Editor’s note: Off the Fifth Floor is an occasional column.
The relationship between the press and the state’s CEO is necessarily fraught with tension, and under the best of circumstances should be adversarial.
The reporters’ job, after all, is to pitch fastballs, sliders, sinkers and curveballs at the governor, (preferably on topics he or she would prefer not to be reminded of), and the governor’s job is to hit those hardball questions out of the park or let them fly by without swinging. (Strikeouts are rare, as the game is played on gubernatorial on turf. They do happen, though, See Dominica, vacation.)
For the first four months of his first term, Gov. Peter Shumlin walked to home base. He answered questions by way of campaign speak and didn’t provide reporters (or the public) new insights into policy matters. In short, he didn’t advance Team Shumlin around the bases with substantive messages about how his staff was implementing the most important aspects of his agenda.
For the last several months, however, Shumlin’s inclination to watch all the pitches zing by has been supplanted by another strategy: calling the game in advance.
Week after week, Shumlin has held press conferences off campus and his staff has orchestrated events that are long on dog and pony show (show and tell time) and short on Q and A sessions with reporters. With the exception of this week’s presser, the events have been at different times, at different locations and with a new cast of characters.
What has been consistent is the extremely limited amount of time reporters are allowed to pose questions (we’re lucky to get 10 to 15 minutes in), and most of the time, the short grilling is conducted in, say, an adult day care center, a mini mart or basement teen center, and the honored participants are treated to an inside baseball game they appear to care little about witnessing.
Granted, his predecessor Gov. Jim Douglas was no easy batter at the plate. Douglas perfected his ability to handle fastball pitches by making a game of information hide and seek, but he at least stood there and took whatever we threw at him. He nearly always gave reporters 25 minutes a week to ask questions. Douglas also was a policy aficionado who could surprise reporters with his depth of understanding of a variety of wonky subjects.
Shumlin, by contrast, is never allowed to waver from the pre-determined game plan worked out by his inner circle. Often, the pitching begins with polite softballs about the topic at hand (flood checks, anyone?) that Shumlin can, indeed, hit home. (It helps that by the time the tough questions are posed, his people are pointing to their watches.) When a topic comes up that Shumlin hasn’t been briefed on, he calls on members of his administration to field the question. If a reporters happen to sneak in a line of inquiry Shumlin doesn’t like, he chides them with the classic bunt move: “The question you should have asked was … ”
This pattern began with the legislative victory lap, in which the governor made a show of dozens of bill signings (with the exception of his controversial budget and tax bills). The flurry of legislative grin-and-grips was followed by the flood tour in which the governor took reporters off campus for elaborate dog and pony shows, most of which shed little or no light onto what is really going on in state government.
In May and June, for example, every weekly press conference was focused on the aftermath of the Montpelier and Lake Champlain floods. Many featured small check hand-out sessions ($25,000 each) to businesses.
This week, Shumlin’s gifts to the Statehouse newshounds were a full 25 minutes of Q and A in his ceremonial office and an announcement that the state was getting around to spending all of the federal stimulus fund money from 2009, and the Department of Energy, it seems, is happy with the way Vermont handled its expenditures. (Municipalities received $18 million for energy efficiency, biomass and energy efficiency projects. East Montpelier, for example, has received $38,000 for a wood pellet heating system for an emergency services facility. Peacham received $22,422 for a project to replace lighting and weatherize the town hall and garage.)
Small municipal grants are important, but it’s not clear what these feel-good, photo-op moments (local selectboard members were on hand to say cheese) have to do with the new governor’s sweeping initiatives.
Remember this? Peter Shumlin A Vision for Vermont
Shumlin expounded on his agenda ad nauseum on the campaign trail last summer, but now that he’s in office, he isn’t apt to say anything concrete about how much transitional housing for ex-cons is in the works or what his administration’s plans are for cutting health care costs as part of setting the stage for single-payer, or whether there have been advances in the rollout of broadband to the rural reaches of the state. Shumlin recently even sidestepped the most obvious, are-you-running-for-governor question.
Shumlin’s commissioners and secretaries, to their great credit, are very responsive to queries from the press, and they supply some of the substance on the day-to-day news items that is missing from the governor’s pressers. The new governor, after all, is not a micro-manager, but a delegator of duties. As for whether viewers in the stands will get a glimpse of the inside baseball the delegator-in-chief practices on the Fifth Floor? That remains to be seen.
Permalink |
1) Declared an end to and concluded the war on local school boards.
2) Pushing ahead to see how far we can get with medical/health insurance (ie .. can we get to single payer from here?)
3) Has maintained a steady path regarding Louisiana Entergy Yankee.
4) Was willing to help defend legislation designed to protect personal medical information from commercial abuse.
5) Has maintained a steady and predictable fiscal path – and has done a pretty darned good job considering the state of Vermont’s finances upon his entering office.
Shumlin’s not perfect by any means, but he has done much more than hold press conferences some in the press may not like. On top of that I see Shumlin’s style as being one of not only sharing the spotlight, but actually encouraging others to take it.
Sure, more openness would be welcome – and of course there are the things I’d personally like to see him addressing.
Permalink |
ZING!
Great job, Anne.
Permalink |
a Grand Slam, Anne…there’s nothing more rare than an independent journalist shining a light on what the People need to know & wouldn’t otherwise, if not for the likes of you.
And it follows that it’s up to the People to let Shumlin know (Letters, Letters, Letters)dog&pony shows are unacceptable when they interrupt the Freedom of the Press in this state.
Shumlin’s gratuitous & biased remarks about the Lowell Mtn Wind Project here in the NEK, in his self-fashioned press conf. DURING the PSB deliberations, is a perfect example of his mis-use of his power as governor…just as allowing a mere 15 minutes of weekly Press Q&A is a mis-use of his gubernatorial prerogatives.
Permalink |
The Vermont media has a reputation of ensuring that Vermonters are informed about issues that affect their lives and communities. They play a critical role in keeping elected officials accountable and strengthening our democracy.
I am a big fan of VTDigger because I usually find the stories to be accurate, informative, and straightforward. This story, however, was a big disappointment.
If Anne’s point is that the Governor is concealing important information or somehow failing to do his job – then we need to know. She readily admits that this isn’t the case. The press is afforded access to the Governor, his staff, and most importantly — the secretaries and commissioners whose job it is to know details and implement policies. She admits that reporters have access to the information they need to answer important questions. I guess the real point of this story is that a reporter’s job is harder when you have to go to where the news happens, when it happens – which isn’t at the same time every week in the 5th floor conference room. As for the collective “10 minutes less per week” to ask questions … really?
I truly hope that VTDigger reporting remains focused on issues, accountability, and transparent government. This story hints of raising needless skepticism – something equally bad for our democracy.
Just my $.02
Permalink |
I hope Governor Shumlin gives some thought to this constructive criticism. Rather than get all complicated or defensive, just accept it as informed feedback that might be a tip toward being an even better Governor.
There is no need for Governor Shumlin’s supporters to counter attack with a list of good things about the new Governor. Other things the Governor has done well bear no relationship to the topic of limited Q&A with the press.
How about just show a little humility, and say, “Thank you for your observations,” then think about how to continue with the outreach via press conferences in remote locations, and possibly supplement their current pattern with more time for Q&A?
Before Peter was nominated, I sent him a sharply critical note on Facebook, regarding a misstatement I felt he had made on the radio. He wrote back, literally apologizing, accepting responsibility. It was a very small statement that made no difference in the public discussion, but he still took the time to “be real” with me. I think one of Governor Shumlin’s best qualities is he is down to Earth, a mere mortal like the rest of us, in contrast to, say, GW Bush, who saw himself as better than the rest of us.
Of course some people are going to have legitimate criticisms for the Governor. In this case, the criticism is pretty simple. What’s the big deal?
I’ll bet this essay by Anne Galloway will reach Governor Shumlin, and I bet he will start allowing more time for Q&A.
Permalink |
@ Mr. Schneider:
Congratulations on repeating the Dem. Party talking points so faithfully.
“3) Has maintained a steady path regarding Louisiana Entergy Yankee.”
When you refer to Ben & Jerry’s, do you refer to them as “Unilever Holland Ben & Jerry’s”? When you refer to IBM, do you refer to “New York IBM”?
You have totally drunk the Kool Aid.
Permalink |
Hi Anne:
You’re off the hook. If and when Shumlin is caught in a grand scandal, we know it could and would have been prevented with 25 minutes of further questioning by you and your colleges.
Permalink |
Sarah, I am glad you were appointed by the Speaker to a national legislative committee, but I hope that the price is not that you are no longer an independent thinker.
Permalink |
Since this is about press conferences, it might be useful if those commenting had attended or watched one. I attended the one where the Governor announced the “War on Recidivism” which concerned Dept of Corrections policies. I was there as a member of House Institutions and Corrections, which has jurisdiction. This bill was largely a useful continuation, expansion, and intensification of policies already in place in DOC. I personally did not feel that the title or the rhetoric were justified by the actual content of the legislation. I thought that the Governor’s remarks were long on anecdotes and impassioned statements of concern and belief, and short on verified and verifiable facts. I have some right to this as an informed opinion since this is one of my policy areas.
I did not think that the reporters were able to get many answers of particular substance or interest, but that may be due to their lack of policy background or other factors. I felt I could have asked better questions.
So my personal observation of this one press conference tends to support the idea that reporters do not get much in depth substance at the pressers, mostly spin and rhetoric and sound bites. But that may be due to their deficiencies or the governor’s skill and preparation or the nature of the venue. It is not clear that more time at press conferences to ask questions would help the reporters.
A larger question has to do with whether there is always substance behind the spin and real accomplishment behind the rhetoric. I have to say this because this session we passed a Jobs Bill that, while it contains useful components, will likely directly create about two jobs, both in government, according to what I have been told. We passed a tax credit for veterans that is unlikely to really help them in my opinion. And we passed a Heath Reform bill that will not reform much or help any Vermonters for years. We lifted the cap on Pre Kindergarten programs, but we did not add any funding. I could go on.
So, we passed a lot of legislation, but did we really accomplish that much? That is what legislators should be looking at going into the next legislative session and that is what reporters should be looking into.
Rep. Cynthia Browning
Arlington, VT
Permalink |
To be honest, I’m not sure the best relationship a reporter can have with a subject is “adversarial” … I think they should both reach for the best form of governing for all the people that the elected person represents, no?
I also don’t believe that the relationship is one of a competition in which one side should win and the other side loses. If a reporter is able to convince her/his followers that all politicians are liars and cheats if left to their own devices without oversight; it shouldn’t be much of a stretch for those same followers to believe that every reporter has his/her own agenda to prove against every elected political/government official.
In this case, it appears that each side – the official and the reporter – use the people as an excuse to further their own agenda.
In reality, the people simply want the truth and the facts with which they may deduce their own informed opinions about the issue or concern at hand. If they are looking for winners and losers, they’ll visit espn.com, no?
They turn to the news for unbiased facts and reports of events that occur next door, nearby, or nationally that may affect their lifestyles and local situation.
The bottom line:
both sides should work on behalf of the people, otherwise, it’s simply more hot air contributing to an already steamy summer season … (wink)
“Born of Valley Isle,
Home now, North Carolina;
Aloha y’all. . .”
Until that time … Earl J.