would like to have a dialogue with the members of the judicial and executive branch on ways to address these issues as a starting point.

I, as vice chair of the judiciary committee feel very strongly that the role of my committee is to help support the integrity of our criminal justice system by ensuring our courts, law enforcement, prosecutors, defense, and victims all have the support they need to properly charge, investigate, litigate and decide cases. The healthy functioning of our criminal justice system goes to the core of a healthy democratic society, and therefore significantly impacts the health of Vermonters and our communities.


KUDOS:

Congratulations to the Roxbury Free Public Library for its receipt of a cultural facilities grant for the construction of a bathroom and ramp.

Congratulations to James Donahue of Northfield for his selection as a Legislative Page. James started the session with us in the first group as pages.

Please stay in touch: maxjg@wcvt.com, 828-2228 (State House), 496-4244 (home). Thank you for giving me the opportunity to serve you. It is a privilege and honor, Representative Maxine Grad

Hillary Wins in New Hampshire... What Now?!

The election returns from New Hampshire are in, and Hillary Clinton has pulled off a remarkable comeback win. She has narrowly bested Barack Obama, 39% to 36%. Edwards is a distant third with about 17% of the vote. While this likely dooms Edwards (and certainly Richardson will be dropping out soon, despite his claims that he can compete in Nevada), what does this mean for the race generally?

One thing it might mean is that the reports of Hillary Clinton's demise are premature. The Clinton's are well loved by rank and file Democrats. What is so surprising is that she is doing so well in a place rife with Independents, like New Hampshire. Time will tell how the voters broke. One theory is that Edwards' folks decided he just wasn't viable and ended up breaking for Clinton... they are blue-collar rank and file Democrats more likely to support her than the cerebral Obama. Another theory is that women ended up breaking heavily for Clinton after her performance in the debates and the "Diner Sob." Finally, Obama's youth brigades may have told pollsters they were for him, but then ended up not turning out (that's what you get for inspiring frat-boys, Barack).

But seriously, the other thing it might mean is that rather than coasting, Obama may, in fact get the proper vetting and scrutiny that his campaign will need if it is to survive a general election campaign - particularly if McCain emerges as a consensus candidate (the only one who might be able to pull out a win against the Democrats in 2008). I think Obama (or Clinton, for that matter) would make a fine nominee. However, his campaign to date has largely centered on platitudes and variations on the "change" theme. That won't hold up for the next 11 months. We're going to need more... "beef" as Walter Mondale so eloquently put it to Gary Hart back in '84.

Slate ran a post on this topic that is worth checking out. It's clearly a huge victory for Clinton if she pulls it out, but it isn't a death knell for Obama, just a reality check. Getting the nomination against the caliber of opponent he is facing shouldn't be easy.

Apparently, it isn't.

There is more analysis on this race (and others) at Mulish Behavior and Green Mountain Daily. There are pictures and video footage of Vermonters canvassing for Edwards from last weekend as well.