Hashpipe's Great Biotimeline

[Hash]

Campaigning: May-September 1962

The gubernatorial campaign did not really begin until the primaries in early September, which marked the real start of Governor F. Ray Keyser's reelection bid. But between May and September, Garrett was much more on the hustings than he was in Washington. He only commuted to Washington for the most important votes, while spending the bulk of his times in Vermont, mostly campaigning.

Garrett was careful to reserve his attacks and his ideas for the general election campaign, and ran throughout the summer on a stump speech composed mainly of vaguer concepts, promises and general attacks on Keyser as a 'novice', 'incompetent' and 'belligerent' governor. It also included much populist rhetoric, about Keyser's links to special interests and his relation with J. Warren McClure of the Burlington Free Press.

Any keen observer of Vermont politics could see that 1962 was a different year. Governor Keyser entered the reelection contest in a weakened position, after a long and costly fight with the legislature and a strike by Rutland Railroad workers which made the abandonment of the Rutland Railroad likely. Having won the 1960 primary with only 29% of the vote against then-Lt. Governor Robert S. Babcock, he found himself isolated within his own party. He never attracted a dedicated group of supporters or allies who might have boosted his personal standing. He distrusted most of his fellow Republicans and he had explosive relations with the General Assembly and his Auditor General.

In the September primaries, turnout was down on both sides. Keyser was renominated without opposition, with some 27,000 Republicans turning out to vote for him. Garrett was unopposed as well, but only 9,000 Democrats turned out, down quite a bit from 1960. Steve Thomas had been successful in ensuring that nobody "threatening" filed to run against Vermont's iconic Senator George Aiken. A political novice, W. Robert Johnson, easily won the Democratic nomination for Senator against a far-left activist, William Meyer. Philip Hoff, Burlington's first-term state representative, was nominated to run against Robert Stafford, seeking election the House of Representatives, the second time perhaps the charm.

[Hash]

Comments?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Comments?

I don't like your character running for Governor for one simple reason: I find governorships boring. Considering that at-large House seat in Vermont in, in fact, a statewide office, in his place, I'd stick in D.C.

But story is good as usual.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I love it. And I for one find the office of Governor of Vermont interesting and worthy of attention!

[Mechaman]

I love it. And I for one find the office of Governor of Vermont interesting and worthy of attention!

Yes indeed.

When I had my character go for Governor of Montana it actually opened a lot of doors for creative development that weren't there before.  Namely, it puts the character in an authoritative position.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I love it. And I for one find the office of Governor of Vermont interesting and worthy of attention!

Yes indeed.

When I had my character go for Governor of Montana it actually opened a lot of doors for creative development that weren't there before.  Namely, it puts the character in an authoritative position.

Exactly. A Governor can be in a very strong--temptingly strong, if you get what I'm saying in terms of character development and conflict--position in a small, rural state.

[Hash]

September 17, 1962
Garrett Campaign Headquarters
South Burlington, Vermont

Post-primaries, Chris Garrett's campaign team meets for an update on the campaign.

Garrett: Good morning guys. Steve, what do you have for me on turnout estimates?
Thomas: In 1960, turnout was 164.6 thousand in the gubernatorial race; in 1958 it was 123.7 thousand. It's fair to say that we all expect turnout to be much lower than in 1960, and perhaps even lower than 1962. Republicans have no reason to turn out with much enthusiasm, as Keyser is hardly a motivator and Aiken is practically unopposed. Besides this race, the only seriously contested race is for Congress, but it is unlikely to boost turnout significantly.
Garrett: What are our chances on assumptions of 123 thousand voters?
Thomas: Keyser's campaign is basically saying that they're dead if it's under 120 thousand. They knew, we know, that Democratic turnout in off-years is about equal to Republican turnout now. I think, with 123 thousand voters, we can be confident of our chances. Democrats could make up a good 40 to 45 percent of the electorate, I believe.
Garrett: What about our registration efforts?
Thomas: I've heard some good reports all around. Our drive in Rutland was a real success, and we've even managed to register some as Democrats in the rural counties.
Garrett: Good, good. Michael, what are the debate setups?
Peterson: We have only one debate, on October 30, at Bennington High School. Exactly a week before election day, which carries the risk of hurting us if your performance is poor; or of really boosting us if your performance is good. The crowd, at any rate, will likely be heavily pro-Keyser.
Garrett: Who had the wonderful idea of scheduling a debate filled with morons cheering for that idiot, in such a God-forsaken dump?
Peterson: I'm sorry, sir.
Garrett: Whatever. Steve, anything to add?
Thomas: Yes, indeed. I met with the League of Women Voters yesterday, and they gave me this wonderful quote from Keyser on redistricting: "rather than interest themselves in the complexities of legislation, they'd do better to stay at home, look after their children and protect them from the onslaught of pornographic literature".
Garrett: Did that moron seriously say that? I'll never get this guy. He's like 10 years younger than me, and he always acts as if he was born in 1860. I'll never understand how he works. I won't complain, though. I'll make sure to use that in the debate. We need to motivate the women voters. This is our chance. Lucie, I need you with me on the campaign trail.
Lucie: But Chris, I'm a terrible campaigner, and the kids.
Garrett: This is important, and it'd only be for a few hours for a few days only. I need you to motivate women voters.
Thomas: On another issue, Luke Crispe wants to meet with you.
Garrett: The alcoholic lawyer who lost the primary to Keyser? What on earth does he offer?
Thomas: He launched a party - the Vermont Independence or something like that - and he wants to nominate you for his party's ballot line.
Garrett: I'm a Democrat, not an independent.
Thomas: Chris, I urge you to reconsider. Some people who like you but aren't comfortable voting Democratic will be enticed by your name on an independent line. Anyhow, Crispe can be a useful ally.
Garrett: Crispe is only on a personal vendetta against Keyser, it's not that he likes me. He's bitter that he lost two primaries.
Thomas: Who gives? Crispe can be a useful ally against Keyser, and besides, Arthur Simpson is also endorsing you.
Garrett: Who?
Thomas: Simpson is the representative for Lyndon; he's peeved because Keyser wanted to sell Lyndon Teachers College.
Garrett: What have I done to attract support from a bunch of local interest nobodies?
Thomas: Thus is politics in a small state.
Garrett: Ah, for Christ's sake.

[Hash]

September 26, 1962
Luke Crispe's house
Brattleboro, Vermont

Chris Garrett relents and finally agrees to meet with Luke Crispe, the Brattleboro lawyer and renegade Republican who is backing Garrett over his 1960 rival Keyser through the creation of the Vermont Independent Party, which has given its ballot line to Garrett.

Crispe: It's a pleasure to meet you, Mr. Garrett.
Garrett: My please, Mr. Crispe. Call me Chris.
Crispe: Luke, please. I'm pleased that you agreed to come.
Garrett: What is it you want to discuss?
Crispe: Well, uh, as you know, I founded the Vermont Independent Party and I'm giving you our ballot line...
Garrett: For which I am grateful, Luke. But I need more than that, Luke. I need you and Simpson on the trail with me. To give a message of bipartisan backing for my candidacy.
Crispe: I'll see what I can do... It's just that... you know... in terms of... uh...
Garrett: What?
Crispe: Association with a Democrat hurts your law practice...
Garrett: Oh, Luke, for Christ's sake.
Crispe: I'm sorry, but I'm sure your wife can vouch to that.
Garrett: Well, yes, more or less. But if you're serious about getting rid of Keyser, then you need to fly the flag, as you say.
Crispe: I do see what you mean...
Garrett: If you stump for me, you're sending a message that my candidacy is more than Generic Vermont Democrat loser candidacy which describes the gubernatorial candidate of my party for the past, what, hundred years?
Crispe: I understand, Chris.
Garrett: If you go out there, I can say - we can say - that there is a true crosspartisan effort for change in this state, to get rid of Keyser.
Crispe: Of course. I suppose I can, at this point, go out with you guys on the trail.
Garrett: I'm pleased that you agree, Luke. Now, get Simpson to do likewise... but... but... what do you guys want in return?
Crispe: I don't see what you mean.
Garrett: Oh, Luke, come on... I don't need to explain how politics works. What do you want in return for you endorsing me?
Crispe: That's not the point.
Garrett: Can't you say that the reason you hate Keyser is that you lost the primary to him in 60?
Crispe: Well... uh... I guess... Partly... he's also, also, an ineffective governor.
Garrett: Hence, your endorsement entails you'd appreciate something in return?
Crispe: Chris, please. That would be Simpson. I'm a lawyer, my political career is over.
Garrett: Are we certain?
Crispe: Well, yes, Chris.

[Hash]

October 9, 1962
Garrett campaign rally
Putney, Vermont

Crispe: My friends; we must face the reality. The time is ripe for change in Vermont. This election is not just about Democrat versus Republican. It is, I firmly believe, a crucial choice between progress and stagnation. For the past four years, we have had a Governor who has been blind to our people's problems and has comforted himself in offering archaic solutions to novel problems. We need a government which understands the problems of this new age, and faces them in light of this new age, and not through use of great traditions which are way past their due date. I have had the opportunity of working the people of Windham County, with the folk of our small towns which have made this state so great, and I have understood the problems faced everyday by our small towns. Small towns have been and will always remain the backbone of our democracy, and they are the founding blocks of our society. But Governor Keyser has refused to face the problems faced by small town Vermont. We need a Governor who understands small town Vermont. Who understands the inequalities which our tax system imposes on small towns, on the difficulty of living independently and on the unequal access to quality education and healthcare.

That man, fellow Vermonters, is my friend, Congressman Christopher Garrett; the next Governor of Vermont!

Garrett: Thank you Luke, thank you Putney! [...] Luke understands that this election is more than just another gubernatorial election. It is a contest between a vision of our state anchored in archaism and traditionalism; and a vision of our state anchored in the possibilities and realities of the future. For the past 109 years, we have been governed by the Republican Party. I am, myself, an admirer of the work done by many of our Republican statesman in the past 109 years. My ancestors themselves were proud Republicans. But 109 years of single-party rule has brought stagnation, complacency and blindness to the problems of this new era. It is no secret to the people of Putney that our small towns are struggling. Our proud small towns and beautiful rural regions that have for so long supplied the lifeblood of Vermont have been allowed to fall victims to new forces that have drained their capacity for growth. In the shadow of our beautiful Green Mountains many of our communities face a future of stagnation and decay. Vermonters have been compelled to move to larger communities to seek better opportunities and new jobs, but this is not our fate. It cannot be our fate. If we put aside the ways of the past, too often held as sacred traditions, then we can rebuild a future for our small towns.

As Governor, my priority will be to improve the quality of education at all levels, from the primary schools in our small towns to our great colleges and universities. I vow to dedicate an additional $2 million in State-aid to education over the course of the next two years. At the same time, as Governor, I will work to overcome the flagrant inequalities in the quality of our primary and secondary education; and work to ensure that every Vermonter has an equal opportunity to attend post-secondary institutions throughout this state.

I will not forget the people of our small towns, who have for too long been forgotten by the political elites and by successive generations of governors, who have envisioned their roles as being that of caretakers. We don't need a caretaker governor. We need a governor who takes action. Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless Vermont!



* certain parts of Garrett's speech adapted from Philip Hoff's OTL gubernatorial inaugural address, 1963.

[Hash]

October 14, 1962
Garrett campaign rally
Burlington, Vermont

I believe the most pressing issue facing voters in Burlington and across our larger towns today is the issue of representation, or rather lack thereof. Governor Keyser has failed in his attempts to reapportion either house of the legislature. The special session was but a stopgap measure, attempting to shift decision on the issue to a later date.

We have an obligation to meet the 14th Amendment in providing equal protection to all citizens before the law. Our ancestors revolted because of 'taxation without representation', yet our twenty-two largest communities today pay 64% of income taxes but are represented by less than 9% of the members of the House. In contrast, a majority can be achieved by all members from towns holding only 9% of Vermont's population. The truth is, my friends, our General Assembly is malapportioned and we must reapportion it on the basis of one man, one vote. It is not an option, because if our legislators do not do so, our courts will eventually do it for them.

We must shape our legislature, the basic institution of decision making, to live up to our democratic heritage and meet the needs of contemporary society. This is not an issue of defying traditions, nor is it one pitting town against town or rural against urban. This is an issue of equality, of the fundamental human right to equal protection before the law. There is no other way to describe our current situation of apportionment than to say it is unfair.

Our government's task should be to translate into action for the common good the necessities and demands of our people. In order to accomplish this task, it is imperative that the government is directly related to the people; not some of the people, but all the people.

As Governor, I will not fail in this task. I will ask, upon my hypothetical election, the legislature to face the issue of reapportionment immediately; with determination to get the issue resolved as quickly as possible as to allow us to move forward to other issues of importance to the people of Vermont. I am pleased that there is a commission currently studying the issue which is due to report to the legislature on or before March 31, 1963.

Together, we hold the power to change Vermont. Thank you, and may God bless Vermont!

[Hash]

October 29, 1962
Keyser campaign office
Bennington, Vermont

Governor F. Ray Keyser Jr (R-Chelsea) is going over last-minute debate prep questions and reflecting on the past weeks of campaigning. The Cuban Missile Crisis overshadowed the final weeks and halted much campaigning, even though the issue of Cuba featured more in the congressional race than in the gubernatorial race.

Keyser is talking with his campaign manager, Paul Fisher.

Keyser: What do you think Garrett is going to hit me with tomorrow?
Fisher: Lots and lots of stuff; reapportionment, education, healthcare, change, the budget surplus, taxation, roads and all that.
Keyser: Why does it pain him to admit that I got a $900,000 surplus in the budget without raising taxes?
Fisher: That remains your best line, but Garrett likely has numbers which attempt to prove that you have a phony surplus.
Keyser: There's also the fact that his whole program is just to come up with huge numbers and promise to spend it like there's no tomorrow. He's gonna need to raise taxes even if he's serious about only half of his stuff. I've balanced the goddamn budget without raising a single tax. If people don't reelect me on that, then I don't know what the hell they want.
Fisher: Well, Garrett claims he can do it without tax increases, but his spending plan remains his weak point.
Keyser: What is my weak point?
Fisher: Change. Garrett can really ding you on change.
Keyser: I'm ten years younger, and his record hardly spells change. He's been a do-nothing congressman for the past two if not four years. I'm gonna ram a stick through him, that arrogant bastard. I'm gonna ram a goddamn stick through his entitled jerk face.
Fisher: Don't get too optimistic, Governor.
Keyser: I have reason to be optimistic. Garrett is a phenomenon which is past its due date. He's full of air. He's a big hot air balloon which is gonna come crashing down tomorrow night, when I shoot arrows through all his fakeness.
Fisher: As I said, Governor, Garrett can be a good debater.
Keyser: So am I. I don't get the love for him. He's a dusty liberal academic from the big town who thinks he knows better than everybody else.
Fisher: [fmr. Governor Harold J.] Arthur said that about him in 58, and look where that got him in the debate. Garrett crucified him, painfully.
Keyser: That's became Harold was a weak-willed moron who belonged in an old folks home. Garrett is willing to say anything to win. He's a little twerp, grubby for power. He bought his election in 60 with his stupid rural development bullsh**t, but he won't buy this election. Not against me. Harold was an old moron, Robert [Stafford] is a nice man who didn't have the guts to frontally attack him. Watch me, Paul, because I'm gonna crucify that twerp tomorrow night. If I'm any good at it, I'll send him running back crying to academia.
Fisher: I do hope it is the case, Governor. But be careful, Garrett is likely thinking the same right now. He's dying to get out of the House, but he's also dying to remain in politics. He wants this job as badly as you want it. He can be bloody. He is a much stronger debater than you'd expect from a dusty university professor. Just ask Robert.
Keyser: I thrive in the bloodiest of situations, my friend. Garrett will be trounced tomorrow, he'll go crying to his wife after I hand his ass to him. He's an out of touch academic, thinking he knows best, an entitled jerk, an opportunistic power-hungry twerp, a man devoid of any understanding of basic economics and a tax-and-spend faux populist. He's full of thin air. It's about we burst his bubble and send him crashing down to earth.

* Keyser being cocky is an historical fact, though I do apologize to all Keyser-fans out there if I have exaggerated his traits.

Stay tuned for tomorrow's bloody debate. Punches will fly.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I grew up in Vermont. I have never met or heard of a fan of F. Ray Keyser.

Again, great timeline, and I'm following it avidly.

[Hash]

Don't know if anybody knows about this site, but for fellow TL writers; this site is well worth bookmarking:

http://astheysawit.com/7764-1961-vermont.html

Great year-by-year reviews of state events. I guess for every state?

[Hash]

October 30, 1962
Gubernatorial Debate - Part I
Bennington High School
Italicized passages are the thoughts of the candidates, never publicly uttered in the debate

Moderator: Good evening and welcome to the 1962 Vermont gubernatorial debate. Joining me on this stage tonight are, first off, Republican nominee and incumbent Governor Frank Ray Keyser Jr. of Chelsea; and Democratic nominee Congressman Christopher Andrew Garrett of Burlington. Please welcome both candidates.

*crowd cheers for Keyser as he enters, more tepid cheers for Garrett*

Moderator: Both candidates may now give their opening statements. Governor Keyser, you first.

Keyser: First of all, thank you to everybody in the audience tonight and to Congressman Keyser. Less than two years ago, I received the honour of serving as your Governor. During the past two years there has been a concerted and determined effort to move Vermont ahead in many areas. We did not select one or two fields of activity but chose rather to move on a broad base for effective progress. In this short period of time; we have undertaken a significant reorganization of our state government to make it more efficient for money and more responsive to Vermonters' needs. We have stimulated job growth in this state through the creation of the Industrial Building Authority, which now stands ready to provide industrial financing. We have been able to create a budgetary surplus in 1961 without enacting any new general taxes. We have made significant investments in education, at all levels; social assistance, state parks and roads. We have enacted medical care for the aged by my orders, effective July 1.

The results of our work together have given Vermont an enviable record. We have enjoyed an increasing level of employment. Many new industries located in Vermont and existing industries expanded. Industrial prospects increased 25% this year compared to last. We have made significant progress together. It is necessary that we continue to build on the progresses that we have made. We have a great potential, it is imperative that we realize this potential. Thank you.

Garrett: A Governor of this state said not too long ago; "We meet in an age of revolution. Humanity is restless, moving. It sits on the powder keg of international relations and scientific discoveries... We can hang in suspension or move ahead. We can paint a picture of quaintness or a picture of pioneering. There is but one choice. We must create a true national vision of Vermont reflecting ideas, imagination and action. We must be bold and adventuresome to meet the challenges of both the present and future." These were the words of my esteemed rival Governor Keyser in his inaugural address to the General Assembly in 1961. Truer words could not have been spoken, but unfortunately the actions of the Governor in past two years have not lived up to the expectations he laid down.

Keyser: Oh, you flaming piece of sh**t. You scumbag

It is a fundamental truth, I believe, Governor Keyser, that "we must be bold and adventuresome to meet the challenges of both the present and future." But we cannot meet the challenges of our future if we stick to old ways which we have grown to call traditions. The crisis we face today is one of obsolescence. Many of our old ways of doing things no longer serve us. On the contrary, they only thwart our progress and hold us back in our search of a better future. We cannot be complacent and blind to the corrosive forces which are working on the structure of our society. For too long we have blindly attempted to maintain the old order in these new times.

As we meet in an age of revolution, of a restless humanity; it is the time for change in Vermont, now more than ever. Together, I believe we can rebuild our communities and our state and finally achieve our potential.

Keyser: Go screw yourself, you opportunistic plagiarist twerp

*this post includes passages and excerpts from Ray Keyser's 1961 and Philip Hoff's 1963 inaugural addresses; as well as Ray Keyser's 1963 farewell address.

[Hash]

October 30, 1962
Gubernatorial Debate - Part II
Bennington High School

Moderator: We will now open this debate with the topic of reapportionment, which has dominated political headlines this year, notably through this summer's Special Session which ended in the reapportionment of the Senate. Governor Keyser, please begin.

Keyser: Thank you. The issue of reapportionment is one which is very important to many voters, and we have been committed to resolving it within the confines of the law and our constitution. The Special Session which I called in July of this year was successful in applying the decision of the Supreme Court in Mikell vs. Rousseau and reapportioned our Senate for this upcoming legislative term according to Section 13 of the Vermont Constitution. We have done so by transferring one senator from Rutland County to give it to Chittenden County, which my administration determined was the fairest course of action, for it now requires 47% of registered voters to form a Senatorial majority.

Garrett: Governor Keyser has failed the people of Vermont in reapportionment, and the only thing he has done is pull out, from the legislature, a temporary stopgap compromise which in the end resolves nothing. He has said nothing of the even grosser misapportionment in the House, in which 50% of our population is represented by only 22 out of 246 members while the 124 towns with less than 12% of the population elect half of the House. We must shape our legislature, the basic institution of decision making, to live up to our democratic heritage and meet the needs of contemporary society. This is not an issue of defying traditions, nor is it one pitting town against town or rural against urban. This is an issue of equality, an issue of equal protection before the law. There is no other way to describe our current situation of apportionment than to say it is unfair.

If elected Governor, I vow to take decisive action on the matter. It will not be easy, as our constitution cannot be amended for a period of ten years, that is until 1971. I will await the recommendations of the Joint Commission the matter, and I stand ready to take the matters to the court to ask for their opinion on the constitutionality of Sections 13 and 18 of our constitution set against the 14th Amendment.

Keyser: I find it amusing that Congressman Garrett recommends taking the state's constitution to court, when the gubernatorial oath of office requires the Governor to uphold the constitution. ... You moron.

Garrett: I thank the Governor for this interesting comment. I would like to quote one of the greatest Vermonters, Ethan Allen, who said that "Formed constitutions and modes of government may and undoubtedly are, more or less imperfect; Yet they may, in future, be corrected and amended as time of leisure, cool deliberation, and experience may dictate."

Ethan Allen would have recognized, were he with us today, the ridiculousness of our situation and the corrosive nature of the Governor's dogged determination to cling to out dated traditions as if they were the word of God.

Keyser: Ethan Allen? Oh, for the love of God, give me a break.

Moderator: Thank you gentlemen. I would like to open the debate on the general matters of state appropriations and especially the top two sources of expenditure, highways and education. Governor Keyser, if you please.

Keyser: The record of this administration of this matter is strong. We have opened a surplus of some $900,000 for the fiscal year 1961-1962, without any additional taxation. Our government, which has been significantly reorganized and streamlined to provide for efficient, non-partisan public governnance, has been administered on a sound financial basis. If reelected, my goal will be to cut taxes. We pay the third highest taxes in the nation, and any increased taxation will have a negative effect on economic growth and job creation. We must all resist the urge to tax and spend.

While we have resisted irresponsible calls for massive increases in spending, as the Congressman is calling for, we have still made significant investments in various fields of social life. Four million dollars was provided for new school buildings, curriculum improved, particularly from teaching material prepared. An additional $750,000 in state aid to education will be paid during the biennium. UVM has been expanded through state funding, the Vermont Technical College was further expanded after I had the pleasure of introducing legislation which created it in 1957. I am also pleased that we were able implement medical care for the aged in the quickest timeframe possible.

Garrett: The record of the Governor on appropriations and spending is one of deception. He boasts and brags of a surplus, but this phony surplus was created only by delaying payments of over a million dollars in debt. The surplus is in reality a deficit. I am concerned about this administration's over reliance on bond issues to fund projects such as state park expansion or airport construction.

To address our financial situation, we must recognize that as a small state we cannot afford to same services that states twice our size do on twice the resources. It is necessary that we sit down, to look at who we are and what we have in the way of possible revenues that we can raise and still make Vermont an attractive place to live, and once we have done this, proceed by putting our emphasis on the most needed programs and from there on down. We must at the same time identify waste in our government, and I must say that there is must waste in our road system which must be addressed.

Education is my priority. The Governor has given only cursory attention to our future generations' education. He opposed a revision of the state-aid for education formula in 1961 and 1962, and committed only limited funds to help our struggling schools. As Governor, I would increase funding for education. Governor Keyser signed legislation authorizing the sale of Lyndon Teachers College, over the advice of many in his own party. We advocate building Lyndon College and similar colleges across Vermont into strong, accredited liberal arts colleges. We further advocate the create, if resources permit, of a scholarship fund for the young generations in our state, so that education is truly a right given to all.

Keyser: The Congressman's broad-reaching wish list of extensive spending increases will only be financed by tax increases. My opponents shies away from counting up the numbers to his proposals, and he is unwilling to tell the people of Vermont how much his new spending would cost them in taxpayer money. Of course, the Congressman has never been one to recognize the dangers of wasteful spending, given that his two terms in Congress have been marked by voting in favour of tax-and-spend legislation. I am proud of the fact that we have managed a surplus - it is a surplus regardless of what the Congressman may say - without any new general taxes. There are two choices in front of us, we can either continue down the safe road of strengthening our economy, encouraging growth and creating jobs by low taxes and sound financial management; or we can take the Smugglers' Notch in winter with the Congressman.

*audience laughs and applauds*

Garrett: Governor Keyser, the numbers on which you're running on are deceptive. Auditor David V. Anderson, of your own party, has disagreed with your accounting methods and claims that there is no such surplus. Those are his words, not mine. Furthermore, Governor, allow me to say that you are in no position to talk of sound financial management. Under your watch, we had the longest and costliest legislative session in our history, and your relations with your own party in the legislature has been anything but sound. If anybody is taking us down the Smugglers' Notch this winter, it is you, Governor, and it is even worse because you are doing so in the middle of the night without headlights.

Keyser: Will you stop plagiarizing? Jesus Christ.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Garrett is meeen

[Mechaman]

Have I said how great this timeline is?

Oh I haven't?  Well, now it's official.

[Hash]

October 30, 1962
Gubernatorial Debate - Part III
Bennington High School

Moderator: Congressman Garrett, you have often talked about the 'plight of Vermont small towns' during your campaign. Could you describe in detail what you mean by this, and what specific steps would you take to remedy to this alleged 'plight'?

Keyser: Oh, Jesus, this is going to be great. The prof is in the house.

Garrett: Thank you for that question. One of our most pressing issue in Vermont is the plight of our small towns. The proud small towns and rural regions, the backbone of our New England democracy, which have for centuries provided the lifeblood of Vermont have been allowed to fall victims to novel forces that have drained their capacity for growth and independent governance. In the shadow of our beautiful Green Mountains, many of our communities face a future of stagnation and decay.

Keyser: You said that in Putney, you unoriginal twerp

The reality for our small towns is that jobs are in short supply, forcing Vermonters to move to larger communities or even other states to find opportunities. But I am optimistic for our future, because we are not doomed to a future of stagnation and decay. Our greatest resource is our people, and together, we can find new opportunities in this state, if we have the courage to cast aside those old ways that force us to squander our resources.

For decades now we have lived and been governed by the lame argument that the old ways more strongly preserves the independence of our smaller communities. Nothing can be further from the truth. The financial plight of our small towns have increased as they have lost inhabitants, and the sad truth is that their independence has been replaced by a dependency on the state government.

We can no longer cling to individual towns as the bases of decision-making in all cases. Our town boundaries were drawn arbitrarily in colonial times, and now correspond to a long-gone reality. Our towns do not have the resources to provide the services they seek to offer. As I said earlier, we must evaluate our resources and provide services in line with those.

Keyser: Why won't you shut up?

As Governor, I would develop a regional approach. Larger regions, grouping various towns, would have more resources and would be able to provide quality social services and also be more efficient and independent. I believe this is the sole feasible way to assure equal opportunities to Vermonters, regardless of their hometown. I am proposing a regional approach to education, tax assessing, planning, development and courts. Our property tax assessment system is in dire need of repair, lest we want to continue perpetrating the evils which our current assessing system breeds.

Keyser: I come from a small town of 957 people. I was born and bred in a small town. I know how it's like to live in a small town, and I understand the concerns and problems which small towns face. Congressman Garrett, you don't understand how small towns work. You're a big city politician, who thinks that he knows better than everybody else, who thinks that he can go out there and prescribe solutions to problems which you don't even understand. The only thing which will result of your policies, Congressman, is to polarize small towns versus big towns. So now, shut up.

Garrett: Governor, that's ridiculous. You're the one who's trying to pit big town to small town, with your irresponsible and demagogic tactics. Yes, I'm from Burlington. There is nothing wrong with big cities. But that doesn't mean I'm oblivious to the world outside my city. Over the past four years, I've traveled to almost every corner of this state and have had the chance to meet fantastic people who have told me of their community's plight. The people of our rural regions demand solutions, Governor, not ridiculous demagoguery. Goddamn you Keyser.

Keyser: I'll tell you what I've done for small town Vermont, Congressman. I've brought jobs to this state. Unemployment has fallen under my watch. We've attracted new industries to Vermont, and allowed existing industries to expand. The General Electric plant in Burlington has expanded, and we have gained a commitment from Fairbanks for construction of a new plant in St. Johnsbury. Our industrial prospects increased 25 percent in 1962 over 1961. Tourism has been on the upswing. Finally, we have made significant investments in development to provide transportation and expanding facilities in a state looking to the future. I can cite $6.2 million in highway construction, a million dollars for a new sewage treatment plant and $375,000 for airport construction. I have traveled extensively on the state's behalf behalf, much of which was at no expense to the taxpayers and have opened the doors of industry to Vermont, promoted the vacation travel business, and Vermont farm products.

Garrett: Let's factcheck your record a bit, Governor, if you please. Neither you nor the development department played any part in the expansion of the General Electric plant in Burlington, and Fairbanks has made no firm commitment for the construction of a new plant in St. Johnsbury.

In terms of attracting jobs, let's talk about the Rutland Railroad. You were unable to prevent a strike which began in September 1961 and which had the result of it idled 400 railroad workers and paralyzing commerce in western Vermont. You failed to prevent the Rutland Railroad from being abandoned.

Keyser: Congressman, quit spreading disinformation on the topic of the Rutland Railroad. This state's position has always been in recognition of the importance of railway service to western Vermont. It has been our policy to restore stable rail service, but let me be clear that under the Interstate Commerce Clause, we are in no position to force the resumption of service. Unfortunately, the ICC decided in favour of abandonment. But let us be clear and frank, Congressman. We inherited the problem, have faced it squarely and taken action in the best interest of the state.

Moderator: Gentlemen, if we may move on to our next topic. Congressman Garrett, you have mentioned the "longest and costliest" legislative session which took place under the Governor's term. What would your style of governance be, if elected Governor?

Garrett: During the last two years under Governor Keyser, Vermont has seen the most deadlock in its recent history and suffered through the longest and costliest legislative session in its history. He's proven unable not only to work across party line, but also unable to work with legislators from his own party. He has governed in a stubborn way which is resistant to any sort of compromise or consensus-building, and the result has been unprecedented deadlock and a lack of progress on the major issues affecting this state.

The most important quality in a successful Governor is his ability to work with his party and across party lines to build consensus and forge compromises which go in the best interests of Vermont. As Governor, even if facing a Republican legislature, I am confident that we will be able to work together successfully. I believe in our ability to surmount our differences and work together in a smooth manner, which is apparently not something with the Governor believes in.

Keyser: Oh, please, Congressman, you're being ridiculous. I have had success in working with members of the legislature, regardless of their party. The legislature and I have often been in agreement, and we have always been able to surmount our differences and we've always done what needed to be done. In this 'long and costly' session you speak of, the legislature passed a $62.4 million general fund appropriations bill for 1962-63, created the Vermont Industrial Building Authority as I requested, and passed some tax repeal measures would have helped create a more favourable business climate.

Garrett: You fail to mention, Governor, that the 1961 General Assembly failed to reapportion the Senate on the basis of the 1960 census. You needed to call a special session this summer to provide what was at best a stop-gap solution to the problem, and only because the Supreme Court rightly said that the existing apportionment was unconstitutional. Governor, you have failed to solve the problems faced by this state. You have failed, Governor.

Keyser: I have not failed. May I invite you to actually read my record in the past two years, to prove to you that no, we haven't failed, on the contrary, we've succeeded. Congressman, it's time you be honest with the people of Vermont. Your demagogic, irresponsible populist rhetoric full of nicely-crafted talking points and your tax-and-spend proposals won't cut it. The people of Vermont deserve the truth. Stop lying, face up to them and be honest.

Keyser: I'm going to kill that son of a bitch

*audience applaud*

Garrett: Lies? Let's talk about lies, Governor. I've heard you at least twice tonight take credit for passage of medical care for the aged. You opposed that legislation, Governor. In fact, you vetoed it. It was passed by the legislature over your veto. Governor, you call yourself a "humanitarian". I don't know what type of humanitarian opposes an extension of community mental health services, opposed establishing a tuberculosis clinic in Barre and opposes expansion of educational programs for the mentally retarded. Be honest to the people of Vermont, Governor.

[Hash]

October 30, 1962
Gubernatorial Debate - Part IV
Bennington High School

Moderator: Gentlemen, we are reaching the end of this debate. If you may please give your concluding statements. Governor Keyser, you may go first.

Keyser: Thank you, and thank you to tonight's audience.

You have heard two different vision of Vermont tonight. On the one hand, my rival, Congressman Garrett, has offered a vision  which threatens to take us down a dangerous path of high taxes, excessive spending and irresponsible governance. On the other hand, I proudly stand by our record of low taxes, high growth, job creations and strong governance. We have accomplished so much together in the past two years. Balanced the budget to create a surplus without any tax increases, kept taxes low for our businesses, created a booming business environment in which jobs are being created and investments flowing into Vermont. The future smiles upon us, as we are promised a bright future. It is imperative that we keep going down this path of strong, sound governance which has brought us so far. May we forever assemble as free men governing ourselves. May our actions make us worthy of that privilege and responsibility. I am asking for your support on November 6 to keep Vermont strong. Thank you.

*audience erupts in wild applause*

Garrett: Thank you to our great audience and to the great town of Bennington for welcoming us tonight.

This election is not just any other election. This is not just a contest between the two parties. This election is about change. I believe in the Vermont traditions of independence, resourcefulness and initiative. We must renew and revitalize these basic strengths, eroded by our desperate effort to cling to outmoded old ways. In this new era, we face new problems and new challenges. Our beautiful rural regions are challenged by unprecedented economic decline, which threatens their viability in the future. Our old traditions are being placed into doubt by the realities of this new day and age. In this new era, we need new solutions to face the new challenges. Let us be resourceful and forge a new future, a new path for Vermont. Stronger schools and colleges, stronger and fairer democratic institutions, stronger towns and communities working together and stronger governance.

I am not just another Vermont politician, and I know that I haven't followed the old tradition of rising from bottom to top, using the offices of Congressman or Governor as steps along my way. I am running for Governor because I want to give us the means of breaking with the past to embrace the promises of the future.

I believe in Vermont, and I have unwavering faith in the determination and resolution of our people. Let us create a movement for change. Let us throw down that destructive wall of tradition which blocks our progress to the future. I am respectfully asking for your support on November 6, so that together we can build the Vermont we want.

*audience applauds*

Moderator: Thank you to both our candidates for joining us in this one-and-only debate tonight. We wish them the best of luck on November 6. Thank you for joining us tonight.

[Hash]

So, dear readers, who do you think won the debate?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

So, dear readers, who do you think won the debate?

Keyser's thoughts.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Keyxon's thoughts, Garrett's words.

[Barnes]

Seems to me that the audience thinks Keyser won, but I of course think it was Garret (seeing as I support him )!

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Seems to me that the audience thinks Keyser won, but I of course think it was Garret (seeing as I support him )!

Bennington stayed very Republican for quite a while. Garrett complains about the choice of venue a little earlier in the timeline.

[Hash]

October 31, 1962
Garrett campaign headquarters
South Burlington, Vermont

Chris Garrett and Steve Thomas, one-on-one, run through the previous night's debate.

Garrett: How do you think I did?
Thomas: I think you did really well, Chris... but how do you feel?
Garrett: Keyser is one tough son of a bitch.
Thomas: I was amazed at how bloody it got between you two out there...
Garrett: Where do you think I did best?
Thomas: On a run through of the debate... I think your opening was great. Using Keyser's words against him was great, and you did what an opening statement does, say nothing while appearing to say a lot. Keyser, meanwhile, just vomited some facts which nobody will remember and which just makes him seem like some nervous machine.
Garrett: What about on reapportionment? I think he got his ass handed to him on that one.
Thomas: Well, he's always been really vulnerable on that one, but I found that you were clear and concise. You said what you would do.
Garrett: Keyser was ridiculous in his oath of office comment... I owned him with the Ethan Allen comment.
Thomas: That quote was great, Chris. For sure, the strict constitutionalists won't like you one bit for the blasphemy, but nobody cares about the constitution in real life.
Garrett: Now, Steve, on the expenditure things, I think Keyser handled it quite well... he kinda stuck the "he'll raise taxes" label to my forehead...
Thomas: I think that was a draw... I'm happy you dinged him on the phony surplus and bonding, but I think nobody understood what you meant by saying "we're a small state, so we can't have big programs" and then saying you'd just spend more on education... Frankly, Chris, Keyser had a pretty good rebuttal to what you said, and the Smugglers Notch road on his part was a talking point which he can use this week.
Garrett: I must say, yeah, that Keyser dinged me bad on that... I'm happy I brought up Anderson, but I could have done without repeating the Smugglers Notch road thing he said... I'll just look like some plagiarist.
Thomas: Now, Chris, on small towns, your answer was marvelous. You did a great overview and presented a solution which Keyser didn't even comment on...
Garrett: Instead he just said he was from a small town and I didn't understand... What an idiot. God.
Thomas: I facepalmed at that, but Keyser realized it... his rebuttal was quite concise... with the "I'll tell you what I've done for small town Vermont" line followed by his re-hashing of policies... But Chris, what the hell went through your mind to talk about the Rutland Railroad? Keyser crucified you.
Garrett: I know... I thought that I could ding him for that, but sh**t that man was prepared to answer me... I think he owned me badly on that one. Thank God the moderator didn't ask me to answer to it, or else I'd have lost the election there and then.
Thomas: Oh, Chris, it wasn't that bad... Then you got back at him on the governance question, and the "stop lying" thing he said blew up in his face...
Garrett: I could feel he was just flaming red... he was about to blow up and I think it took all his strength to restrain himself from swearing... He was really, really angry. I could just feel the intensity of his vivid anger.
Thomas: I think he just got angrier and angrier, but it calmed him down when the Republicans in the crowd applauded.
Garrett: Who had the great idea of filling the audience with Keyser's fan club? For Christ's sake, talk about a bad audience. I felt like I was trespassing in there...
Thomas: Now, let's talk conclusion. Keyser managed a solid one, but again he was a bit all over the place. Now, you, Chris, you gave a solid image of yourself as a change-maverick politician and presented this race as being more than just another election. That was a great line, and I think you won the conclusion if only because your statement motivated.
Garrett: I won the debate overall, right?
Thomas: I think you won, yeah. Keyser had it tough in there and didn't score the knockout blow he might have wanted. I think you motivated Democrats and independents to turn out, while Keyser didn't manage to motivate Republicans to turn out for him. He was unable to give his base a good reason about why it was imperative to turn out, you did. That's what matters to me.