Political Chowder's NUMBER OF THE WEEK - Sponsored by www.no-deal.org



December 30, 2007
NUMBER OF THE WEEK
1898
From: Salon.com



Roadies' rules of the road

From the curse of New York's city hall to the historical fate of insurgents, here are our favoritepolitical theorems.

By Walter Shapiro

Dec. 26, 2007 | The novelist Nelson Algren has been long credited with handing down three memorable rules of life: "Never play cards with a man called Doc. Never eat at a place called Mom's. Never sleep with a woman whose troubles are worse than your own." Algren, in truth, may have been the popularizer rather than the creator (see Ralph Keyes' fascinating 1992 guide to misattributed quotes: "Nice Guys Finish Seventh"). But still it remains hard to top these eternal verities.

Operating in less exalted realms, "Roadies" has long been guided by another set of rules of the road. Like Algren's three-part list, the Roadies' compendium of political folk wisdom can be boiled down to three succinct sentences. While there is no ironclad guarantee that these dictums always work -- and they will be tested in the weeks ahead as never before -- the Roadies Rules historically have boasted an enviable track record for accuracy.

No New York mayor, since the modern city was created in 1898, has ever been elected to another political office.

This one first came into play back in 1972 when Republican-turned-Democrat John Lindsay ran (badly) for president, and the rule proved its staying power in 1982 when Ed Koch lost a gubernatorial primary to Mario Cuomo. A few months ago, Rudy Giuliani seemed to many (but not to Roadies) to be the ex-mayor likely to burst the curse when he was riding high in the polls. But now that "America's Mayor" has all but conceded Iowa and New Hampshire -- and three marriages plus Bernie Kerik are taking their toll on his national poll numbers -- there is a growing sense in the John McCain, Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee camps that, yes, you can fight City Hall.

Always bet against the youth vote making a difference.

Ever since the 26th Amendment gave 18-year-olds the right to vote in 1971, apostles of the young have been promising a youth-quake in the next election. We are still waiting. Rock the Vote, which has been around since 1992, is getting middle-aged. For all the yowzas over YouTube and the fandangos over Facebook, Iowa (where a younger caucus-goer can be defined as a voter under 50) seems an unlikely setting to defy this enduring rule. Kathy Frankovic, the survey director at CBS, recently pointed to historically low participation rates among the young voters in Iowa to explain why polltakers do not have a cellphone problem in reaching a random sample. As a result, Roadies is tentatively guessing that Hillary Clinton will do better in attracting older first-time caucus participants (say, a 59-year-old waitress smitten with the idea of a woman president) than Barack Obama will do in motivating college students still on Christmas break to caucus in their hometowns.

Insurgents may win news-magazine covers, but they lose the nomination to establishment candidates in the end.

It is easy to understand the media hoopla over Mike Huckabee (and to a lesser extent, John Edwards). Bored with Rudy and Romney, Hillary and Obama, the press pack needed a new story line -- and Huckabee obliged by vaulting to the top of the Iowa polls. But not since Jimmy Carter in 1976 has a true political outsider raised his hands in triumph at his party's convention, although many have won Iowa or New Hampshire. The lionized long-shot losers include Gary Hart (1984), Pat Buchanan (1996), Bill Bradley and John McCain (2000) and, of course, Howard Dean (2004). Although political reporters -- who crave upsets as much as any sports fan -- are loath to admit it, we are often akin to midway barkers who loudly insist that the games of chances are not rigged and anyone can win a kewpie doll.

Sure, these Roadies' Rules run the risk of being upended between now and the Feb. 5 Super Dooper Party Pooper primaries in 23 states. But as I drive around Iowa during this closing week before the climactic caucuses, I intend to stick with the immortal truths of Nelson Algren. So no matter how hungry and weary I am, no matter how beguiling the small-town restaurant looks, I will never eat at a place called Mom's.

_

READ MORE


www.no-deal.org
Verizon's Transfer Of New England Lines Gets A Busy Signal


By W. David Gardner, InformationWeek
URL: http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=205203073

Verizon Communications' effort to spin off landline operations in Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont has run into a roadblock as Vermont regulators turned down Verizon's plan to transfer the operations to FairPoint Communications.

The decision, by the Vermont Public Service Board, was immediately followed up by a move by Maine's Public Utilities Commission to postpone its Wednesday meeting to Jan. 3 to take up the issue. The Maine agency had reached an agreement with Verizon last week and that pact could now be reviewed.

In a statement, the Vermont board said: "The board found that FairPoint had not demonstrated that it would be financially sound as it seeks to operate the newly acquired territories in Vermont, Maine, and New Hampshire -- a service territory that has five times the number of access lines as FairPoint presently has."

In recent months, Verizon has moved to shed landlines and older operations in mostly rural areas as its moves aggressively to deploy advanced wireless and fiber optic services in mostly urban regions.

The Vermont board noted that FairPoint, a North Carolina-based firm with about 310,000 phone lines, would be financially pressed to support the 1.6 million lines that Verizon seeks to shed. The Vermont board noted that FairPoint would have to borrow $2.5 billion to support the transaction.

The Vermont board's decision was hailed by the Communications Workers of America, which has been urging lawmakers to help establish an independent phone company that would be operated by management in the region. The CWA stated that the proposed Verizon-FairPoint deal for Vermont "has the potential to lead to a reduction in service quality, in less investment in the Vermont infrastructure, and to slower deployment of broadband services than is acceptable."

The Vermont board's decision doesn't kill the Verizon-FairPoint deal and New Hampshire and Maine regulators have indicated they are expecting to review revised proposals from the two companies.

FairPoint spokeswoman Rose Cummings told the Associated Press that "this is a procedural move that we consider an invitation to discuss the conditions, to introduce more information into the record... We are looking at it as an invitation to continue discussions around conditions, just a procedural bump."

In its decision, the Vermont board indicated it could approve the transfer of Verizon assets to FairPoint if the financial provisions and some other details can be ironed out.



There are many, many more issues that need to be examined. This is just a snippet of what's wrong with this deal. For more in depth details, please go on-line to www.no-deal.org. This is a bad deal for consumers, tax payers, rate payers, our communities and for the economic growth of New Hampshire.