Don Praisner will be endorsed by County Executive Ike Leggett and County Council Members Marc Elrich, Phil Andrews, Duchy Trachtenberg and Roger Berliner at his announcement on Monday. The Washington Post talked to Praisner and Leggett.
Steve Kanstoroom has been subpoenaed by the Montgomery County Planning Board to provide communications he has had with news organizations over the Sandy Spring road dispute.
No assumptions should be made at this point about MCEA's endorsement. The union could endorse a candidate or sit out the race entirely.
As of 4:40 pm today, Kanstoroom, Pat Ryan, Cary Lamari and Republican Mark Fennel have filed papers to run.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Latest on County Council D4
Modifications to Proposed Town of Chevy Chase Building Ordinance
The Town Council continued its markup of the proposed new building ordinance. The Council has made the ordinance simpler and much less restrictive than the original proposal. Here are the major changes to the ordinance from the original proposal:
Everyone is guaranteed a minimum of 3000 square feet regardless of lot size (up from 2500).
Basements don't count for purposes of FAR calculation.
Attics don't count for existing homes or additions to them but the portions of attics above 6' 6" (i.e. you can walk in them) do count for new construction (or the expanded portion of existing attics).
There is a single FAR of .50 for all lots of less than 12,000 square feet.
For homes on lots greater than 12,000 square feet, the FAR is .25 for the amount over 12,000 (e.g. on a 14,000 foot lot, you could build 6500; 6000 with the FAR of .50 for the first 12,000, 500 for the 2000 above 12,000)
The garage and wall length incentives have now been made into requirements (i.e. requirements on the placement of garages and no wall can be longer than 34 feet).
Non-vegetative surface is limited to 35% or less of the front yard.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Why I'm Disappointed in Phil Andrews
By Eric Luedtke. Eric is a classroom teacher in MCPS and a member of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Education Association but writes here solely on behalf of himself
You may have read on the Washington Post’s Maryland Moment about the Wednesday evening meeting between County Executive Leggett, members of the County Council, and the executive boards of the county employee unions. I can tell you that the discussion was both very honest and very depressing. We have very real budget issues that we’ll need to address over the next few months. But I was encouraged at the fact that the meeting was taking place, and that the unions and our elected officials have agreed to keep open lines of communication and to work together on solving the budget difficulties. That gives me hope.
I was, however, deeply disappointed in Phil Andrews. The Post account notes that he was the only official present who described our salary increases as, “unsustainable.” It leaves out the full tenor of his remarks.
Before I go any further, let me say that I have deep respect for Phil Andrews. Growing up in Gaithersburg, he was my Councilman, and I’ve always appreciated his advocacy on behalf of average Montgomery County residents. But on the issue of the budget and public employee salaries, he is simply wrong.
Andrews says his belief that the salary increases should be cut or eliminated rests on the idea that the burden of solving budget difficulties should rest equally on taxpayers, recipients of county services, and county employees. The flaw in this argument is that cuts to the salaries of county employees are, effectively, reducing county services. Providing good services rests on our ability to recruit and retain good staff. This is true in the school system, in the police and fire departments, and in county government. High salaries are the reason we have been able to build a strong workforce across county government. And reneging on negotiated salary increases which help county employees to keep up with the cost of living in Montgomery County will undermine that workforce.
I’m a teacher, so I can speak to this best from the perspective of the school system. You may be surprised to hear this, but in Montgomery County, one of the best school systems in the country and one of the highest paying systems in the area, we never have enough teachers. In certain content areas, and most often in special education, the school system is operating under a permanent shortage. Even in the current hiring freeze, and more than halfway through the school year, the MCPS vacancy database currently lists more than a hundred unfilled full and part time teacher and para-educator positions.
There are a number of reasons for this shortage. But among the biggest is this: approximately one third of MCPS teachers leave within their first five years. Some leave because it is a difficult profession. Some leave because of other life choices. Many leave because even with the county’s commitment to good salaries, a commitment Councilman Andrews questions, the cost of living in Montgomery County is simply too high for many young teachers. So good teachers move and work elsewhere. Or they abandon teaching for a more lucrative profession outside of public service. Cutting employee salary raises will make this problem worse, and losing more good teachers undermines our ability to continue to provide a world class education for MCPS students.
But his flawed argument aside, what most offended me was Councilman Andrews’ condescending lecture to those of us at the table about what public service means. Sitting at a table with dedicated and hard working teachers, administrators, support service professionals, and county employees, and with the police officers and firemen who daily risk their lives for public safety, Councilman Andrews told us that public service is a “privilege.” The implication was that this privilege of public service should be more than enough for us, and that we should therefore humbly accept reduced salary increases. For people who have sacrificed the ability to become wealthy for the sake of careers in community service, this is a slap in the face.
I do feel privileged, every day, to work with the extraordinary and talented children that walk through the doors of my school. But that privilege doesn’t put food on the table. That privilege doesn’t pay my mortgage, which is a stretch on two teacher salaries. That privilege isn’t going to cover the thousands of dollars my wife and I will be paying for day care for our son, who is due at the end of March. Councilman Andrews is out of touch with that reality, the financial difficulties experienced by many of our public employees.
We have real budget problems in the County, and we face the difficult task of limiting the burden on taxpayers while continuing to provide high levels of services. The public employee unions get that, and will be sitting right there at the table working to find places to improve the county budget. But to attack the salary agreements of county employees in the media as if we are the reason for the budget problems is disingenuous at best. And to lecture public employees on the privilege of public service while ignoring the sacrifices they make to serve the public is simply arrogant. This is why I’m so deeply disappointed in Councilman Andrews. I expected better from him.
Don Praisner Is In
Here is some news that should get the juices flowing if you like politics. Marilyn Praisner's husband, Don, is set to announce his candidacy on Monday. It will be noon at the Stella Warner Building (that's the County Council Building) in Rockville. He is expected to have some well known elected officials standing behind him as he speaks.
So the list of candidates reads as follows: Don Praisner, Nancy Navarro (one of two candidates a working web site), Pat Ryan, Steve Kanstoroom, and Cary Lamari (the other). Cary ran for an At Large seat in 2006 and he has been active in Aspen Hill. Cary has former Council member Blair Ewing endorsing him.
Still only rumors about Delegate Ben Kramer getting into the race. Same goes for 2006 Primary challenger, Mike Jones. If either Jones or Kramer gets in we will announce it.
Currently, Navarro leads in the endorsements with Congresswoman-to-be Donna Edwards, Council member Valerie Ervin, Del. Tom Hucker, Sen. Rich Madaleno, and former Del. Gareth Murray. Navarro also claims the endorsement of the Coalition of Asian Pacific American Democrats (CAPAD) which is interesting since I would think that a group would not endorse until they have gotten back all of the surveys from the candidates. So if you are a candidate and you get the CAPAD survey I guess you can save time by not filing it out since they have their candidate already selected.
Where You Can Meet the Candidates
There are several Debates (or Forums as we like to call them in the 21st Century) that are in the planning stages that will be announced in the coming week as well. The firm events are:
The Aspen Hill Civic Association is going to host a candidate forum at the Aspen Hill Library on March 19 (Wed) evening. They will probably be several other groups cosponsoring the event.
The Greater Silver Spring Democratic Club will be sponsoring a forum on Wednesday April 2 in the White Oak area. Details to follow later.
The Leisure World Democratic Club, which is one of the largest Democratic clubs in the state, will be hosting their own Democratic Forum on Thursday April 10.
There will probably be another couple of events. I am working with some folks to get an event for the East County folks. Once a date and place is selected I will share it here. Several Democratic clubs are eager to sponsor an event. So they might add to the list of events or become cosponsors.
If any readers know of other events that are going on please post a comment here or just send me an email (look at my profile to find my email address). I will get the word.
Note: As a voter in District 4, I will be an active supporter of one of the candidates. According to our policy here at MPW, when that happens I will clear all posts with someone who is neutral. If I do post anything on this race I will tell you who I support in the post. We here at MPW will be up front and clear about who we support and why.
Key Dates
Filing deadline is March 24. Special Primary is tax day April 15. Special general is May 13.
Is MoCo in a Recession?
Recent attention to Montgomery County’s reduced, but still substantial budget deficit (now projected at $297 million) has caused many to pay closer attention to the state of the county’s economy. Simply put, is MoCo in a recession?
The classic definition of a recession is two or more consecutive quarters of negative growth in gross domestic product (GDP). At the national level, there are an excruciatingly large number of measures used to predict and track business cycle changes, many of which are tracked by the National Bureau of Economic Research. At the local level, fewer statistics are available. Survey sample sizes shrink, employer non-disclosure requirements become a problem and data in general are more scarce. But there is enough information to know, or at least speculate about on an informed basis, two questions: is the county’s economy growing now and will it grow in the near future?
Montgomery County’s Department of Finance is a good resource to start. It has a number of coincident indicators, or data that measure the state of the county’s economy right now. Through November 2007, the county’s labor force (the total number of civilians employed or looking for work) was 506,884, an increase of 0.5% from the year before. As a matter of fact, the county’s labor force has increased every year since 1997. Total payroll employment through June 2007 was 458,964, a drop of 0.7% from the year before. The local unemployment rate was 2.8% through November 2007, down only 0.1 from the year before. Sales taxes collected through October 2007 were up only 0.3% over the prior year, below the local rate of inflation (3.5%).
All of these figures point to a stagnant, but not shrinking economy. Jobs are stable, inflation is creeping up but unemployment is still low. (MoCo’s unemployment rate has not risen above 4% since at least 1992.) The Washington region’s employment base grew by 1.5% last year, faster than MoCo’s, which helped the county. MoCo’s tax collections are not growing as fast as government expenditures, but the private sector is not currently contracting.
However, there is more. To answer the question of whether the county’s economy will grow in the future, we have to examine leading indicators – data that correlate with future growth. At the local level, most leading indicators are related to the construction and real estate industries. These industries serve an important function because they channel economic growth from a handful of industries into a much broader range of industries. For example, in the Washington region, up to one-third of the local economy is associated with federal spending. When federal employees or contractors receive increases in compensation, they often spend them on new housing, housing upgrades or associated real estate. Those payments multiply through real estate agents, construction contractors and material supply industries, which then distribute them more widely through the economy. The construction and real estate industries therefore absorb current growth, magnify it and create future growth throughout the economy. When construction and real estate stop growing, it means that the future growth they promulgate throughout the economy will dissipate.
According to MoCo’s Department of Finance, residential construction starts totaled $485.9 million through November 2007, down 30% from the year before. Non-residential starts totaled $526.3 million, down 9% from the year before. Non-residential volume has declined every single year since 2004. Home sales through November 2007 totaled 9,348 – down 28% from the year before and 43% from 2004. And while the median price of a single-family home increased by 0.7% last year, average days on market has jumped from 26 in 2005 to 84 in 2007.
MoCo’s commercial office market is tight but beginning to slacken. According to Transwestern, the county’s office vacancy rate was 7.1% in the third quarter of 2007, a very low rate. But look at absorption – the amount of square footage newly leased minus the square footage vacated. That figure fell from 2.2 million SF in 2004 to 150,000 SF through the third quarter of 2007. That means the rate of demand for MoCo office space is rapidly cooling and may even turn negative.
So what’s the bottom line? Current economic growth throughout the county is flat. But the commercial real estate industry is slowing down, the commercial construction industry is contracting and the residential real estate and construction markets are in a steep downturn. MoCo is not in a recession right now. But if its real estate and construction industries do not bottom out this year, a recession later in 2008 or 2009 is not out of the question.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Pass the CARR Bill
Montgomery County faces a $297 million budget deficit. Prince George’s County is projecting a $100 million budget deficit. Baltimore City is seeing a 20-30% drop in recordation receipts and transfer taxes. So there is lots of talk in these jurisdictions and others of raising taxes and fees, freezing hiring and perhaps even delaying compensation increases for employees, all traditional methods of dealing with budget deficits. But new District 18 Delegate Al Carr has a better idea.
Carr points out that state law allows Baltimore City and the counties to set just one property tax rate that applies equally to all categories of real property. So in Baltimore County, for example, the county levies $1.10 per 100 dollars of assessed value regardless of whether the property is a house or a giant office building. Baltimore City’s rate is $2.27, again applied equally to housing or commercial properties. No county government is allowed to establish different rates for different property types.
Over the long run this can cause problems. Take Montgomery County. According to the county’s Department of Finance, residential property (including condominiums) accounted for 69.6% of the county’s total assessed value of real property in 1991. By 2007, that percentage had climbed to 76.8%. On the other hand, commercial property’s percentage of total assessed value fell from 30.4% to 23.2% over the same period of time. The state’s homestead tax credit limits tax increases on owner-occupied homes to 10% per year, but that merely delays tax increases rather than eliminates them. The bottom line is that, at least in Montgomery, the property tax burden has been slowly shifting from commercial owners to residents.
Maryland’s municipal governments, unlike the counties, are free to set different rates on different classes of property. The District of Columbia charges 85 cents per 100 assessed dollars for residential property and $1.85 per 100 assessed dollars for commercial property. A new Virginia law allows counties and cities in Northern Virginia to establish different property tax rates and Arlington County is considering doing so. Carr’s bill, HB 676 – cosponsored by Delegates Barkley, Bobo, Feldman, Gilchrist, Hucker, Kaiser, Lafferty, Manno, McIntosh, Montgomery, Tarrant, Taylor and Waldstreicher – would give Maryland’s counties and Baltimore City the same ability to establish different property tax rates that these other jurisdictions have. (District 18 Senator Rich Madaleno is sponsoring the companion bill in the Senate.) Hereinafter, this bill shall be designated the Commercial Assessment Rate Review (CARR) bill by the authority vested in me as the author of this blog post!
Won’t raising commercial property tax rates cause real estate and job losses? Not necessarily. Consider the District, which charges a commercial property tax rate more than double the residential rate. Commercial property manager Transwestern estimates the District’s office vacancy rate at 5.8%, one of the lowest rates in the country. Transwestern proclaims, “The District remains one of the top-performing areas in the nation with a strong tenant base, low vacancy rate and high barriers to entry.” Sounds like that higher commercial rate is really killing their economy.
And the CARR bill would even enable counties to lower commercial property tax rates below residential rates. Consider a county seeking to revitalize a run-down commercial center. Right now it could not do it through cutting the commercial property tax rate. With the CARR bill, it could.
The point is that this bill gives county governments new options for changing their revenue mix in good times and bad. And at this moment, Montgomery, Prince George’s, Baltimore and other jurisdictions need those options. Otherwise residential taxpayers and public employees could pay the price. So what are you waiting for guys? Pass the CARR bill!
The Maryland Lottery
From Marc Korman:
Despite all of the talk about the slots constitutional amendment on the ballot this November, there has been little discussion of one of the state’s existing form of legalized gambling, the lottery (for information about another form of gambling in Maryland, reads the report on bingo machines in the Washington Post). Many of the concerns expressed about slots are intertwined with concerns about the lottery.
I have heard three major reasons to oppose slots:
First, slots are not a fiscally sound method of budgeting. When Moody’s released its latest report on Maryland’s bond rating last week, it specifically highlighted the problem of the state over estimating slot revenue. Governor O’Malley’s projection for slots is $550 million a year, largely based on recapturing Maryland players currently traveling to other states.
Second, slots are regressive in that they disproportionately affect the poor because it is expected that the amount they play will have a negative correlation to how much they can afford to lose. Gambling is, of course, addictive. As one State Senator put it to me, a slot machine is basically a “Skinner Box” that reinforces gambling through occasional rewards and makes certain the player does not lose too quickly.
Third, there are major special interests involved. These include major casino companies, which will probably push to expand gambling to different locations and different types of games in the years ahead. There are also built in payments to specific interests that may not be worthy of the dollars. The slots enabling legislation sets aside 7% of the slots revenue, up to $100 million annually, to the ‘Purse Dedication Account’ to increase the winnings at horse tracks. An additional 2.5%, up to $40 million a year for the first eight years of slots, is dedicated to the ‘Racetrack Facility Renewal Account.’
Of these three reasons for opposing slots, the first two also apply to the Maryland Lottery. The third is less of a factor due to the lottery being run directly by the state. But unlike slots, the Maryland lottery does not exist as some hypothetical windfall in the future. It has been a part of state budgeting for over thirty years and is much more difficult to take on. The Maryland State Lottery Agency generated $1.577 billion in fiscal year 2007. Of this, $494 million went to the state’s general fund and $21 million to the Stadium Authority. The remainder went to expenses, including pay-outs to lottery winners.
Despite these contributions to state revenue, the lottery is still not the most sound method of raising revenue. Lottery proceeds as a share of the budget have been declining for years from a peak of 8% of the budget to 4%. The New York Times also ran a comprehensive story last year on the failure of lotteries nationwide to live up to their potential for government revenue. Lottery revenue shortfalls have led to an increase in the type of games offered and the frequency of drawings. That is the same type of gambling expansion slots opponents worry will happen in Maryland slots parlors/casinos as the years progress.
The lottery is also regressive. In fact, I believe it may be more regressive than slots. A Washington Post poll in 2005 found that 37% of adults played the lottery within the past month and 19% of those spent $20 a month doing it. While slots will be limited to five locations around the state and will, in most cases, require a special trip, the lottery is everywhere. Gas stations, convenience stores, and other locations all around Maryland peddle the product. In poorer, urban areas, it is hard to walk a block without finding a place where lottery tickets are available.
There are ten different lottery games overseen by the Maryland Lottery Agency. Keno and scratch-off games allow immediate gratification and are always available. Lotteries involving number drawings occur, in some form, on a daily basis. Individual ticket prices vary from $.50 to $20.00 per play depending on the game. This is far less than would be spent on a single trip to the slots parlor. The difference is that people can purchase multiple lottery tickets on their way home from work every day. What they pay for each play of the lottery is less than they would pay each time they hit the slots, but the frequency with which they do it is much higher.
Is repealing the Maryland lottery realistic? Given the continued pressures on the budget and real needs in education, transportation, and other areas, the answer is no. But if slots are defeated in November, slots opponents should think about the Maryland Lottery before patting themselves on the back.
Kevin Gillogly is NOT Running for County Council
We promised our readers close coverage of the County Council District 4 race, and boy do we have a doozy for you! In a shocking development, we have just learned that Maryland Politics Watch contributor and District 4 resident Kevin Gillogly is NOT running for the seat! We caught up with the famed blogger outside his office and landed this exclusive interview.
Adam: Kevin, why have you decided not to run?
Kevin: Well Adam, I was all set to do it. My website was ready. My fundraising solicitations were about to go out. I ordered the voter lists. My literature was prepped.
Adam: So what happened?
Kevin: I found out that they’re holding a special election! I thought MCDCC was going to pick the replacement. That would have made things a lot simpler.
Adam: Indeed it would have, although now you won’t have to buy any royal bon-bons.
Kevin: It’s a great shame. I had my team all put together. Nancy Navarro was going to be my campaign manager. Ben Kramer was going to be my treasurer. And Steve Kanstoroom was going to be my press liaison. But when I called a meeting of my team a couple weeks ago, none of them showed up. I’m still trying to figure that one out.
Adam: Yes, I’m sure that puzzles our readers too. It would have been nice to have a fellow blogger elected to office. Kind of like actually getting one geek into the prom.
Kevin: There is a bright side to it, I guess. For instance, I won’t have to take any phone calls from crazy activists.
Adam: That’s why council members hire staff. They’re supposed to take the abuse for you.
Kevin: Oh right. Hey Adam… when you were talking about the potential candidates, why did you mention Free State Politics’ Eric Luedtke but not me?
Adam: Well, he’s a serious blogger.
Kevin: What the hell do you mean by that?
Adam: Errr, moving on… are you going to endorse any of the remaining candidates?
Kevin: I don’t know. Most of my endorsed candidates lose. I mean, I ran as a pledged delegate for John Edwards for heaven’s sake!
Adam: Any advice for the candidates still in the race?
Kevin: Don’t read the blogs. You never know if the posts are for real or if they’re just ridiculous spoofs!
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
I'm Going Nowhere, Somebody Help Me
United Airlines outdid themselves yesterday. They managed to lose my luggage even though I didn't fly anywhere.
On the scale of life's trails, my experience with United doesn't exactly rank with "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings." Nonetheless, I suspect that if Dante were updating his inferno for the modern age, surely airports would features as one of the circles of Hell.
I was supposed to fly to Austin, Texas from Dulles Airport yesterday afternoon for a meeting at the University of Texas. Wanting to avoid rush hour, I arrived at the airport around 2.5 hours before my scheduled departure. And then I made my critical mistake: I checked a bag.
Since I checked in online and the afternoon push hadn't started yet, I whizzed through check-in and security. I violated the first rule of airport karma by assuming that all was going well and unusually fast. I've had days when I've had to wait an hour to check-in on the line reserved for business class passengers. However, the airport gods don't like you to presume.
The reason for the endless delay of my flight was unusually lame even for the airlines. No, it wasn't weather. Weather is frustrating but causes genuine problems. No, it wasn't mechanical problems with the plane. One wishes planes were always problem free but I imagine I am glad that they don't let them fly when they are having mechanical problems.
In this case, the weather was fine at both the departure and destination airports, and the plane was supposedly in tip-top shape and parked at the gate.
The problem was that United lacked a crew to fly the plane.
You would think finding a new crew wouldn't be that difficult since Dulles is a United hub but the crew apparently had to be flown up from Charlotte and they were delayed because their plane had mechanical problems.
So United pulled the slow motion, endless series of delays rope-a-dope when they further delay the flight every couple of hours by a couple more hours until it is canceled. If you checked bags, like myself, you had no hope because they couldn't switch you to another flight.
United was unusually bad, even for the airlines, throughout the situation. Announcements were made only sporadically (as in hours apart)--the passengers were a better source of information. The gate was left unmanned for awhile when an agent left at the end of her shift. We through three different gate agents during our stay at Gate D14. Agents there and at the oddly-named "customer service" desk had about zero interest in finding out or conveying information to us.
The "customer service" desk nearest to D14 had one person when I was there and thus an endless wait so I trekked over to C concourse when I finally decided to pack it in and go home at 9pm. They did issue a refund and gave me a coupon of United funny money which is very difficult to use not just because it has the usual panoply of airline limitations but has to be presented in person at the airport.
The "customer service" desk can't help with bags so I had to go to baggage handling. Phyllis in baggage handling insisted I wait because they were going "right now" to get my bag off the small plane. She agreed grudgingly to have my bags delivered about 50 minutes later when they still hadn't shown up.
The evening was topped off by an automatic computer call to my cell phone announcing that my flight had been canceled about 30 minutes after I arrived home.
It turns out that it was a work of fiction that they were locating my bag. It is now over 24 hours since my flight was supposed to have departed and United still can't find the bag. I've spent several hours on the phone trying to navigate the mouse maze of call routing lines. The baggage handling line hung up on me after a recorded voice announced the termination of the call with a quick mention of not wanting to waste my time.
I went through seven different "customer service" people who constantly gave me new numbers to call (with new call routing systems) and promised to stay on the line while they transferred me (and then didn't) but who repeatedly told me how valued I was as a United Premier member even as they proceeded to do absolutely nothing to help me.
Later this afternoon, someone finally admitted that my bags had been flown to Austin today. However, they're still missing in action.
Well, I guess I should be glad something got to travel.
CRG Alleges “Intimidation” by Dana Beyer
Citizens for a Responsible Government (CRG), the organization seeking to overturn Montgomery County’s Transgender Anti-Discrimination bill is alleging “intimidation” by County Council staffer Dana Beyer. And the group claims to have video evidence supporting their allegations.
CRG states in a press release that Beyer encountered its signature collectors outside a Giant Supermarket at Bethesda’s Westwood Shopping Center on Monday February 18. The following six-second cellphone video shows Beyer telling the collectors, “An email went out; you’re going to be asked to leave. Any petitions gathered today are illegal.”
CRG claims this is part of a pattern of “harassment and intimidation” by Beyer and others. Former Republican candidate for Congress Dan Zubairi also alleges that Beyer “ordered” him not to sign CRG’s petition but CRG supplies no evidence to back up that allegation. Finally, CRG alleges that Beyer violated Section 19A-14 of the County Code during the course of her activities. CRG attorney John Garza said he will “probably” file a civil rights lawsuit soon.
Beyer, an aide to County Council Member Duchy Trachtenberg, Vice-President of Equality Maryland and former candidate for District 18 Delegate, told her side of the story to this blog. She said she encountered CRG’s petition collectors on Primary Election Day, the following weekend and President’s Day (2/18), the date of the incident in question. At the Bethesda Giant, she entered the store, told the manager that the petition collectors were violating store policy (which allows the group to collect signatures on only one weekend per month), and left soon after making the statements to the group shown on the video.
Council Member Trachtenberg was the lead sponsor of the transgender bill. Beyer, a transgender female who serves on Trachtenberg’s staff, worked on the bill and advocates for keeping it on the books along with passage of a similar state-level law. Activists with Teach the Facts and Equality Maryland are now challenging the validity of CRG’s signatures.
“These people had a right to collect signatures if they’re not trespassing and they did so. But if they’re trespassing, there’s no right for them to be there,” Beyer told us. “I didn’t harass or intimidate anybody… I don’t think what I did is wrong at all.” Beyer accused CRG of employing scare tactics, saying, “You want to talk about harassment and intimidation – we’ve gotten death threats! I have to deal with this because people are threatening my life and those of my friends and colleagues.” Trachtenberg has also talked about “spiteful messages and threats,” telling the Frederick News Post last year, “(They) left a message on my home phone asking my husband if he knows my sex.”
CRG has two things going against it. First, its video clip is only six seconds long. It does not have any context associated with the events before or after the video was taken. That context, along with testimony and evidence about any other events at other locations, will be relevant in any lawsuit. Second, the organization has a history of distorting the content of the legislation. Given that history, CRG’s version of events cannot be trusted as the entire truth.
But the incident between Beyer and CRG raises some interesting questions.
Did Beyer violate the County’s ethics code?
County Code Chapter 19A-4(m) defines a “public employee” as including “the County Executive and each member of the County Council” along with “any person employed by a County agency, including the director of the agency.” No exemptions appear for council staff or any employees operating off-the-clock. Even non-paid board and commission members are treated as employees.
County Code Chapter 19A-14(e) states, “A public employee must not intimidate, threaten, coerce or discriminate against any person for the purpose of interfering with that person’s freedom to engage in political activity.” Do Beyer’s activities in the video constitute intimidation? That question may be examined in court.
How does this reflect on the Montgomery County Council?
Should CRG go to court, they will probably attempt to tie Beyer’s conduct to her supervisor, Council Member Trachtenberg. County Code Chapter 19A-14(f) states, “A person must not influence or attempt to influence a public employee to violate this Chapter.” CRG’s attorneys may very well ask whether Trachtenberg knew of Beyer’s activities. Trachtenberg has made ethics one of her priorities while on the council. For example, she questioned the ethical implications of lobbyist-paid trips taken to Israel by other council members in the past, ultimately causing the County to abandon them. Trachtenberg has set high ethical standards for herself and others and we would expect her to vigorously battle CRG’s charges in court. Other council members and their staff will pay close attention.
How does this incident change the debate over the legislation?
There is little question that this video will be a propaganda boon to CRG. They can now expand their argument beyond the narrow confines of the legislation (on which they are clearly wrong) and into the realm of civil liberties. CRG will ask what business a County Council employee had in enforcing Giant’s solicitation policy. Trespassing on Giant’s property is a matter for company management and the police. Throw in the fact that the council employee in question was a known advocate for the bill and an employee of its lead sponsor and CRG will claim political targeting by the government. Many people who support the transgender bill will be uncomfortable with the idea of county employees – especially the personal staff of council members – seeking to get petition collectors ejected from store premises. Civil liberties questions are now going to arise on both sides of this debate.
Update: The Sentinel's coverage is here.
The Purple Line for Social Justice?
The Washington Post wrote an interesting piece on Latino immigrants and the housing market in Langley Park. Buried in it was an interesting nugget on the potential impact of the Purple Line on working-class immigrants--a key sector of the populations that proponents hope will be served by the new link:William Hanna, an urban-planning professor at the University of Maryland, has studied the neighborhood for 12 years. He sends out a bilingual e-mail newsletter to 700 residents every two weeks and helps to organize an annual street festival, which this year will be held May 4.
This same process occurred in Columbia Heights when the Green Line stop opened.
He said he's alarmed by how expensive housing has gotten in the neighborhood: He hears that one-bedroom apartments now cost $825, when 10 years ago they were $485. He worries that working-class immigrants will be pushed out, especially if the Purple Line arrives at the intersection of University and New Hampshire, as is planned.
Students March to Vote in Texas
I realize that this blog focuses on Maryland but I was supposed to be in Austin, Texas today (for work, not politics). I thought this story was interesting and shows how mobilized students have gotten over this year's elections.
The Field blog covered this story:Texas Republicans have worked overtime to make it harder for key Democratic voting groups to vote and be represented fairly. The redistricting games they’ve played are infamous. And for the Prairie View A&M University precincts, they put the early-polling place more than seven miles from the school.
Update: The Houston Chronicle has covered the march and places it in the context of long-term voting rights problems in that County. A colleague has sent me links to more YouTube of the event:
So what did the students in this video do? They shut down the highway as they marched seven miles to cast their votes on the first day of early voting.
Students at Texas Southern Support the March
More Students Marching for Voting Rights
Students Voting at the End of the March
Monday, February 25, 2008
Changing the Size of the County Council
With most of the focus on the special election to replace the late Marilyn Praisner you might have missed this nugget in the Monday's WaPo.
CoEx Ike Leggett wants to expand the size of the MoCo Council.His plan, which he had proposed several years ago while a council member, calls for adding two members who would represent new districts. Currently, five council members are elected by district, and four are elected at-large. Leggett also proposed changing the method for picking the council president, suggesting that a candidate run at-large in a president's race for a four-year term. Currently, the council president is picked by colleagues and serves a one-year term.
The MoCo Civic Federation was pushing for a change to the County Council from 4 At Large and 5 District members to 9 District members in 2004. It was County Question C on the November 2004 ballot. It lost 60.6% to 39.4%.
I remember Ike mentioning his desire to expand the county council from 9 members to 11 members (7 Districts and 4 At Large) during the 2006 primary race. The article indicates that Ike had wanted to expand the County Council for several years. It makes sense. Having 9 members to represent a County of almost a million people is daunting. DC has 13 members to represent a population that is around 70% of the size of MoCo.
The next step is for the MoCo Charter Commission to come back with its report in May.
MCEA Begins Endorsement Process in County Council D4
The Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA) is starting its endorsement process for the County Council District 4 Special Election.
Wednesday’s Gazette will contain the following ad:MCEA Candidate Recommendation Process
Gerson, MCEA’s Director of Community Outreach, offered our readers the following description of their process:
County Council (District 4) Vacancy
Special Election
During the next week, the Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA), an organization of over 11,000 education professionals in our community, will be conducting candidate interviews and reviewing qualifications in connection with its recommendation process for the upcoming Special Election to be held in conjunction with the vacancy for Montgomery County Council (District 4).
Formal announcement of the individual recommended by MCEA will occur in March 2008.
Candidates interested in seeking recommendation by MCEA should contact Jon Gerson at 301-294-6232 or email: jgerson@mcea.nea.org by March 3, 2008 to ensure full consideration by the organization.MCEA conducts one of the most thorough candidate screening processes of any organization in the county. MCEA contacts all incumbents and all announced and rumored candidates for office. We also run ads in both major party county newsletters soliciting candidates to participate in our screening process (note: because the timeframe for the Council vacancy did not allow placement in the party newsletters, we are running a ¼ page color ad in the Olney/Burtonsville/Wheaton editions of this Wednesday’s Gazette). All candidates are asked to complete a detailed questionnaire. All candidates are invited to participate in a personal interview with a team of rank-and-file MCEA member-volunteers from the Political Action and Legislative Support (PALS) Committee. (note: in 2006, over 100 candidates for public office were interviewed.) Each candidate is asked a set of structured questions. The interviews are all taped. The PALS Committee then discusses the interviews, reviews the questionnaires, and makes a recommendation to the MCEA Board. A 58% vote by the PALS Committee is necessary for a recommendation. The Board then reviews the recommendations, considers the broader political contexts, and makes its own recommendations; again with a 58% majority requirement. Those recommendations then go to MCEA’s final decision-making body, the Representative Assembly. At the RA, typically more than 170 elected MCEA Reps from schools all across the county discuss and debate the candidates. Approval of final recommendations of candidates again requires a 58% majority vote.
Donna Edwards Statement for Navarro
This is one of the three endorsements that every candidate running in County Council District 4 would like to have. The others, of course, would come from County Executive Ike Leggett and MCEA, neither of whom has announced their support. Edwards' statement follows:Over the years, I have been fortunate to meet many smart, talented, and visionary leaders from all across our district. One such individual is Nancy Navarro. Her experience on the Montgomery County Board of Education and years of service in numerous volunteer roles throughout the County make Nancy an extremely well qualified candidate to become the next member of the Montgomery County Council. She embodies the critical qualities of proven leadership, understanding of the issues, integrity and progressive ideals that we need in our elected officials. I am proud to offer Nancy Navarro my endorsement in her bid to join the Montgomery County Council succeeding Marilyn Praisner in her tremendous commitment to public
How long before Council D4 residents see a mailout with Edwards and Navarro in the same photo?
service. Donna Edwards
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Del. Shewell and Those Pesky Weeklies
A few weeks ago, I wrote about Delegate Tanya Shewell's bill to regulate the distribution of regional free unsolicited newspapers. The bill, as written, would also likely affect small community association newsletters and other neighborhood publications. I have spoken with Del. Shewell and she assures me that is not her intent.
The Shewell bill covers any "circular, newspaper, magazine, paper, or booklet that is published at regular intervals and distributed to the public" that is "delivered to a residential address in the state without the prior consent of the resident." This definition would seem to include community association newsletters, as well as a number of other small-time neighborhood publications.
The unsolicited publications must tell people how they can have further deliveries stopped. Continued delivery would then constitute an “unfair or deceptive trade practice” and be punishable by a fine.
Shewell, a Carroll County Republican, says the unsolicited delivery of unwanted weeklies like The Examiner is the number one issue constituents contact her about: These weeklies clog storm drains, leach ink into our waterways, become trash in the community, and can serve as a signal that the resident is out of town. The abundance of yellowed, wet newspapers creates an eyesore that lowers property values.
Del. Shewell is aware of the constitutional issues raised by her bill, saying that she worked with Maryland Assistant Attorney General Bonnie Kirkland to craft a bill that would not violate the First Amendment. In terms of constitutionality, she says that Kirkland likened her proposal to the federal "Do Not Call" telemarketing opt-out list.
However, I'm not sure that's quite so good a comparison. Telemarketing involves commercial speech, which generally receives less First Amendment protection than political speech. Telemarketing also involves a direct intrusion into the home, which newspaper delivery does not, a factor suggesting less constitutional protection for telemarketing than for newspaper delivery.
As far as community association newsletters go, Del. Shewell had not taken them into account when drafting her bill. Assuring me that she does not want to include them, she expressed a willingness to amend the bill to ensure that does not happen.
The House Economic Matters Committee has scheduled a hearing on the bill for March 6.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
What Transgender Opponents Really Think
Finally, we uncover the true agenda of the opponents of Montgomery County’s Transgender Anti-Discrimination bill. But first some background.
Last September, Montgomery County Council Members Duchy Trachtenberg, Valerie Ervin and Marc Elrich introduced Bill No. 23-07. The bill’s purpose was to “prohibit discrimination in housing, employment, public accommodations, cable television service and taxicab service on the basis of gender identity.” Its primary effect was to add “gender identity” as a protected class from discrimination along with age, race, religion, color, sex, sexual orientation, handicap, national origin or marital status under County Code Chapter 27.
After the bill was introduced, it was amended to include the following language:A person must not deny any person access to the equal use of any restroom, shower, dressing room, locker room, or similar facility associated with the gender identity that the person publicly or exclusively expresses or asserts.
After significant public pressure, the council stripped this language from the bill. The bill was then passed by an 8-0 vote and signed by the County Executive.
But the controversy continues. Bill opponents have launched a petition drive to put its repeal on the ballot in the next general election. As David Lublin has noted, their success in meeting the threshold of 25,000 signatures is far from assured.
One dimension of the controversy is whether the bill prevents bathroom operators from forbidding biological men to use female bathrooms and locker rooms. As stated above, the language on that issue was stripped from the bill prior to its passage. Council President Mike Knapp recently commented on this in a press release:“We have heard some people are confused about the effect of this new law on how the operator of a public accommodation controls the use of a public bathroom or locker room,” said Council President Knapp. “Bill 23-07 did not change the law in this area.”
Citizens for a Responsible Government (CRG), which is leading the fight to repeal the bill, told the Gazette that the language “is too vague.” But in gathering signatures for their petition drive, evidence is accumulating that the group did tell signers that the bill allowed men into women’s bathrooms – an opinion unsupported by the bill’s language.
Opponents of the legislation have circulated petitions to send the law to referendum, telling potential signers that the legislation requires men to be allowed in women’s bathrooms and locker rooms.
This is not accurate, Knapp said. The law still allows the operators of public bathrooms and locker rooms to continue to separate their facilities based on gender identity or biological gender. For example, a restaurant owner can require a biological male presenting as a female to use the men’s bathroom. The new law does not require a restaurant owner to allow biological males access to women’s bathrooms, or vice-versa.
“The misinformation being put out about this law really troubles me,” said Council President Knapp. “We guaranteed that certain people in our County will have the same rights as other residents—and that is all we did. Those who intentionally mislead people about what this bill means will have to explain what is behind their actions, but we want everyone to know exactly what this law is about.”
CRG is an offshoot of Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum (CRC), which has struggled for years to exclude discussion of homosexuality from Montgomery County Public Schools. Prior to CRG’s establishment, CRC led a crusade against Bill No. 23-07, stating on its website:Bill 23-07 adds “gender-identity” to the current Non-Discrimination Law, and will allow males who self identify themselves as females to have open access to ALL women’s and girls’ restrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms, and showers. In other words, a male teacher or student will be able to use the female restrooms and locker rooms if he thinks he is a female.
Again, this view is directly contradicted by the language that was passed.
Furthermore, prior to CRG’s start of a paper petition, CRC posted an online petition to mount pressure against the bill. The statements of the signers are very revealing and if you read them, you will quickly realize their real intent. Following are some of the signers of the online petition against Bill No. 23-07 speaking in their own words:Sheila F. Stepek, petition signer 47: “Those unable to use the proper facilities can go find a tree!!!!”
Joan Press, 109: “What restrooms are the Council members going to use? They are setting OUR children and neices up for RAPE. The council members and the State of Maryland will be hels accountable and sued for this one. Between the HOMOSEXUAL class in Montgoery County Public Schools and now this we have NO rights. Only in America! It's time to move, and we pay high taxes for this? They are Crazy or we are stupid! Or they are trying to make us look both! I didn't vote!”
Kathleen O’Connor, 167: “Stop using MY tax dollars to strip MY parental rights and stop endandering and indoctrinating our children with endless perversions.”
Bonnie Van Veldhuizen, 290: “HEADLINES: MONTGOMERY COUNTY MARYLAND EXTENDS OPEN INVITATION TO ALL PEDOPHILES AND STALKERS SEEKING NEW TARGETS. Shame on every council member who supports this bill. It may be your granddaughter or grandson in the next stall.”
Jeff He, 308: “Nonsense. Who summit the bill should GO TO HELL!!!”
Stephen W. Sweet, 492: “Gay is one thing. But a man/women thinking they are the opposite sex is litterally not figureitively, INSANE!! If this becomes acceptable; I promise the county counsel I will then become a dog and your yard, tree, light post and fire hydrant , are then MY bathroom.”
D. Selleh, 732: “Why isn't the council advising free psychological help instead of encouranging dilusion?”
Robert J. Cassotto, 757: “God is Still in control and those who are not with Him are against Him.He will show is all that He lives.God is also Just and we will very soon have to pay for following satan.....some of us will, that is! Come Lord Jesus !”
Michael Garlick, 768: “Matt. 23:27: Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.”
Lucy Kiganda, 833: “IT'S NOT ENOUGH THAT OUR CHILDREN ARE EXPOSED TO THE PEDOPHILES OF THIS WORLD, NOW THEY HAVE TO FACE THEM IN THE RESTROOMS AND LOCKERROOOMS! HOW PREPOSTEROUS!”
David John, 991: “This is shame wellcame evil in America bye bye God and son and h spirit, What next patition man or women to marry pets”
John Fulayter, 1006: “To applease's the transgender, is to undermine's the well-being of public's mentality & pshyical show how the bill or in any form cannot encourage the harmony but put it backwards to wondering why we only have more dysfunctional problem to fix's. Please do not allow this bill back fired the public safety.”
District 2A Delegate Appointment Proceeding in Secrecy
The resignation of District 2A (Washington County) Delegate Robert A. McKee promises scandal in the newspapers for some time to come. But the appointment process to replace him may also be scandalous.
As readers of this blog know, when a state legislator steps down, the county central committee of his or her party selects the replacement. This process has been used seven times over the last year (Senate 35, 39 and 47; Delegate 16, 18, 35A and 39). Voters have no role until the next regular election, which can often be several years away.
Yesterday, the Gazette reported the following about the District 2A appointment process now underway:Meanwhile, Washington County Republican Central Committee leaders are tight-lipped on the process to replace McKee.
Contrast this with the appointment process used by the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee for the District 18 Delegate vacancy. MCDCC posted all applications on its website. They posted as many recommendation letters as they could. (Ultimately, there were too many letters for Al Carr for the committee to keep up with.) The District 18 Caucus hosted an open candidates forum and moderator Charles Duffy accepted written questions from the audience. Multiple MCDCC members posted their reasoning for their votes on this site. And on the night of selection, MCDCC allowed Kevin Gillogly to cover the process on this blog and voted by open ballot.
Interested candidates had until Thursday to apply, but committee chairwoman Penny Pittman declined to say how many people have submitted applications or expressed interest in the vacancy. She also did not say when the committee would interview candidates.
‘‘We are not leaking anything to the press,” she said Thursday. ‘‘We are not [releasing the interview date] either so that we won’t have the members of the media waiting outside to question candidates. We are choosing to convey information through press releases so that information is conveyed accurately.”
Is MCDCC's appointment process perfect? No, and we will continue to discuss it. Did they make a real effort to increase the transparency of their process? Absolutely, and they deserve credit for it. The Washington County Republican Central Committee would do well to adopt the reforms used by MCDCC.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Latest News from the Special Election Front
Not enough for a real post but here are the scraps of paper I have.
Nancy Navarro is the first one to have a web site up and running.
Pat Ryan, according to Pat himself, is the first one to have all of his filing papers in at BOE.
Finally 2006 Democratic primary challenger to Marilyn Praisner, Mike Jones is going to get into the race.
So the card reads four (in no particular order): Colesville resident Navarro, Fairland resident Pat Ryan, Layhill Village East resident Mike Jones and Ashton resident Steve Kanstoroom.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
County Council District 4 Special Election Preview, Part Two
As noted in Part One, Mrs. Praisner’s premature departure has left a large vacuum in Council District 4’s political world. But there are potential aspirants for her seat. The actual and possible candidates in the all-important Democratic primary include:
Board of Education President Nancy Navarro
Navarro, a co-founder of immigrant services non-profit Centro Familia, was originally appointed to the school board in 2004. She quickly formed an alliance with fellow board member (and future County Council Member) Valerie Ervin. When Navarro ran for election in 2006, she appeared on the Apple Ballot and leapfrogged Sharon Cox to become President shortly afterwards. Navarro declared for office on Tuesday and was promptly endorsed by progressive hero Donna Edwards.
Navarro is the early favorite for three reasons. First, her position on the school board gives her substantial district-wide name recognition. Second, she would be a logical choice to once again appear on the Apple Ballot. (Note: MCEA has not disclosed its plans.) Third, there is growing concern among politically-active MoCo women about a recent trend of filling vacancies formerly held by women with men. (The state legislative appointments in Districts 16, 18 and 47 come to mind.) If Navarro is the only female candidate in the field, she will benefit.
Current State Legislators
Of the eight current state legislators in Districts 14 and 19, all but one (District 14 Delegate Karen Montgomery) live in Council District 4. Two of them have run unsuccessfully for County Council before. District 19 Delegate Ben Kramer was the Democratic nominee in District 2 in 1994 and ran at-large in 1998. District 14 Delegate Herman Taylor was the Democratic nominee in District 2 in 1998. (Ironically, both Taylor and Kramer were defeated by Republican Nancy Dacek.) Any of the current state legislators would be plausible contenders for Mrs. Praisner’s seat.
However, not many of them will actually run. First, three of them (District 14 Senator Rona Kramer and Delegates Herman Taylor and Anne Kaiser) are in their second term and District 19 Delegate Henry Heller is in his sixth term. These legislators have or are gaining seniority in the General Assembly, probably making it less tempting to leave. Second, because their state legislative incomes ($43,000 and up) supplement their salaries from regular employment, they would have to make significant financial sacrifices to accept a sole County Council member salary of $89,721. Third, each of them would have to work hard to raise money quickly and make contacts in the portion of Council District 4 that they do not currently represent.
The most likely exception to the above rules is Ben Kramer. Kramer, the son of former County Executive Sidney Kramer and brother of current District 14 Senator Rona Kramer, is a self-employed businessmen who has loaned his delegate campaign $124,450. If he is still interested in following his father into County government, he is more than capable of waging a well-financed campaign aided by name recognition.
Former State Legislators
Former District 19 Delegates Adrienne Mandel and Carol Petzold unsuccessfully ran for Senate in 2006 against Mike Lenett. Either of them may be interested in a council run. But they would face the same problems the current state legislators have: the need to raise money quickly and campaign in the parts of Council District 4 that they did not represent in the statehouse.
Civic Activists
MoCo has hundreds of civic activists who volunteer substantial amounts of time on various causes. When many of these activists broaden their agendas beyond their neighborhood-specific issues, they often focus on limiting development, pursuing accountability in government and restraining government taxes and spending. These sorts of issues interest participants in organizations like the Montgomery County Civic Federation, the Montgomery County Taxpayers League and Neighborspac.
Two District 4 activists have already declared their candidacy.
Steve Kanstoroom, an activist from Ashton, looks a bit like an older Dirk Benedict without the cigar. Among the issues he has worked on in recent years are illegal deforestation, abuses in FEMA’s flood insurance program and the Planning Department’s denial of street addresses to some residents of Sandy Spring. Kanstoroom even exposed an individual who had appeared as an expert witness at Board of Appeals hearings as never having possessed a professional engineer license. The Montgomery County Civic Federation gave him its “Community Hero” award in 2006. But not everyone is a fan of Kanstoroom’s. Council Member George Leventhal was incensed after Kanstoroom picketed his house over the Sandy Spring issue.
Patrick E. Ryan is a management consultant with the Washington Federal Practice of PriceWaterhouseCoopers. He is a co-chair of Action in Montgomery, a multi-purpose activist group affiliated with the Saul Alinsky-founded Industrial Areas Foundation. He is also active in the Church of Resurrection Catholic Parish, the National Coalition of Homeless Veterans and the Fairland Master Plan Civic Advisory Committee. Ryan lives in northeastern Silver Spring near Burtonsville.
Civic activists were a natural part of Mrs. Praisner’s base. But a pure civic candidate faces problems of name recognition, raising money and securing endorsements – all of which are exacerbated in a short campaign. The 2006 race in Council District 2 provides an example. Longtime activist and Neighborspac endorsee Sharon Dooley ran against well-funded, endorsement-rich, MCEA-backed incumbent Mike Knapp. Dooley lost the race by 64-36%.
Perhaps the biggest problem Kanstoroom and Ryan have is each other. In a one-seat race, they threaten to split much of Mrs. Praisner’s coalition, thereby allowing another candidate to win. And there may yet be other civic candidates.
Finally, Free State Politics blogger Eric Luedtke lives in Council District 4. Luedtke is an MCEA member and is one of the most-learned, best-researched bloggers in the state. Are we going to see any announcements on FSP, Eric?
Our readers should watch three things going forward. First, who is getting endorsements from organizations with money (like the Chamber of Commerce) and ground operations (like MCEA)? Second, who is raising money? Campaign finance reports are due to the State Board of Elections on March 18, April 4, May 2 and June 3. Third, who is the County Executive, a Burtsonsville resident, going to support? A literature mailout with the Executive’s picture on it will be valuable in a short campaign with low turnout.
Stay tuned for more on this race.
Update: You can read the Post's coverage here. The Post floats one additional name: Cary Lamari, former president of the Montgomery County Civic Federation. Lamari finished 11th out of 13 candidates in the 2006 council at-large race.
Update 2: The Gazette's coverage is here and here.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
White Women Can't Vote in MoCo?
From Sally Hand:
I have been voting since 1977, and a registered voter in Maryland since January 2006. Yet when I went to vote at my local polling place I was told I was not a registered voter in the state of Maryland. Even with my voter registration card the BOE had made several errors.
First the person looking me up in the system could not use the system. He had no idea what to do until a member of the Board of Elections came over and showed him how to use the database. He found me but in the wrong district.
Then I called a voter suppression number who told me to go back to the precinct I had voted in the last election. I went there they did have me on the rolls but since I moved over 21 days ago I couldn't vote there. At least here they had me fill out an official change of address.
So I went back to the first polling place – they gave me a provisional ballot (who knows if it will get counted) and I voted manually.
This took several hours – going back and forth. What if I hadn't fought back – knowing that I had my card from the BOE? What if I didn't have a car so I could easily go from poll to poll?
What I found out was there were a lot of these errors – many people in my precinct voted provisionally because of change of address issues. The only response from BOE – must be a computer error. COMPUTER ERROR – if these guys can't get the changes of addresses right how can we trust them with computerized / no paper trail ballots?
I called BOE this morning to make sure they had it right for the November election. Answer they will have to look into it and get back to me.
I will keep you posted – but I have lost faith in the BOE and believe that they need oversight. If we can't trust the BOE then all elections are full of doubt.
Update: After calling the BOE, I have received a change of address card similar to the one the sent me in Dec. 2006 – but still no voter registration card.
Presidential Primary Results by LD with a Close Look at D18
Election result junkies can find the unofficial results for each congressional and legislative district as well as each polling place in Montgomery County online. Obama carried all eight legislative districts in MoCo by the following margins:
District 14: 57% to 41%
District 15: 50% to 48%
District 16: 55% to 43%
District 17: 50% to 47%
District 18: 56% to 41%
District 19: 50% to 47%
District 20: 64% to 35%
District 39: 55% to 43%
Rich Madaleno forwarded me a nice table with the precinct results for District 18. Obama carried all but six of the thirty-five precincts in District 18. Obama's three best precincts in the District were comprised by Chevy Chase municipalities (Chevy Chase Village, Town of Chevy Chase, and Sections 3 and 5).
Clinton carried five precincts with relatively high shares of Latino voters in the eastern part of the District (Twinbrook East, Randolph Hills, CT Ave. Estates, Glemont Hills-Wheaton HS, and CT Ave. Park-Turkey Run).
However, Obama did very well in other precincts in the eastern portion of D18. After Chevy Chase, Obama's three best precincts in District 18 were Forest Glen-Capital View, Woodside-North Woodside, and Silver Spring-Woodside Park.
Referendum Petition Signatures Unusual
Opponents of Montgomery County's inclusion of gender identity in its anti-discrimination law claim to have collected enough signatures to petition the law to referendum. But have they?
"Citizens for a Responsible Government" (a.k.a. "Citizens who Make Irresponsible False Claims about Legislation") states that they have collected 32,087 signatures. Since 25,000 signatures from registered voters are needed to petition a law to referendum, it would appear they have enough signatures.
Except that the validation rate for signatures is normally 70%, and 70% of 32,087 is well under 25,0000. The law further requires that 12,500 of the 25,000 signatures be submitted by February 4 with the remainder due by February 19. Of the 15,462 signatures turned in on February 4, 13,476 were validated by the Board of Elections--a validation rate of 87%.
Sounds like someone needs to take a second look at the petitions to see if all the signatures were properly validated and met the requirements. Either the referendum opponents were incredibly skilled in their collection efforts or the signatures have not yet been examined rigorously. I imagine supporters of the legislation will try to find out in order to prevent a vote on the law.
County Council District 4 Special Election Preview, Part One
The upcoming special election for MoCo’s District 4 County Council seat is important for two reasons. First, it is the first time a council member other than Marilyn Praisner will represent the district. Second, it will decide the close balance of power on the council, especially on issues related to growth. And so we offer special coverage of this race here at Maryland Politics Watch.
Montgomery County Council District 4 was created in 1990, along with the four other council districts. Prior to that time, the council had seven members, all of whom were elected at-large. In 1990, the present system was set up assigning one council member to each of five districts, with four others running at-large. The districts roughly mirror the county’s population distribution with Council District 4 covering East County.
Geography
District 4’s boundaries are (roughly) the county line on the northeast and east, the outskirts of Olney and Brookeville on the north, Rock Creek and Veirs Mill Road on the west and Randolph Road, Four Corners and US-29 on the south. You can view the official district map here.
The district contains two distinct sub-sectors. The western sector includes the neighborhoods between the northern reaches of Wheaton and the southern outskirts of Olney. Much of this sector is accounted for by Aspen Hill. The eastern sector includes the US-29 corridor from White Oak to Burtonsville as well as the areas near the Howard County border. The dividing line between the sectors is New Hampshire Avenue. We make this distinction because these two sectors have very different demographics, as we shall see below.
There are no urbanized downtowns in District 4. The vast majority of the district is covered by single-family neighborhoods with only one Metro station (Glenmont) that is very close to the District 5 border. There are a few commercial strips along Georgia Avenue and Layhill Road in the west, US-29 and Cherry Hill Road in the east, and New Hampshire Avenue. But the lack of density robs the district of any centrally-recognized locations of social, political or civic activity.
Demographics
District 4 conforms fairly closely to the Census Bureau’s Public Use Microdata Areas (PUMAs) 01005 and 01006. (Those areas, however, include part of Kensington and exclude part of the area along the Howard County border, so they are not a perfect fit.) According to Census, the two PUMAs had a population of 236,844 in 2006. The population was 44% white non-Hispanic, 26% black non-Hispanic, 17% Hispanic and 11% Asian non-Hispanic. Two-thirds of the population is native-born while one-third is foreign-born. Of the 33% foreign-born, almost two-thirds (19%) are non-citizens. Forty percent of the district’s population speaks a language other than English at home. Median household income is $74,656, lower than the county’s average ($87,624). Forty-one percent of MoCo’s black population lives in this district.
There are significant demographic differences between the two sub-sectors. On the western side, which includes Georgia Avenue, Aspen Hill and most of Layhill Road, the population was 51% white non-Hispanic, 17% black non-Hispanic, 21% Hispanic and 8% Asian non-Hispanic. The median household income was $70,170. On the eastern side, which includes the US-29 corridor along with Colesville, the population was 37% white non-Hispanic, 35% black non-Hispanic, 11% Hispanic and 14% Asian non-Hispanic. The median household income was $80,043. So the western part of the district is whiter, more Latino, and relatively poorer than the eastern side. On the eastern side, the black population almost equals the white population, Latinos are not as numerous and the residents are nearly as wealthy as the county average.
Politics
The natural breeding grounds of politicians are municipalities and civic associations. District 4 does not have any municipalities and its civic associations are generally not as well-organized as those closer to Downtown Silver Spring and the I-270 corridor though there are a few exceptions). Those factors combined with the lack of urban density and the long dominance by Mrs. Praisner have created something of a political vacuum in the district. Mrs. Praisner had no real rivals and no designated successors.
The population’s racial diversity is not well reflected by its politicians. State Legislative District 14, which accounts for much of the eastern side of the district, is represented by three white women and one black man. State Legislative District 19, which accounts for much of the western side, is represented by four white men. Mrs. Praisner was the only County Council Member who lived in County District 4. However, there is one important exception to the above rule: County Executive Ike Leggett, who served four terms as an at-large member of the council, is a Burtonsville resident.
Dan Reed’s outstanding East County blog Just Up the Pike provides a good feel for East County. Dan paints a picture of a community handicapped by lack of transit, car-oriented neighborhood design and a general lack of commercial amenities. His series on the Briggs Chaney area provides one example. Dan’s interview with Mrs. Praisner also touches on these issues.
But East County’s large and diverse population and its links to both Wheaton and Silver Spring tie it firmly into the rest of the county. Mrs. Praisner, an unusual thinker who could handle both big-picture concepts and excruciatingly minute details, understood this very well. She was a capable defender of the area’s priorities but also a serious player on countywide issues. Whoever follows her will require quite some time to match her stature.
In Part Two, we’ll look more closely at the district’s political playing field.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
More on Special Election Dates in MoCo Council D4
Here's a tidbit sure to interest all of you MoCo political junkies.
The County Council staff memo written by Senior Legislative Attorney Mike Faden confirms the dates reported by Kevin (4/15 for the primary, 5/13 for the general). But it then says the following:Although neither date falls during a school break, Council President Knapp confirmed with Superintendent Weast that the school system could handle continuing to use schools as polling places on these dates. Of the 46 polling places used this year in District 4, 43 are public schools. County Elections staff indicated that they expect to consolidate some polling places for this special election. In any case, voters in District 4 will be officially notified at least twice of the election dates and their polling place.
Two questions:
1. What will this "consolidation" of polling places do to turnout?
2. If the teachers are working, who is going to distribute the Apple Ballots?
Special Election for Marilyn's Seat is Set
Looks like things are going to move very fast. Date has been set by the MoCo Council for tax day (April 15) for the primary and May 13 for the general election. Deadline to file will be March 24 at 5:00 pm.
Steve Kanstoroon, who was listed as a candidate last week in the Gazette, is in. Almost immediately after the date was set, School Board President Nancy Navarro, announced her intention to run.
Fellow blogger Adam Pagnucco has a series of posts at the ready on the background of district and the people of Council District 4.
This will be a quick fast ride to the finish. Keep a window (or tab) open to MPW on your browser for the latest in the Council District 4 Race.
More on Is MoCo Getting Its Share of the Spoils?
Yesterday fellow blogger Adam Pagnucco posed an excellent question "Is MoCo Getting its Share of the Spoils?" His post pointed out how few of the appointments were going to MoCo citizens. He looked at it from how large we are compared to the rest of the state. It is even more apparent when you look at it from the number of votes, especially Democratic votes we bring to get someone elected statewide.
Andrew Jackson created the spoils system but it has been refined through the years. In MD politics, Baltimore City has run this state and the Democratic Party since the beginning of time.
Look at this chart. It is from the state Board of Elections. It is the number of votes cast by county in the latest Gubernatorial election. I put it into a spreadsheet and compared the percentage of total votes statewide by county and the percentage of total Democratic votes by county as a percentage of total Democratic votes. In both cases, MoCo provides the largest percentage of votes and more importantly the largest percentage of Democratic votes.
In the case of MoCo, we are 17.1% of the statewide total in Nov 2006. We are also 20.3% of the total Democratic vote. We should be getting more from a Democratic Governor, especially one who loves to come here and remind us that he grew up in Rockville and Bethesda.
Here it is in detail.
As a rank order of vote as a % of the statewide total by county, here is the list:
MoCo 17.1%;
Balt Co 15.8%;
PGCo 11.6%;
AACo 10.5%;
Balt City 8.5%;
HoCo 5.9%
Everybody else: 30.5%
More importantly look at the list as to the number of votes that come from MoCo to get a Democrat elected statewide.
Here is that list as a % of Democratic votes as a % of total Democratic votes by county. Again rank order:
MoCo 20.3%;
PGCo 17.3%;
BaltCo 14.4%;
BaltCity 12.2%;
AACo 8.4%
HoCo 5.6%;
Everybody Else 21.7%.
What is our "reward"? Crumbs, leftovers.
One veteran political observer on seeing another Baltimore Democrat come to MoCo in the fall of 2002 said "the only time we see them (Baltimore based politicians) is when they are looking for money or looking for votes." I thought what she said was both untrue and crass. Now I find I am in complete agreement.
It is about time that our county Democratic officials demand that we get our share of appointments, our share of the spoils.
You know if we wanted to have a Governor who would support: slots, the ICC and not give us any of the spoils then we could have stayed with Governor Haircut.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Superdelegate Heather Mizeur
Maryland Del. Heather Mizeur (D-20) is neutral in the presidential race according to MSNBC (and Maryland Politics Watch) and a Clinton supporter according to the Washington Blade. Will Del. Mizeur vote with or against her district? Every superdelegate faces this same quandary: alienating the Democrats who elect them and with whom they must work. "People are very much divided," said Mizeur.
Heather Mizeur is not just a delegate from District 20 but a superdelegate by virtue of her service on the Democratic National Committee as an elected member from Maryland.
Statewide, Obama won 60% of the vote compared to just 36% for Clinton. In District 20, represented by Heather Mizeur, voters supported Obama even more strongly, giving him 64% with only 35% for Clinton.
Last month, Mizeur said deciding who to support was tricky because one was bound to alienate one side:[Mizeur] acknowledged that if she were to support Obama or Clinton, there could be some unhappy Democrats in her district, the ones who support the candidate that she didn't endorse.
However, now it is clear that both her district and her state are not evenly divided but support Obama over Clinton by a margin of over 20 points. So I imagine that I am not the only one wondering how Del. Mizeur plans to vote at the Democratic National Convention.
Sen. Muse, Marriage Equality, and the Get Bill
In a way, this year’s debate in the General Assembly over the civil marriage equality bill echoes last year’s legislative debate on Orthodox Jewish divorce law. In each case, part of the debate centered on the blurring of the line between civil marriage and religious marriage.
One of the most contentious bills to reach the Senate floor in 2007 was what was commonly referred to as “the get bill.” A purely religious divorce within Orthodox Judaism, a get (Hebrew גט) has no consequence on the status of a couple’s civil marriage. Under the religious rules of Orthodox Judaism, it is solely within the discretion of the husband to grant a get. Without it, civilly divorced women — who are free to remarry civilly — are still considered married within their religion and do not consider themselves free to date, remarry, or have new families. Under the get bill, upon the request of either spouse, Maryland would have refused to grant a civil divorce unless each spouse attested that no religious barriers remained to remarriage. As a result, a couple’s marital status under Maryland's civil law would have been dependent on the couple’s marital status under religious law.
A closely divided Senate voted the get bill down, 22-22. Many of the bill’s opponents noted the clear distinction between religious marriage and civil marriage. They realized that a group’s religious definition of marriage and divorce, even though it may date back thousands of years, was simply not relevant to how the state of Maryland defines civil marriage and divorce.
One of those who opposed the get bill was Sen. Anthony Muse, who a year later is a pivotal committee vote on the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act - a bill that expressly recognizes and protects the distinction between religious and civil marriage.
Sen. Muse is the founder and leader of the Ark of Safety Christian Church, and his religion does not recognize marriages between two men or two women. He has strong religious beliefs on this issue.
I hope that this year, as in 2007, Sen. Muse will recognize that religious beliefs about when two people are married are not relevant to how Maryland defines civil marriage.
Is MoCo Getting its Share of the Spoils?
Believe it or not, there are a few people in MoCo who believe that we are getting the short end of the gubernatorial stick from our ex-Mayor of Baltimore. The latest list of the Governor’s appointments will give them a bit of ammo.
Last Friday, Governor O’Malley released this year’s “green bag” nominations, a list of appointments to many of the state’s boards and commissions that require Senate approval. There are 165 nominees on the list, which you can view here. Obsessed as we are with numbers, we counted the nominees by county of residence. The leaders were Baltimore County (35), Baltimore City (26), Prince George’s County (18), Anne Arundel County (15), Montgomery County (15) and Howard County (11). No other county had more than five appointees. Caroline, Kent, Queen Anne’s and Somerset Counties, all of which are located on the Eastern Shore, had no nominees. Mysteriously, two "non-residents" appear on the list instead.
Let’s consider the populations in these counties. Baltimore County accounted for 14% of the state’s population in 2006. It accounted for 21% of the Governor’s green bag list. Baltimore City accounted for 11% of the state’s population and 16% of the nominees. MoCo, on the other hand, accounted for 17% of the state’s population and 9% of the nominees. Prince George’s fared a bit better than MoCo (15% of population, 11% of nominees).
Now we are all good Democrats on this blog and big supporters of Governor O’Malley. So I have an idea for how the Governor could rectify this unfortunate appointment deficit. How about appointing Kensington Mayor Pete Fosselman as our next Secretary of State? He would be a nice D18 counterbalance to all of the people from Takoma Park who seem to be taking over the state government these days.
Just a suggestion from a blogger who’s trying to be helpful, Governor!
The Death of My Conventional Wisdom
From Marc Korman: I was wrong in many of my predictions for Primary Day. In the interest of honesty and disclosure, I thought I would share with you these numerous mistakes:
1. Donna Edwards’ Margin of Victory
In truth, until a few short weeks ago I did not think Donna Edwards could win at all. To be fair, I do not live in the 4th Congressional District and no part of the legislative district I represent on the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee is in Congressional-04 either.
Prior to the last few weeks, I was convinced that the early February primary would not give Donna Edwards enough to time to focus attention on the race. I also thought that Al Wynn had responded to his close call in 2006 by adjusting his voting pattern and sharply increasing his presence, especially in Montgomery County.
As the primary drew closer and Al Wynn began using negative campaign tactics, it became apparent that Edwards had a real shot at unseating him. Even so, I had no idea how decisive her victory would be. Defeating an entrenched incumbent is difficult. Even in 1994, when the Republicans took the majority in Congress, the reelection rate was 90%. In 2006, it was 94%. In 2004, what I would call a typical year, was 98%. Donna Edwards beating Al Wynn by over 20 points is incredible. The presumptive Congresswoman from the fourth Congressional district deserves credit for a hard fought campaign that essentially lasted for three years.
However, the many committed Democrats who worked for Congressman Wynn also deserve credit for their hard work and efforts. I was not at Al Wynn’s concession, but from all accounts he took his loss gracefully. That fight is behind us now.
2. Wayne Gilchrest’s Loss
Until EJ Pipkin entered the race for the 1st Congressional District, I thought there was a great chance Gilchrest would lose the primary to Andy Harris because Republicans generally like the extreme right. When Pipkin entered the race at the end of 2007, I thought Gilchrest would squeak by since the opposition would be divided. As the primary drew closer and the Republican presidential nomination was sewn up by a moderate, I thought Gilchrest’s chances improved again. With Mike Huckabee spending his time mounting a conservative campaign in Virginia, basically conceding Maryland to McCain, I thought Gilchrest was safe. In the end, Gilchrest lost to Harris by double digits. The good news is that Gilchrest’s loss sets up the outside possibility of Democrat Frank Kravotil winning in November.
3. Alies Muskin’s Loss
For several weeks I have been working on a blog entry about the power of the Apple Ballot. Obviously, it will need a few more rewrites. I was shocked that Muskin did not win this race. I did notice during election day that of the thirty District 16 polling places I visited, only two had Apple Ballot volunteers present. I have not looked at the Apple Ballot’s successes in other presidential election years (which are off years in Maryland), but given Apple Ballot support for Al Wynn and Muskin in this race, their winning percentage has taken a hit.
4. The Democratic Presidential Race
If you had told me last September that the Democratic race would be competitive when the Maryland primary came around, I would have laughed at you. At the time, I was convinced that Hillary Clinton would sail to the nomination, primarily due to name recognition, momentum, and what I thought was a lackluster campaign on Barack Obama’s part. All that changed in the fall and by December 31st, when the Des Moines Register released its pre-Iowa Caucus poll, I would have told you Maryland would not matter because Barack Obama would win Iowa and steamroll to the nomination by Super Tuesday due to momentum. Of course, after Clinton’s surprise victory in New Hampshire, it became clear that Maryland, and the states after, would matter.
Despite my poor prognostications, I still had a great time on primary day. The highlight was a moment I had while making get out the vote calls for Barack Obama. On my call list was MPW contributor Adam Pagnucco. As he is no fan of mine since I’m trying to raise his taxes and am a member of the politburo, I did not leave my name for fear it would cause him to vote against Obama. Given Obama’s huge victory, I had nothing to worry about.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
New Committee Assignments on MoCo Council
Mrs. Praisner's passing has left vacancies on the Planning, Housing & Economic Development (PHED) Committee, which she chaired, and the Management & Fiscal Policy (MFP) Committee, which she chaired for many years. Those vacancies have now been filled by Mike Knapp (PHED) and Phil Andrews (MFP). Marc Elrich is the new PHED Chair. But these committee assignments are temporary pending the special election for Mrs. Praisner's seat in District 4. After that election, all of this (and more) could change.
You can view the new committee structure here.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Council Special Election Date Set?
Looks like the MoCo Council will meet on Tuesday February 19 at 1:30 pm to set the date for the special primary election and the special general election for Marilyn's Praisner's seat.
The County Council sets the dates for both. The staff recommendation is for the special primary election April 15 (tax day) and the special general election of Tuesday May 13, 2008.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Will the Donut Hole Get Filled?
To the causal observer, you measure a legislator's success by how many bills they sponsor or cosponsor that become law. But there are other ways to "succeed". Here is an example of one our newer Delegates getting something done behind the scenes. You wouldn't know that from reading the lead story of today's Baltimore Sun.
First-term Delegate Roger Manno (LD19: Leisure World, Aspen Hill and the northern reaches of Silver Spring) has been working since he entered the legislature on closing the "donut hole" on Medicare Part D. He filed this bill in 2007 and again in 2008.
It still has several hurdles to pass not the least of which is funding approval. The initial bill, HB 37, probably will never become law. But the concept, with today's announcement, has made a quantum leap forward. Having the most powerful person in Annapolis on your side gives a freshman Delegate a huge "win". The "victory" comes when it passed and the policy is changed.
Proving once again that there are several ways to measure legislative success.
Yet ANOTHER Legislative Vacancy in Annapolis
Hold onto your hat, but it looks like there's yet ANOTHER vacancy in Annapolis.
There are reports that Del. Robert McKee, a Republican from District 2A in Washington County, has very suddenly and unexpectedly announced that he will be resigning. Press reports state that the police seized his computer and found "images that are available on the Internet."
According to the Baltimore Sun:McKee, who was active in numerous youth athletic and civic groups in his district, was one of the legislature's leading advocates on children's issues and had co-sponsored a bill this year that would deny child sexual predators the ability to earn good-time credits on their prison sentences.
He was in Annapolis yesterday but did not attend the morning session at the State House and was also not in his office. He did not return phone calls to his home or office today.
...
The Republican caucus held a meeting this morning, but numerous delegates would not say what they discussed.
House Minority Leader Anthony J. O'Donnell said he had not spoken to McKee and had no knowledge about the investigation other than what he had seen in published reports.
O'Donnell said he found it "troubling" that McKee's house had been searched but urged caution before the details emerge about what he's being investigated for.
"It would be inappropriate to speculate," he said. "I won't do that."
It looks like yet another group of Marylanders will be dealing with what seems to have become Maryland's unofficial pastime: filling legislative vacancies.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Marriage Equality In the MD Senate
This afternoon, the Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee heard testimony on the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act - the bill that would end marriage discrimination against gay and lesbian couples in our state.
As Sen. Rich Madaleno reported hours later, the committee heard testimony from children of gay and lesbian parents, clergy, social workers, and many others in support of marriage equality. The committee also heard supportive testimony from the bill's sponsors - Senator Madaleno and Senator Jaime Raskin - as well as Attorney General Doug Gansler.
The Baltimore Sun reports on Gansler's testimony here. I will long remember Gansler's support of my basic human rights - a position that stands in strong contrast to that many other leading Democrats in the state, to say nothing of the presidential candidates.
Sponsor Rich Madaleno gave very powerful testimony in support of his bill:
SB290 – Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act
Sponsor Testimony
I come before you today to ask that you give SB290 a favorable report, and in doing so, grant my family, and the families of thousands of our constituents, the rights and responsibilities of marriage. Until this bill is passed, Maryland will remain a state where some families are at risk of being torn apart not because they lack the strength of commitment, but because they are invisible in the eyes of the law.
This bill is simple. It reiterates that no religious denomination will ever be required to recognize, perform, or bless any marriage that is against its beliefs. At the same time, it provides full equality under the law for thousands of same-gender couples in our state- couples like Mark and me.
With marriage, we can live our lives secure in the knowledge that we have the same legal rights, responsibilities, obligations, and protections that you enjoy.
Without marriage, I am at the mercy of doctors, nurses, and security guards for my partner to gain access to me in a hospital.
Without marriage, all of our financial planning and savings could be wiped out by inheritance taxes if one of us suffers an untimely death.
Without marriage, we live in a state of legal limbo that exacts a significant emotional and financial toll on our family, our children, and ourselves.
Without marriage, instead of security, we have fear. A fear that is always there. The fear that at the moments we are most vulnerable, afraid, and alone, our state could step in and take everything away from us – just because we cannot have a civil marriage.
That even one family lives with this fear is bad enough. But it is not just one family – not just my family. Thousands and thousands of Maryland families live with this fear.
And when that fear is created by the laws of the state itself, that is untenable. And just as untenable would be for this General Assembly to turn its back and do nothing.
At the same time, as important as the legal rights and responsibilities associated with civil marriage are, they are only part of the story.
Many of you know Mark, my partner. “Partner.” We had a church wedding seven years ago, and in the eyes of our religion, our families, our friends, and in my heart, he is my spouse. But under Maryland’s civil law, he is a legal stranger to me. He is just “my partner.” Even that term cheapens our relationship. It makes it sound like we are in a business. It is a badge of dishonor I must wear every day, whenever I introduce Mark to anyone or even talk about him to someone who does not know us, because my state refuses to grant us civil marriage. I would never ask any of you to relegate your wives or husbands to being only your partners.
Without full and equal civil marriage, Maryland makes sure that thousands of its families never forget that they are outsiders. That they are not quite equal.
Our state and our nation were founded on principles of fairness and equality. These principles are timeless; unfortunately, their application has not been. Yet every generation of Americans has held out their hand to some who had been left out of the promise of equality – held out their hand and brought them fully into our civil society, saying, “You are not the other. You are us.”
This year marks the 60th anniversary of the first state court decision to overturn the laws banning interracial marriage. In its decision, the California Supreme Court wrote “human beings are bereft of worth and dignity by a doctrine that would make them as interchangeable as trains.” As a friend observed, when you are denied the freedom to marry the person precious and irreplaceable to you, it is not like you can just catch the next one.
Our country also has a long tradition of recognizing the difference between civil law and religious law. In that respect, I seek common cause with each member of the Committee. We all agree that each of our religions must remain free to define marriage as it so chooses. That has always been the case in Maryland, and this bill ensures that that will remain the case. None of us wants to live in a nation where the civil law dictates the tenets of our faith.
Just as importantly, we should not allow the teachings of a religion to dictate the civil law under which all of us must live. Some religions do not recognize divorce and subsequent remarriage. Some religions do not recognize a marriage unless it is performed in the name of Jesus. Others don’t recognize a marriage that is performed in the name of Jesus. Some clergy will not perform or recognize marriages between people of different faiths.
But our civil marriage law is rightly blind to our rich diversity of often-conflicting religious doctrines. Civil laws, unlike religious ones, apply to everyone, regardless of faith. That is why we do not allow the many different religious definitions of marriage to determine the definition of civil marriage.
With the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Act, Maryland can end an injustice against thousands of its citizens while respecting the critical independence of our religious institutions.
This bill represents the best ideals of Maryland, and that drive to live up to our ideals is the story of America.
Heavy Metal Makeup
If you’re a knuckle-dragging Cro-Magnon like me, you’ve probably waited impatiently for your wife or girlfriend to finish getting ready before you both head out to dinner. You’ve growled at the bathroom door, thinking, “What on Earth is she doing in there? What’s taking so long?”
Well, Mr. Caveman, she’s going through her checklist. Foundation and powder, check. Mascara, check. Eye shadow, check. Lipstick, check. Mercury, check.
Waitaminnit – MERCURY?! That’s right, MERCURY.
Mercury is sometimes used as a preservative and germ-killer in a wide range of cosmetics, including soap, mascara, eye-liner and creams. It is the active ingredient in some foreign-made skin-whitening creams. Back in 1995 and 1996, skin creams containing mercury were found to have poisoned three people in Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. In 2002, women in Hong Kong panicked after a skin-whitening cream was found to contain 9,000-65,000 times the maximum allowed mercury dosage. A 2005 study by the Mercury Policy Project found that mercury frequently appeared in cosmetics used in Africa, and a quarter to a third of women used those cosmetics in several countries. Shockingly, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration actually allows mercury in eye-area cosmetics so long as its levels do not exceed 65 parts per million.
Last month, Minnesota became the first state in the U.S. to ban all cosmetic products containing mercury. And Maryland could follow suit. New District 18 Delegate Al Carr has introduced House Bill 587 (co-sponsored by Delegates Braveboy, Gutierrez, Howard, Hucker, Krysiak, Kullen, Lee, Manno, Mizeur, Montgomery, Stukes and Waldstreicher), which would ban the sale, offer for sale or distribution of all cosmetic products containing any mercury in the state.
Come on you guys, is it really worth it? If we can’t eat it, can’t drink it, can’t inhale it, can’t use it in our thermometers, then is it OK to spread it all over our bodies? This bill is a total no-brainer and it has to pass on the first go.
But if it doesn’t, at least all that mercury should cut down on those pesky botox fees.
(We would like to thank District 18 Breakfast Goddess Susan Heltemes for sharing this with us. Susan doesn’t need mercury to look her best at our breakfasts!)
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
A Sure Sign of a Winning Campaign
All elections have tell tale signs of when the mood changes. Almost always it is not when a poll comes out and has you ahead by x points. Usually it is not when a memorable phrase such as when "You are not Jack Kennedy," line was uttered.
The tell tale sign is when some average person not political connected, not hard wired for electoral politics says or does something so obvious that you know the race is over. There is no need to count any more ballots. The result is no longer in doubt.
Here is that story from the Donna Edwards - Al Wynn race yesterday.
The story is not mine. The story comes from Tom Pollow, who is a member of PDA. He was working a Wynn stronghold of a precinct in PG County. A driver for Wynn was delivering lunches to Wynn volunteers just after noon. He came up to Tom and asked him if he was there for Edwards or Wynn. Tom pointed to his buttons and said "Donna". Tom said the Wynn volunteer had left about an hour ago. The driver still had several lunches to dispatch. Tom, a large man who was once a professional wrestler, worked two meals out of the Wynn driver for himself.
Then the two of them started talking about the race. Then came the key moment. The driver asked Tom how did he know that Donna would not stray from her original message. Tom said he didn't know but he did know that if Donna stopped supporting policies to help common folks that PDA and its members would find someone to run against her.
The driver, who remember was paid to deliver food to Wynn supporters, then talked about how Wynn forgot about the people of the district. The driver concluded with "I'm voting for Donna."
At that moment the race was over.
Other observations from the front lines
Sorry this is my first post since the pre-election. I was working as a Democratic Area Coordinator in LD20. I had four precincts that were in CD4 and one in CD8. I also looked in on a few other precincts nearby. The striking thing for me was how many of the Edwards supporters stayed longer at more precincts than Wynn supporters.
Here is a picture of Edwards supporter at the George Meany Center (05-07) which is at New Hampshire Avenue and the Beltway. The Wynn supporter was sitting in her Luxus SUV about 100 yards from the polling place. (The polling place itself is a 200+ yard walk from the parking lot.) The Edwards supporter was about 25 yards from the polling place out in the elements. Note the picture. That's dedication. That's the sign of a winning campaign.
Update: I want to id this person but I forgot to get her name. So if you are out there please respond and I will put your name to this picture.
Tales from Antarctica
May I add to Adam's musings on the Apple Ballot that working the Democratic tent stinks. I felt like the Rodney Dangerfield of Precinct 07-01.
At B-CC High School, the precinct I worked, someone stuck the Apple Ballots on a shelf. It's hard to blame them. Two hours of bitter cold while I was there. (Kudos to the Precinct Chair for setting up a tent so at least I avoided the freezing rain.) Not one person wanted literature except a batty old lady who got mad when I asked if she really needed 20 Obama brochures and accused me of being a Clinton person before ranting on further.
Then there was the Hillary diva who let this nice man handing out lefty-spiritual leaflets hold her dog's leash while she voted but then wouldn't even take one of his pamphlets. She then critiqued the Democratic tent as being set up too favorably to Obama (I had nothing to do with setup and there was a big Hillary sign in front). I should've said, well, if you volunteer for the rest of my shift, you can set it up however you BLEEP like. (Sorry for the censorship but this is a family publication.) She got unhappy when I wouldn't let her rearrange the whole booth and she promised "to tell her Hillary people". I'm sure they'll get right on it. Oy.
Freak of the Week
Anyone who can prove the following statement wrong gets a case of Dogfish Head 90 IPA and a no-prize.
Never before in the history of Maryland have two incumbent Congressmen and a MoCo Apple Ballot school board candidate gone down in the same primary night. Go ahead, start doing the research to prove me wrong!
And here is the strangest question you will ever see on a political blog: what do MCEA-backed school board candidate Alies Muskin and my tailbone have in common? Answer: both of them were done in by an ice storm.
MCEA's Apple Ballot, the WMD of county politics, relies on mass volunteering for distribution. Back in 2006, the Teachers fielded at least six Apple Ballot ladies in shifts at my precinct. Yesterday, only one Apple Ballot lady showed up. She left when the flurries started at 11 and no one replaced her. The rain started falling around 2, and a couple hours later, a thin sheet of ice covered every hard surface. I found this out the hard way when I fell down my front steps, ba-BUMP ba-BUMP ba-BUMP. Thus the considerable sympathy in my bruised tailbone for Ms. Muskin's plight. (Worry not, D18 legislators: I can still handle a shovel.) Philip Kauffman and Tommy Le, each of whom had run for school board before, edged out Muskin probably on name recognition alone.
I tell you, people, you can't get election analysis like this on CNN!
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Edwards Leads in Early Returns!
According to the Baltimore Sun, Edwards leads by 55% to 42% for Al Wynn with just 11% of the precincts counted.
Update 1: Donna leads Al by 58% to 37% with 26% of the precincts counted.
Update 2: Two incumbents are endangered tonight. Wayne Gilchrist currently trails Andy Harris in the Republican primary for the First District (Eastern Shore) with E.J. Pipkin in third place (38%-31%-28%).
Update 3: Donna leads Al by 59% to 36% with 39% of the precincts counted. It's starting to look pretty grim for Wynn.
Update 3: It's in the bag. A kind commenter reports that Donna is winning Prince George's. She is whomping Wynn in Montgomery. With 51% of precincts reporting, Donna leads Al with 59% to 37%. Welcome to Congress, Donna Edwards! P.S. Wayne Gilchrist trails Andy Harris by about 3% in the 1st with just over 50% of returns reported. Looks like two incumbents will be turfed out tonight in Maryland. I need to go do some work before hitting the hay but check out openleft.com for really, really detailed coverage of the Edwards win.
By the way, the official State Board of Elections website appears useless. One always gets "This page cannot be found" and not unofficial election returns. Is Diebold involved?
Update: Well, now you get to the results pages but no votes are yet entered there. But I guess at least SBOE is workin' on it!
Speeches on Potomac Primary Night
John McCain surrounded himself with the soon-to-be- retired and the defeated tonight as he was backed by Sen. John Warner, Rep. Tom Davis, and former State Sen. Jeanmarie Devolites Davis. The camera was stuck on closeup. I guess Republicans don't do large arenas. The cameras revealed that Obama filled a large arena in Wisconsin; it was hard to gauge the size of the crowd from the medium-range shots in El Paso with Clinton though it clearly is a pretty big crowd.
McCain gave a preview of the general election in his speech. Every phrase, including the slams, begins with "My friends". He derided Obama's message of hope as a platitude followed by not-so-subtle repeated allusions to his war hero status before concluding--I kid you not--by saying that he was "Fired up, and ready to go!"
Clinton began her speech by shouting her thanks to just about every elected official in El Paso. The blogosphere doesn't seem to care much for her speaking style--just take a look at this scorching thread on the DailyKos. We don't exist to Hillary Clinton here in the Potomac Primary states. No thanks to her supporters in Maryland, D.C., and Virginia let alone a gracious concession to Sen. Obama.
Clinton's trademark seems to be to make some corny reference to the locale. Remember her joke about being unable to sing at the Opry in Nashville? In El Paso, she explained how Bush is all hat and no cattle.
Obama gave his usual stirring speech but looked a tad worn out as he struggled to get names right and hit the right notes at the right moment. Like McCain, he previewed the general election by fighting back against those who would mock his message of hope. After talking about various issues and making the required references to Bush and his cousin, Dick Cheney, Obama spoke about how the wheels have come off the straight talk express.
No Shame for Wynning
Throughout this primary election, I have been willing to overlook Congressman Al Wynn's shortcomings. He had a messy public divorce where he alledgely kicked his wife out of his house on Christmas. He was constantly having to file amended FEC reports because his could not keep his contributions in order. He was active -- almost too active in local PG Co politics -- playing kingmaker when he should have been focusing on being a national legislator. He had some of the worst constituent service where his caseworkers spent more time assulting volunteers for his opponent in August 2006. He was even known to have joked about his "stealing" the election in 2006 when three precinct boxes showed up weeks after the vote helping him to win. But the largest concern was also the main one: He had a series of horrible votes on issues that favored wealthy corporate interests over his own working class electorate. His MoCo supporters have tried to tell me "that he learned his lesson and is a better Congressman" after his narrow victory in September 2006 to upstart Donna Edwards.
He has not learned. Here it is the night before the election and we have the following stories coming from Wynn in the past seven days:
1) He files a complaint with the FEC saying his principal opponent, Donna Edwards, is part of a "vast left wing conspiracy". That term incidentally comes the name of a book written by a right wing reporter for the National Review. Oh and no violation of campaign finance law is cited.
2) He puts out a series of robo calls highlighting Donna Edwards having multiple tax liens on her home, which is true. But he just happens to fail to mention that she had the liens -- as she pointed out at numerous debates -- because she was a single mother trying to raise a young son without health insurance for herself.
3) Now the latest is Wynn has created a flyer that implied that he and Sen. Barack Obama are a team. That they share the same values. If Obama and Wynn share the same values then our country is in deep deep trouble.
4) He wraps himself in the mantle of change candidate, Barack Obama, by inviting himself onto Fox News to debate for the Illinois Senator. He was not selected by the Obama campaign. He did it himself. That is not how you earn the good graces of the campaign you want to help.
I have been involved in politics for almost thirty years. I have seen nasty fights for office. This one takes the cake. In fact there is so much cake being tossed -- the vast majority from him, his supporters and his personal attack dog at many debates has been Dr. Michael Babula -- that the main issue is being missed. Al Wynn has reached his shelf-life as an elected official. His expiration reads September 2006. It is time for him to go. He is beyond the pale as a representative.
I gave my props to him to his winning a debate last week. He was good. But then you have to wonder when the moderator was a member of his "Women for Wynn" team. I wondered why the questions always put Donna on the defensive and made Wynn look good. Is there nothing he won't do to win? I doubt it; and the flyer coming out of PG County is latest exhibit.
Wynn may get more votes tomorrow but he will not be a winner. If he does win he should start Wednesday February 13 looking for a job in the Obama Administration because he burned so many bridges to win this his final election. He has been shameless in his zeal to wynn. I see little chance that he could ever win another election after Tuesday.
I have met Al Wynn. He is quite personable. We talked on Saturday about how he has to care for his elderly mother. The look on his face said it all. He was not a politician then. He was Albert Wynn, the son, caring for an elderly parent something any adult child can relate to.
We will gather in a few hours to elect a Democratic nominee for the 4th District of Maryland. This has been Al Wynn's seat for 16 years. In that time he has developed a win at any cost that there is nothing left to him. I am certain that at one time Congressman Wynn was a decent and honorable man. It may have been when he first ran for State Delegate in 1982. He probably had many ideas of what he wanted to do to make our community a better place. Those days are a distant memory.
Al Wynn has got to go. The best line of the campaign was uttered by another challenger for this seat, Jason Jennings, when he said that Al Wynn "is like a championship prize fighter who has stayed around too long". Jennings is correct. Please vote Al Wynn into an early retirement. There is little left to admire.
Please support Donna Edwards. We need her.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Alies Muskin for School Board
I'm supporting Alies Muskin for School because she is committed to making sure that all students have the opportunity to succeed. This goal is an important one in a school system facing new challenges in maintaining its traditionally high level of academic performance not just among students who would perform well in any school system but among all students. I'm particularly impressed by her commitment to students with mental illness and who face challenges at home.
Here are reasons another person identified for voting for Alies:LEADERSHIP: For 20 years, Alies has advocated for our schools and our
children. She has been PTA president, Area Vice President for the Einstein,
Blair, Kennedy and Northwood clusters, Cluster Coordinator, and a member of
many committees at the local, county, and state level.
FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE: As the Chief Operating Officer of a national
nonprofit, the Anxiety Disorders Association of America, Alies knows what it
takes to scrutinize a budget and understands the complexities of multiple
funding streams, contracts, and balancing budgets.
COLLABORATION: Alies knows that nothing gets done with just one person.
She has been an integral part of many committees, as both member and chair.
She has also participated on many selection panels for principals through
MCPS administrators.
COMMITMENT: Alies is tireless. Her two daughters are successful Montgomery
County Public School graduates. Yet Alies still believes she has work to do
in the system. She has been involved in improving the MCPS system for 20
years. She is committed to asking the hard questions.
Barack Obama for President
Tommorrow, I will cast my ballot in Maryland's Democratic primary enthusiastically for Barack Obama. Here are some of the reasons why.
On the issues, distinguishing between the two candidates is like trying to tell apart two angels dancing on the head of a pin. Obama and Clinton just don't disagree all that much. Unlike some, I don't make much of her vote for the Iraq War and his opposition. Like John Kerry, I was for the War before I was against it. It seemed a reasonable judgment at the time and the determination of the Bush Administration to skew the intelligence wasn't yet clear.
On the other hand, I like Obama's support for driver's licenses for undocumented immigrants. Like his willingness to talk about energy policy in Detroit, this stand demonstrates someone who will take a risk and stand for the right thing even if it is unpopular. It's right not just because it helps limit exploitation of a vulnerable population. It's also utterly defensible from a national security perspective: we should know who is in the country.
I've been surprised that Hillary Clinton has often led with health care as a reason to elect her president. She is undoubtedly knowledgeable about this issue--and many others. However, it's hard to forget that she failed to make progress on this issue in 1993.
Doomed not just by implacable Republican opposition but by her determination to craft a plan in secret and an unwillingness to compromise, her plan failed to attract key Democratic support and couldn't pass Congress even when Democrats held sizable majorities in the House and the Senate. In an insightful New York Times column, David Brooks explains why we should probably expect a replay in a second Clinton administration.
In contrast, Barack Obama has shown an ability both in Springfield and in Washington to work with people in both parties to get the job done. I'd hate to miss another chance to make sure that all Americans have access to health care sixteen years after the failure of 1993.
Reaching across the aisle doesn't mean abandoning one's goals or one's principles. Under our system of separation of powers where 60 votes are required to get anything done in the Senate and even members of one's own party are quite independent, it isn't a luxury but a necessity.
While their stands on issues differ little, the styles of Obama and Clinton differ markedly not just in the halls of Congress but in the electorate. Clinton immediately polarizes the electorate. She will find it easy to gain 45-47% support in the polls. Getting the last bit needed to form an electoral majority is very difficult for the Senator from New York.
Even if she manages to defeat McCain, I fear that a second Clinton Administration will be a continuation of the enervating War of the Roses between the Clinton and Bush dynasties. Even at a time when their party is badly fractured, Republicans will find it easy to unite in opposing Clinton at the ballot box and in office.
Obama has a more inclusive style and has a higher ceiling in the polls. His approach is deeply appealing at this time. President Bush's claim to be a "uniter, not a divider" turned out to be a hollow promise--we even have the academic evidence from one of the nation's top scholars to prove it. However, Americans yearn even more for someone who can disagree without demonizing his opponents precisely because of Bush's failure in this area.
Obama's ability to mobilize people is nothing short of amazing. Every four years we give lip service to the idea of mobilizing young people. Obama is the first who has actually done it--youth voter turnout and interest in the political process has soared thanks to him. I've seen it in my own students. At the rally at American University, I was amazed to discover even Republican students of mine quite taken by the junior senator from Illinois.
We face difficult times ahead no matter who is elected president. Extracting ourselves from the Iraq War is a tricky task--as both Obama and Clinton have laudably recognized in more candid and detailed discussions. The War combined with Abu Ghraib have lowered American prestige around the world. We face uncertain economic times.
Americans love this country deeply and desperately want someone who can restore their faith in it and their government. Barack Obama can do that. Our nation's most successful self-made businesswoman, Oprah Winfrey, got it right when she said "He's the One."
Donna Edwards for Congress
I had my one and only conversation with Al Wynn around eighteen years ago when he was still a state senator and I was a college student interviewing Maryland senators over the phone for my senior thesis. I tried to find a way to inquire gently about the race of the senator--this was back when the internet and I were young and before one could just look at photos online. Wynn's response was easily the most memorable of any senator: "Can't you tell? I can tell that you're white!"
I was charmed by his directness. I also thought the way Wynn won election to Congress in 1992 was a nice parable. Wynn lost the primary in Prince George's to another black candidate who focused primarily on Prince George's. He also lost Montgomery to a white candidate who campaigned mainly in Montgomery. However, Wynn won the primary because he campaigned aggressively in both counties. He came in second in both and first throughout the district.
Unfortunately, sixteen years after that promising start, it is time for a change in the Fourth District. Wynn has spent too much energy playing political kingmaker in Prince George's and voted too often against the public interests of his constituents. My friend and colleague, Tom Schaller laid out the case against Wynn in the Baltimore Sun:To put it bluntly, Mr. Wynn, an eight-term congressman, is an embarrassment to his Prince George's County-based district, the state and the Democratic Party. And his past - his machine-style bossism, dirty politics and political bullying - is catching up with him.
Fortunately, the Fourth District has a strong alternative to the incumbent in Donna Edwards. Donna has campaigned aggressively throughout the Fourth. If she's shows even half as much energy once elected, she will be a force to be reckoned with in the House. In particular, I have confidence that Donna will fight for consumers and mortgage holders rather than credit-card companies and mortgage lenders.
In 2006, he sent out a flier implying he had won endorsements from some unions that hadn't endorsed him.
That same year, two of his supporters physically harassed one of Ms. Edwards' campaign volunteers.
This cycle, he filmed a political ad fashioned to look like a news reporter had caught him randomly on the street for an interview, when in fact the ad was staged by his campaign.
And then last week, Mr. Wynn, who is a lawyer, filed a completely bogus Federal Election Commission complaint that charges Ms. Edwards with violating election law. As The Sun has reported, the complaint is so slapdash that it doesn't even bother to cite specific election law provisions.
All of these electoral shenanigans are designed to mask Mr. Wynn's real problem: his voting record, which reflects contempt for voters in his district and the opinions of many Marylanders.
He voted in October 2002 for President Bush's Iraq war resolution. In 2004, Mr. Wynn voted for Vice President Dick Cheney's energy proposal, even though every other member of Maryland's House delegation, including both Republicans, voted nay.
He has accepted more than $200,000 in campaign contributions from banks and lending institutions, and, not surprisingly, voted in 2005 for a Bush administration-backed bankruptcy "reform" bill with punitive provisions for working-class borrowers.
Donna Edwards will be a strong advocate for the people of Prince George's and Montgomery in Washington. Vote to send her to Congress this Tuesday in the Democratic Primary.
Latest Polls
SurveyUSA has Obama up over Clinton by 55% to 32%. More details after the jump.
Clinton's black support is very weak--receiving only 15% compared to Obama's 78%. In contrast to earlier primaries, Obama appears prepared to win the Latino vote in Maryland where he currently leads with 65% to 33% for Clinton.
Clinton currently has a plurality among white voters with 44% to 39% for Obama. Her strongest region of the State is the Baltimore suburbs where she has 41% to 44% for Obama. The Senator from Illinois leads in Baltimore City with 68% to 21% and elsewhere in the State with 60% to 29%.
There is a huge gender gap. Obama leads among men by 65% to 24% while winning women by a margin of just 48% to 39%. One wonders if this is driven primarily by white voters as it has been in some previous primary states.
PFA Statement on First Amendment Rights on Ellsworth Drive
In the summer of 2007, a controversy occurred concerning First Amendment rights on Ellsworth Drive in Silver Spring. Ellsworth, part of the Downtown Silver Spring retail center developed by PFA (a partnership of Peterson Companies, Foulger Pratt and Argo Investment), is a publicly-owned street that is privately leased. After a demonstration on July 4, the County Executive and County Attorney determined that First Amendment rights applied to Ellsworth Drive. At the time, management spokesman I. J. Hudson said:
"We’re reviewing the [county attorney’s] opinion and generally have no arguments with the general principles that First Amendment rights apply to parts of downtown Silver Spring, including Ellsworth Drive."Last week, Chip Py, who led last year's demonstration, told Just Up the Pike and the Silver Spring Penguin that he was recently prevented from distributing political literature on Ellsworth. PFA issued the following statement on the incident:
STATEMENT OF DOWNTOWN SILVER SPRING
The management of Downtown Silver Spring recognizes and supports the public’s First Amendment rights along Ellsworth Drive.
On February 8th, a gentleman was distributing political pamphlets on Ellsworth Drive, as is his right. He was asked by DSS courtesy officers to come to the management office, at which time the management reviewed the DSS property policies and determined that he and any other individuals would be well within their rights to distribute the pamphlets. This was immediately communicated to this person by management. In fact, this person was specifically advised that he was free to continue distributing the political pamphlets on Ellsworth Drive and we believe he did so.
As the result of community concerns about Downtown Silver Spring's policies last year, DSS property management, Montgomery County government and other concerned parties began an exhaustive review of first amendment rights along Ellsworth Drive. Given the unique public-private nature of DSS, all stakeholders wanted to ensure the rights of the public were understood and honored, at the same time respecting the rights of the property owners to protect the activities of their tenants and the public at large.
This review was completed and new rules were issued protecting First Amendment rights and providing for other applicable DSS property policies. We are also in the process of further communicating our new policies to the public, tenants and security and support staff.
In the daily business of maintaining and monitoring activities at DSS, and providing for the needs of our patrons and its businesses, from time to time visitors are asked to visit management offices to review policies and procedures. It is never our intention to keep people from expressing their First Amendment or any other rights.
We apologize to the community if anyone felt that our precautions were inappropriate, however briefly they may have occurred. We would like to emphasize that individuals are free to distribute political materials and exercise their other First Amendment rights along Ellsworth Drive.
We respect the rights of all our guests and other visitors to DSS. It is our hope that the public understands, once again, that any rules and regulations are painstakingly considered and then enacted only with the rights and needs of the public, our tenants and the community at large in mind.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Intrigue at the Democratic National Convention?
From Marc Korman
With over 1500 committed delegates and over 400 super delegates up for grabs, we are still a long way from a contested Democratic Convention. However, the chance does exist that the campaign could go all the way to the Denver convention in August. If that occurs, the Credentials Committee of the Convention could become important. The Credentials Committee is one of three Convention Standing Committees and it resolves questions about the seating of delegates and alternates to the Convention that are not resolved by the Democratic Party’s Rules and Bylaws Committee before June 29, 2008.
The specific rules of the Convention and Credentials Committee are set out in the DNC’s Call for the Democratic National Convention. Delegates to the convention can be challenged and it is the job of the Credentials Committee to resolve those disputes and then submit its report to the full convention. If 20% of the Credentials Committee disagrees with the majority outcome, they can file a minority report which will also be taken up on the convention floor. Which could result in lots of political maneuvering. There are detailed rules for how and when a challenge may be brought and heard.
Of course, none of this has been relevant for a while because the last time there was a significant credentials fight was 1972. At that convention, George McGovern successfully reversed a Credentials Committee decision to strip him of 151 of his California delegates, further strengthening his hold on the nomination. Also in 1972, Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago fought to have himself and other Illinois delegates seated, unsuccessfully.
Prior to 1972, the last credentials fight was 1964. That year, the Mississippi Democratic Party sent an all white delegation to the convention. The Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party sent its own, integrated delegation and sought Mississippi’s delegate slots. The issue was resolved when the all white Mississippi delegation agreed to support the Johnson/Humphrey ticket, which was controversial for them because Republican nominee Barry Goldwater opposed the Civil Rights Act as the white Mississippi delegates mostly did. The deal also included a prohibition on any future racially discriminating delegations to Democratic Conventions.
This August, we may add some new history to the Credentials Committee. Florida and Michigan have been stripped of there 366 delegates as punishment for not following the DNC’s primary and caucus schedule. Hillary Clinton, who won both states, has already called for these delegates to be seated at the Convention. This would give her a large block of delegates, since she won those states, and could decide the race.
So who is the Credentials Committee? Every standing committee of the Convention has three chairs and its membership includes twenty-five party leaders/elected officials nominated by Howard Dean and 161 other members elected by the state delegations. The three chairs for the 2008 Credentials Committee are Alexis Herman, James Roosevelt Jr., and Eliseo Roques-Arroyo. None of the three donated to any of the presidential campaigns, though Alexis Herman did donate to Clinton’s Senate campaign. All three are also unaffiliated super delegates. More interesting however, is that Alexis Herman was Labor Secretary under President Clinton and Roosevelt was an Associate Commissioner in the Clinton-era Social Security Administration. Of the 25 party leaders and elected officials, three were Clinton super delegates at the time of this writing. The chairs and party leaders/elected officials will not have full control over the outcome of committee decisions, but they will have a lot of influence.
The make-up of the Credentials Committee chairs helps define the problem for Obama going into the convention. Many of those attending have worked for or with the Clintons at one time or another. That does not guarantee they will support Senator Clinton, but it certainly gives the Clinton campaign an edge in wheeling and dealing at the Convention. That edge, both on the Credentials Committee and with the Convention as a whole, could be all Senator Clinton needs if the campaign goes to Denver.
Viewing the Wynn-Edwards GOTV Operations
Yesterday both sides in the Wynn-Edwards race had their weekend rallies. Seeing the campaigns organized on the Saturday before gives you an excellent look at the strength of each campaign.
The Edwards campaign had two bus caravans that when from their respective HQs in MoCo and PG to a central meeting at the New Carrolton Metro. Here is a report from Progressive Democrats of America web site. Since the blogging community would probably not cover the same for Al Wynn, I went to see how his operation was running.
He has a well organized operation -- better than it has been in the past. Bags were picked and volunteers assembled. At the Electrical Workers site in Lanham in the morning, over a hundred people were there. I covered the MoCo afternoon event. Politicker MD did a nice job of covering the who said what and the latest from Wynn's camp on the robo calls about Donna Edwards' tax liens. The best defense of Donna's response was written at FSP by Eric Luedtke.
The Only Poll in the Race
Donna's camp is giddy with the prospect of unseating the eight term incumbent. Her internal poll has her up by 8 points. Wynn's campaign manager dismisses it without elaboration. This means that it is: a) true and she can't say it publicly; b) not true but she does not want to reveal what her side has on seen with daily tracking polls; or c) she is bluffing.
I have a video of Wynn's speech at the Rockville rally at MCEA and once I figure out how to upload onto YouTube then I will embed it here. Wynn talks about his robo calls are "Very encouraging". The unsaid message is -- the Donna Edwards' tax lien robo call is cutting into her lead.
Comparing Field Operations
Wynn has a strong field operation; but I think Donna's stronger. I witnessed Edwards' field operation on Sunday. I see more boots on the ground for Donna. The Wynn campaign will tell you Edwards workers are out-of-towners. Maybe but Wynn's campaign manager and I were on the same successful Chris Van Hollen race of 2002 that relied on out of district folks that were combined with several local activists. Edwards field campaign looks exactly like Van Hollen in 2002. Still a close example -- at least from the MoCo perspective is the Ida Reuben vs. Jamie Raskin race of 2006.
Donna Edwards has the feel of a winning campaign. She has that buzz. The "it" you need to get over the top.
I see strength on Al's campaign but it lacks the same intensity as hers. I have also been on a campaign similar to Wynn's (that is an incumbent who has had to ask his dwindling core supporters to get him over the top another time). There are only so many times you can call on people before they stop coming. I am not saying that is the case with Wynn's field operations. But freshness in a campaign is critical in a close campaign. I don't get that feel with his campaign. And winning campaigns don't release robo calls that attack your opponent personally in the final weekend of the campaign.
Still, two of the biggest names in MoCo Politics were at Wynn's rally in Rockville. Al Wynn has Ike. Doug Duncan, more casual than I have seen him in several post-Executive appearances, was also there. In addition, Sen. Forehand, whose district is outside of CD4, was there. So was his Women for Wynn co-chair, Loretta Knight, who is Clerk of Court. Delegate Reznik, whose district is about half in CD4 and half in CD8, came late from another event.
Could Clinton Surprise in the Potomac Primary?
The latest polls show Obama substantially ahead of Clinton. However, could Hillary surprise Barack on Tuesday?
According to Mason-Dixon, Clinton trails Obama by 35% to 53% in Maryland, and 37% to 53% in Virginia. These hefty leads suggest that the Illinois senator should extend his streak of solid wins in Tuesday's Potomac Primary, right?
Maybe.
According to these polls, around 10% or more of voters still have to make up their minds. Obama supporters might like to think that they'll all shift to Obama, who often gains support as he becomes better known and gains name recognition. However, it's just not clear that it works that way.
Remember that Obama didn't rack up any last minute gains in Massachusetts and New Jersey. Instead, Clinton won those contests by more than many anticipated, including the exit polls which showed them as tight.
While it would take a lot for Clinton to pull ahead, she just might finish more strongly than some anticipate. As many commentators have noted, the Obama distortion field can cause even the most jaded liberal observer to swoon and lose their judgment.
A Brunch of Democrats
This is a report filed by Sharon Dooley, a community activist from Olney.
Sunday saw the annual brunch for Montgomery County’s Democratic faithful at the Marriott Convention Center. The event, usually held in March was moved this year to preview the February 12th Primary. This regional primary change decision, pushed by the previous Party Chair Terry Lierman, is now seen by many as a prescient move as the national primary focus is definitely on the Chesapeake area, or as some have named it – the Potomac Primary.
Sign waving partisans along the entry roads, and legions of banner bearers and sticker stickers, greeted attendees once they were inside. Volunteers were enthusiastically working for both Congressional seats as well as each Presidential campaign. Most of the Montgomery County elected officials, led by County Executive Ike Leggett, were among the visible announced guests and included Council, Congressional and State legislative representatives and Senator Ben Cardin. All were roundly applauded by the several hundred attendees.
The surrogates for the two Presidential candidates were among the most powerful guests in attendance as Governor Martin O’Malley spoke eloquently for Senator Hillary Clinton and surprise guest, Senator Ted Kennedy hoarsely thundered for Senator Barack Obama – and they did not disappoint the audience. Each gave a rousing partisan speech marking the attributes of his particular favorite candidate; the audience was cheerfully engaged and both candidates had significant support in the room. Some present in the room wore buttons marking 1/20/09 – the date they hoped would signal a party address change at the White House. One thing was obvious – all were united in a desire to create a change at the top. This year the Democrats in Montgomery County seem really ready to work for that change.
Sharon Dooley
Obama Weekend Continues in Maine
Obama won 59% of the state delegates in the Maine Caucuses today to just 41% for Clinton (with 91% of precincts reporting). Maine had been one state that the Clinton campaign had been hoping to win since she has run strongly in the Northeast, including in nearby New Hampshire and Massachusetts.
Update: Obama leads Clinton 59-40 with 95% of precincts reporting.
Hillary Clinton Changes Campaign Manager
Ben Smith of The Politico has the news. Patti Solis Doyle was the first Latino or Latina to chair a presidential campaign. She has been replaced by old-Clinton hand Maggie Williams.
Michelle Obama Coming to B-CC High School
Michelle Obama is speaking at a 'Stand for Change' Rally at Bethesda-Chevy Chase High School, where she'll talk about why Barack is the one candidate in this election who can bring about change we can believe in.
Stand for Change Rally with Michelle Obama
Bethesda-Chevy Chase High School
4301 East West Highway
Bethesda, MD
Monday, February 11, 2008
Doors Open: 5:00 p.m.
Program Begins: 5:30 p.m.
The event is free and open to the public. However an RSVP is strongly encouraged.
RSVP Now
http://md.barackobama.com/bethesda
For security reasons, do not bring bags. Please limit personal items. No signs or banners are permitted.
Jewish Support Letter for Barack Obama
As Jewish Americans, we are asking you to join us in an effort to make for ourselves, our children and grandchildren a better America and a safer world for years to come. We strongly believe that Barack Obama is the Democrat who will lead us to victory in November and heal our great, yet divided, Nation. We are voting for a candidate, not against one.
Rabbi Hillel, the great Jewish scholar, asked "If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? And if I am only for myself, then what am I? And if not now, when?" In making the decision as to who will be the 44th President of the United States of America in 2008, we believe his questions are as relevant today as they were when first asked many centuries ago.
Barack Obama’s rich and varied life experiences have helped enable him to understand the needs of all Americans, young and old, black, brown and white, men and women, alike. He has inspired millions of people to think deeply about what they, too, can do to help repair the damage done during the past eight years—damage that has eroded America’s respect we American Jews fought so hard to earn.
In eight short years, we have spent billions of dollars and lost thousands of lives on a war we never should have started. Our economy has declined to the point that we are the brink of a recession. Our country has grown so polarized that our core values of character, spiritual virtue and kinship are threatened.
The time for change, the time for a leader who will heal, unify and make the world a better, kinder and safer place for our children, grandchildren is NOW. We believe that Barack Obama is such a leader. He is the only candidate who truly represents and embodies real and positive change. He is the only one who has the moral fiber that we need in order to bring back respectability, trust and inspiration to the nation’s highest office.
Barack Obama’s friendship with Israel is clear and unwavering despite the vicious and fallacious emails circulating the internet. In his own words, he is committed to Israel as a Jewish state, "I start with the premise that Israel is a stalwart ally of ours and their security cannot be compromised… the Palestinians would have to reinterpret the notion of right of return in a way that would preserve Israel as a Jewish state.”
When questioned about Iran’s Ahmadinejad’s sick claim that the Holocaust is a myth, Obama responded eloquently and firmly, “…we know the Holocaust was as real as the 6 million who died in mass graves at Buchenwald, or the cattle cars to Dachau or whose ashes clouded the sky at Auschwitz. After 60 years, it is time to deny the deniers."
And, he has strongly expressed his commitment to Israel, including, “our total commitment to [America’s] unique defense relationship with Israel by fully funding military assistance and continuing work on the Arrow and related missile defense programs. This would help Israel maintain its military edge and deter and repel attacks from as far as Tehran and as close as Gaza.
Lester Crown, a foremost Jewish leader in Chicago, who for many years has known Barack Obama and his close relationship with the Jewish community, is confident that Barack Obama will continue his loyal friendship with Israel in the White House. A recent New York Sun editorial emphasizes that “anyone who questions Barack Obama on Israel policy has not checked their facts” (Jan. 9, 2008).
These are just a few of the many reasons we strongly support Barack Obama to be our Democratic Presidential nominee. We encourage you to join us in voting for him in our Maryland primary election on Tuesday, February 12, 2008, and to visit his website at www.barackobama.com, to learn about his policies, and to financially support his candidacy to be our 44th President. Our future depends upon it.
Sincerely,
The Honorable Doug Gansler
The Honorable Brian Frosh
The Honorable Jamie Raskin
The Honorable Brian Feldman
The Honorable Kirill Reznik
The Honorable William Bronrott
The Honorable Roger Berliner
The Honorable Marc Elrich
Cathy Bernard
Gary Bortnick
Debby Bortnick
Fran Brenneman
Robin Coleman
T. Michael Coleman
Barbara Goldberg Goldman
Michael F. Goldman
Rosalyn Levy Jonas
Gary F. Jonas
Donald Kane
David Litwack
Jules Polonetsky
Sandy Rovner
Josh Rales
Debby Rales
Robert Silverberg
Chong Stavins
Ralph Stavins
Sue Tabach
Gary Tabach
Baltimore Sun Endorses Obama
The Sun had some nice words for Hillary Clinton but explained why they ultimately plumped strongly for Obama.Barack Obama, her Senate colleague from Illinois, offers a more compelling vision for the country that he would lead. He wants to forge a new reality in Washington where consensus replaces confrontation. And he has shown a remarkable ability to enroll a diverse array of Americans in his cause, convincing a new generation that it too has a stake in Washington.
That's why The Sun strongly endorses Mr. Obama as the Democratic nominee for president.
When Mr. Obama promises change, surprising numbers find the pledge credible. Despite his few years in the Senate, Mr. Obama exudes confidence and assesses the nation's problems with a fresh eye. When questioned by us on a number of tough issues, he showed a sophisticated understanding of them. His opposition to the war has been steady, and while committed to an early withdrawal from Iraq, Mr. Obama recognizes the challenges to that course.
Asked how the troubled No Child Left Behind education program might be salvaged, Mr. Obama said achievement testing should not be abandoned but rather complemented with other measures of progress and more aid for schools.
As the first African-American president, he would deliver on America's promise that there is no barrier to success.
Mr. Obama is a powerfully inspirational speaker, engaging listeners with energy and warmth as he describes his goals. That's the essence of leadership. His conversations feel more heartfelt than calculating, which reminds us of President John F. Kennedy.
Untested in foreign affairs, Mr. Obama is not afraid to disagree with popular opinion, favoring dialog with Cuba, Iran and other hostile powers, for instance. But he still has lots to tell America about how he would govern and whom he would rely on to help him lead. His promises to work across party lines may favor hope over reality, and the same might be said of his plans to reach out around the world.
Mrs. Clinton told us she would be "ready on Day One" to lead decisively, and indeed, her experience is one of her most appealing attributes. But her years of sparring with conservative adversaries have left her bruised and unpopular with many Americans. Mr. Obama is more likely to turn the page to a new era and deliver real change that is urgently needed to deal with the nation's economic, social and political problems.
Saturday, February 09, 2008
Barack Saturday
Barack Obama won caucuses and primaries all over the nation on Saturday night. Obama announced his victories to an ecstatic crowd at the Jefferson-Jackson dinner in Richmond, Virginia. None of the results were close--results after the jump.
As of the time of this writing, here are the results:
Louisiana Primary: Obama 57%, Clinton 36% (98% of precincts).
Nebraska Caucus: Obama 68%, Clinton 32% (99% of precincts).
Washington Caucus: Obama 68%, Clinton 31% (96% of precincts).
Virgin Islands Convention: Obama 90%, Clinton 8%.
WaPo Endorses Edwards; Gazette Goes for Wynn
Earlier this week the Gazette endorsed incumbent Al Wynn. This morning the WaPo has endorsed challenger Donna Edwards.
I wonder how much a newspaper endorsement has nowadays.
Donna Edwards Up By 8
Here is the first poll of this race. Edwards is leading Wynn by 8.
The information comes to us from Matt Stoller at Open Left. Thanks Matt. This is an internal poll (means it is a candidate's own poll). The pollster is Donna's. You don't leak polls unless you are ahead.
Wynn needs to respond.
If the Wynn camp wants to discount this poll they will either discredit this pollster or need to release their own internal poll. This is a game of chicken.
Wynn has some of the worst reelect numbers I have ever seen.
As Matt points out Wynn had a very low reelect number (32%). An incumbent with a reelect number under 50% is not long for office. There has been a whisper campaign for the past few months -- that Wynn's reelect number against a generic Democrat was under 40%. Lake Research says it is 32%. That adds "ex-" to your title "Congressman" 9 times out of 10.
This explains Wynn's last two weeks of ads and robo calls. It would explain Wynn filing the FEC complaint against Edwards last week. It explains the negative ads.
This poll is already old.
The +/- is 5%, which is on the high side. The poll was conducted on Jan 29 and 30. But released Friday. Making the news -- while hot today -- potentially old. It was done pre-Super Tuesday, pre-FEC complaint, pre-negative TV ads. Still look at Edwards' gain from October to today. She gains 18 points and he loses 10 points. That is a major shift in voters.
Huge pack of undecideds remain.
Concerns are the same that Matt Stoller points out -- neither candidate is above 50%. There are 28% undecideds. Making the claim that candidates, Jason Jennings and George Mitchell, have made for months -- no one is thrilled with the two leading candidates. Which would explain why an internal poll such as this was not released prior to GOTV weekend. It would given a huge boost to the other candidates.
Prince George's County is a dead heat.
That's the WOW of this poll. If Wynn does not take PG by comfortable the new Congressman will be a Congresswoman. Even the most ardent Wynn supporter never expected him to carry MoCo, so winning PG is the key to a Wynn win.
Obama and Clinton are huge to this race.
This poll has 400 likely Democratic voters, which is the normal universe. The universe has changed. Most people figured our Presidential primary would be over on Super Tuesday.
Having a contested Presidential primary is the worst case scenario for Wynn. You have a slew of new voters that may not normally vote in this race showing up on election day. If they are Obama voters they are not his natural voters, even though he beat Edwards to the punch on endorsing the favorite son of PG, Obama.
I witnessed first hand on Monday at the NAACP Debate the impact of a contested Presidential primary. This was in the heart of PG. Wynn country. The overflow crowd was both pro-Obama and pro-Edwards. The Big Mo is on the side of the challenger.
So if you are Wynn you need to suppress voting (legally) and pray that Jack Johnson's machine deliver you a ton of votes.
Will WaPo release a poll as part of its Sunday's news?
I have wondered out loud where is the WaPo on this covering this race. No polls. My roommate got a call from a pollster on Tuesday. If the WaPo is polling for Obama and Clinton it should not be that hard to ask a few questions of those people who reside in CD4. It would be an easy two for one the nation's political newspaper. Sunday would be the perfect day to release.
The Gazette Drops The Ball -- Again
Here is the local paper of the DC Suburbs and there are two key races in Maryland for Congressional seats. One is nearby -- the 4th District, covering PG and MoCo; the other is far away -- the 1st District, covering the Eastern Shore and portions northeast of Baltimore.Guess which race is the lead for Gazette.
The headline caught my eye: Turnout is the key to congressional races. I thought hum, the Gazette is going to discuss the turnout in the contested Wynn-Edwards race. Great. I would love to hear what some of the experts have to say about turnout now that we have a contested Democratic Presidential primary. Will it hurt Wynn or help him. What does this do for the challengers.
Boy was I wrong.
We get four paragraphs of Republican Mitt Romney dropping out. The impact this has on the 1st Congressional District. You know that Eastern Shore race.
Where was the editor on this one? Must be in OC working on his summer place.
Did they interview a political expert? Sure some prof down in Salisbury. What the local phone lines don't work? Did this expert add anything to the story. Nothing that was worth quoting.
Did they talk about the most important Democratic primary for Congress? Oh yeah, at the end of this story we have Wynn and Edwards trade barbs in final days. Maybe someone should give them a map of their territory or a clue.
The Gazette sure knows how to stick their neck out on a key local race. Maybe the staff was busy calling car dealers for another print ad because they sure weren't talking to someone who could help them get to the bottom of the story. Great headline; lousy story.
I write for this blog in my spare time. I would not waste my time writing about turnout in a district three hours away when you have the best story in the country in the middle of your circulation. But the Gazette paid someone to write that crap. No wonder circulation is down.
Friday, February 08, 2008
What a Way to Seek an Endorsement
Did you read the Post’s article on the Montgomery County school board candidates the other day? Did you see at-large candidate Tommy Le’s comments on the Montgomery County Education Association?
Le, by contrast, opposes the [teachers’] raises and the influence wielded by the teachers association, which he referred to as the "Montgomery County Extortion Association" during a telephone interview. He said labor support has packed the school board with people who "owe their allegiance to anything that benefits the union."So Le is a principled objector who’s going to stand up to the “extortionists,” right? Wrong.
It turns out that Le actively sought the Teachers’ endorsement, sending in a questionnaire last December and sitting for an interview with them. In that questionnaire, Le described the current collective bargaining agreement as “a win-win situation for all concerns.” When the Teachers asked him, “Would you support honoring negotiated agreements, especially in tight fiscal times,” Le replied, “Yes.” Le also supported continued inclusion of MCEA on the schools’ Executive Leadership Team and Deputies’ Operating Budget Committee (a sure mechanism for “influence”). It was only after the Teachers endorsed Alies Muskin that Le went on the warpath.
Stranger still, Connection Newspapers reported the following during Le’s last school board run in October 2006:
Le said that he has not sought the endorsement of any organization because he does not want to be “subjected to their interests in the future.” “I want [to be able] to put the interests of the students first over the teachers’ union in case of financial crisis,” he said.So first he doesn’t want an endorsement. Then he does. Then when he doesn’t get it, the Teachers are “extortionists.” What’s that old rule about getting out of the way of a politician who’s blowing himself up?
So here’s my idea: let’s get Kevin Gillogly to endorse him. That’ll put this campaign to bed for sure.
Latest Wynn-Edwards News
We are into GOTV (Get Out The Vote) weekend and here is some of the latest news from the leading candidates.
This is a robo call sent out on behind of Congressman Wynn. It comes from Open Left's Matt Stoller, who is a supporter of challenger Donna Edwards. Still the robo call undercuts Wynn's argument that he is running a positive campaign.
Baltimore Sun is running an article from UMBC Professor Schaller that dovetails with Stoller's comments. The end of Schaller's comments he calls for the voting Wynn out of office.
From the WaPo blog, Sen. Mikulski is staying out of the race citing her focus on Hillary.
Also from the WaPo, Donna Edwards has endorsed Obama. Wynn endorsed Obama back in mid-January. This confirms that Obama is solidly ahead of Clinton in the DC burbs. Expect both sides to hand out palm cards linking their candidate with Obama.
Of course MPW's own Adam Pagnucco commented on the local elected officials who are endorsing Wynn. It is an impressive list. This also originated in the WaPo blog. Among the comments on their site was an interesting point made by someone known as "lefty". He/she, based on previous comments, is pro-Donna. So take that as you may but the point made was that WaPo reporter, Roz Helderman, headlines the blog piece with a majority of the electeds were there for Wynn. Not true. Wynn has an impressive list of endorsements but it is still not a majority of either delegation.
This race is so close that whomever gets out the GOTV wins. Not that's obvious but so many races are not close coming into GOTV weekend. This one is.
Money, Money, Money
The General Assembly is now in session so legislators cannot raise campaign cash. However, legislators had to file campaign finance reports in January. See how much cash Montgomery legislators have on hand and how much they owe after the jump.
A number of things to remember while interpreting this data:
1. N/A means no report was available online.
2. The money owed is often loans made from the candidate's personal funds to themselves.
3. These amounts exclude balances for slates treasuries.
4. A lack of funds in the kitty does not equal a lack of access to cash. Many legislators can quickly replenish campaign treasuries through self-financing or through family donations.
5. A lack of funds may indicate electoral safety rather than electoral vulnerability. In Congress, the legislators who spend the most money are the ones who are most in danger of losing. Many legislators also accumulate "war chests" in order to discourage strong challengers.
Update from Adam Pagnucco: In terms of positive changes in account balance over the past year, the leaders in MoCo are Senator Brian Frosh (D16), $66,810; Delegate Susan Lee (D16), $38,259; Delegate Brian Feldman (D15), $30,482; Delegate Bill Frick (D16), $30,282; and Delegate Tom Hucker (D20), $25,886. Among freshmen, the leaders were Frick, Hucker, Delegate Saqib Ali (D39), $23,453; Senator Jamie Raskin (D20), $22,163; and Delegate Roger Manno (D19), $21,289.
As District 16 may be the wealthiest legislative district in the state, the high rankings of its delegation in fundraising are not surprising. But Bill Frick is clearly sending a message to his potential rivals that he plans to fight to keep his seat: (see http://maryland-politics.blogspot.com/2007/12/rumor-du-jour.html).
Thursday, February 07, 2008
More on the Politburos
Today's Post contains a few tidbits about the Montgomery and Prince George's County Politburos... err, excuse me, Democratic Central Committees.
First, the Post reports that PGCDCC used an open roll call vote in selecting District 47 Senator Gwendolyn Britt's replacement. Hmmm, very interesting. Does anyone know how long PGCDCC has been using open votes for appointments? Delegate Saqib Ali had to threaten MCDCC with state legislation before they agreed to open voting.
Second, the same article supplies even more details about County Executive Jack Johnson's maneuvers to thwart his enemy, former Delegate Rushern Baker, from getting the appointment. Apparently, Johnson employed an eyeball-to-eyeball staredown (probably in addition to other tactics) to reverse a vote that was previously pledged to Baker. Now do you think Johnson could have personally stared down the thousands of voters who would have participated in a special election to fill the vacancy? I think not.
Third, in an article chronicling County Council Member Marilyn Praisner's long and distinguished career, the Post notes her support for special elections:In an ironic twist, Praisner and former council member Betty Ann Krahnke, who died in 2002, were the driving forces behind a measure that in 1999 created the mandatory special election for replacing council members. They didn't want to leave those decisions to the political activists on the Democratic and Republican committees.
Actually, I believe the County Council appointed its own replacements prior to 1999 and MCDCC had no role. But Mrs. Praisner favored special elections for vacancies and worked to pass them at the county level. And unlike MCDCC spokesman Milton Minneman, Mrs. Praisner believed in the capacity of voters to choose their own leaders. Remember Minneman's infamous quote in the Examiner?...The county’s Democratic Central Committee spokesman Milton Minneman believes his team is best equipped to make the selections. Because the group’s purpose is to get Democrats in office, and because it spends time interviewing potential replacements and hosting public forums, it is far more knowledgeable than average voters of each candidate’s suitability.
That's right, I thought you remembered that.
“Special elections are often held rapidly, and voters don’t have time to get to know the candidates,” Minneman said. “We think we’re more representative.”
Purple Line Funding Concerns
Maryland officials are worried that problems which have plagued funding for the Silver Line in Virginia may also impede funding for the Purple Line.State Transportation Secretary John D. Porcari said recently that national competition has always been fierce for a relatively small pot of federal transit money. Still, Porcari said, "we're all concerned this Dulles decision is signaling that it's going to be even more difficult in the future." . . .
If cost remains a major pressure, then it appears bus-rapid transit should gain a lift over the light-rail proposal. After all, the Project Manager for the Purple Line has conceded that it is more cost effective than light rail. One might also boost ridership by running the rapid buses to BRAC and NIH via Medical Center Metro before going down Woodmont Ave., rezoned by the Council for high density buildings, before terminating at the Bethesda Metro.
Porcari said that the state's latest ridership estimates for a Purple Line -- as many as 47,000 boardings daily -- are "very strong" but that planners are still working to keep costs down. He said the state hopes the federal government will pay as much as half the cost of building a light rail or rapid bus line between Bethesda and New Carrollton. Without federal help, the project is prohibitively expensive, he said. . . .
"Local dissension about the design of the project" is another of the Dulles rail project's "extraordinary large set of challenges," FTA chief James S. Simpson said. And like the Silver Line and most other major transportation projects, the Purple Line faces its share of vocal opposition.
For years, some Chevy Chase and Silver Spring residents have objected to the idea of Purple Line trains or buses running through their neighborhoods. Some users of the Capital Crescent Trail have launched another protest, saying a Purple Line along the popular walking and bike path would destroy a rare swath of urban tranquility between Bethesda and Silver Spring. Officials at the University of Maryland are fighting the state's plans to run the project down the College Park campus's main street. They say it would be too dangerous for pedestrians.
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
Below the radar?
This article is written by Sharon Dooley, a former candidate for County Council from the Second District (Upcounty).
Is the Board of Education primary race below the radar this year? With a spirited Presidential campaign now finally featuring 2 candidates for the Democrats, and a greatly reduced slate on the Republican side, the Board of Education race may be overlooked by some.
If one adds to these contests the media attention given to the 4th District Congressional race between Edwards, Wynn and a host of other candidates, many voters would be hard pressed to name the candidates who are running for the Montgomery County School Board.
Half of the school board is elected every two years and seats vary from district to at-large races, even though all candidates run countywide. This primary selects the two candidates who move forward in the non-partisan contest for a position on the General Election list.
The February 12th election will feature no contests in District 2 (Rockville area) where Steve Abrams (incumbent) and Laura Berthiaume will move onto the November Ballot, and District 4 (Silver Spring) where recent appointee Christopher Barclay will face the electorate unopposed.
The real contest will be in the race for the at-large seat. On the slate of five, frequent candidate Tommy Le faces off against second time candidate Phil Kauffman (endorsed by the principals) and newcomers Alies Muskin, who has the teachers nod, teacher Rob Seubert and Carey Apple. Those in the know believe that Kauffman and Muskin have the best chances to move forward to the fall contest.
This writer favors Kauffman, an attorney for the VA, who is a veteran PTA Board member from Olney. He is respected for his hands-on approach to problem solving and inclusive manner in discussions. His wife is a county schoolteacher, and I am confident he will be watchful of the needs for both students and teachers.
Since he has experience both in contract law and budgets, I believe he has the knowledge to read between the lines and find ways to identify efficiencies and savings in these times of tight budgets. In my opinion, since the School Board uses half of our county revenues, we need to be certain that we, as a county, continue our commitment to educational excellence in a fiscally responsible manner.
Sharon Dooley lives in Olney
The list from the Board of Elections is noted below.
Don’t forget to vote for your choice on February 12th.
Board of Education At Large
Apple, Carey - Non-Partisan
Kauffman, Phil - Non-Partisan
Le, Tommy - Non-Partisan
Muskin, Alies - Non-Partisan
Seubert, Rob - Non-Partisan
District/Circuit 002
Abrams, Stephen N. - Non-Partisan
Berthiaume, Laura V. - Non-Partisan
District/Circuit 004
Barclay, Christopher S. - Non-Partisan
Donna Edwards' Closing Statement from the NAACP Debate
This is Donna Edwards' closing statement from NAACP Debate at the PGCC Debate on Monday. The other candidates are seated from left to right are: Jason Jennings, Al Wynn, Robert Broadus (Republican) is blocked by Edwards and to the far right is George McDermott.
Thanks to Open Left for providing the video footage. Open Left's Matt Stoller has been covering this race. Good job Matt. Here is his report on the event.
Al Wynn's Closing Statement from the NAACP Debate
This was Congressman Al Wynn's closing statement on the NAACP Debate at PGCC on Monday night. Candidates Michael Babula and Jason Jennings are seated in front of him.
Thanks to Open Left for providing this video. Open Left's Matt Stoller has been covering this race. Thanks Matt. Here is a picture of Matt talking with Congressman Wynn prior to the debate. Check out Matt's blog posting here. 
MoCo/PG State Legislators for Wynn
Maryland Moment's Rosalind Helderman covered a rally in Annapolis for District 4 Congressman Albert Wynn. I encourage everyone to read her piece as it contains details of the remarks made by Senators Mike Miller, Ulysses Currie and Rob Garagiola, all of whom have endorsed Wynn. As part of that coverage, Helderman provided a list of the Montgomery and Prince George's County state legislators who turned out at that rally and we reproduce it here.
Montgomery County State Legislators for Wynn
District 14: Senator Rona Kramer, Delegate Karen Montgomery
District 15: Entire Delegation
District 17: Senator Jennie Forehand
District 19: Senator Mike Lenett, Delegate Ben Kramer
District 39: Entire Delegation
Note: Districts 16 and 17 do not overlap with CD4. District 18 only shares two precincts with CD4.
Prince George's County State Legislators for Wynn
District 21: Senator James Rosapepe, Delegates Ben Barnes and Barbara Frush
District 22: Delegates Anne Healey and Justin Ross
District 23: Delegate Marvin Holmes (23B)
District 24: Senator Nathaniel Exum, Delegate Michael Vaughn
District 25: Senator Ulysses Currie, Delegates Melony Griffith and Dereck Davis
District 26: Senator C. Anthony Muse, Delegate Jay Walker
District 47: Delegate Victor Ramirez
In addition, Helderman noted attendance at the rally by Prince George's County Council Member Will Campos, Former District 39 Senator P.J. Hogan and Betty Weller from the state teachers union, which endorsed Wynn.
Edwards responded by announcing endorsements from Delegate Ana Sol Gutierrez (D18), Delegate Joseline Pena-Melnyk (D21) and Edmonston Mayor Adam Ortiz. But this is far from a complete list of her elected supporters.
Notably absent from the Wynn camp are Delegates Herman Taylor (D14, who briefly considered challenging him), Kumar Barve (D17, the House Majority Leader), Luiz Simmons (D17), Senator Paul Pinsky (D22, a staffer of MCEA) and everyone from District 20 (Silver Spring-Takoma Park).
Congressman Wynn is known for his long memory. So are MoCo progressives. That's what makes the above list so interesting.
It's Just Not That Strange, George
The Washington Post just carried an article in which Montgomery County Council Member George Leventhal complained about a school fundraiser at McDonald's. I've got news for you, George: given what's already going on, it's just not that strange!
According to the Post, the "McTeachers Night" fundraisers feature teachers serving students at McDonald's with the schools getting a cut of the proceeds. Upon hearing about this at a council meeting, Leventhal reacted with disbelief:"Teachers are enlisted by McDonald's to work behind the cash register at McDonald's, and students are recruited to go to McDonald's that night to see their teacher dishing out the Big Macs?" he asked with horror. "I never heard of that."
Now look, George. It's seventy degrees out and it's February, and that's causing some odd behavior. Governor O'Malley and State Superintendent of Schools Nancy Grasmick kissed and made up. Immigrant-baiting Republicans are voting for John McCain for President. And even you and Marc Elrich are cooperating(!) on a bill to protect domestic workers. So maybe it's not so strange that among these oddball alliances, the teachers are teaming up with McDonald's.
About 20 minutes later, Leventhal spoke up again. "The McDonald's thing really bothers me a lot," he said, his sentiment partly fueled by a concern about childhood obesity. "I mean, I don't know if we'd have a fundraiser at the local cigarette store."
And that's not all! Looking through my inbox, I see a lot more weird things going on. Hmmm, let's go through the list of upcoming events:
March 8
Fundraiser for County Council Member Marc Elrich, Federal Realty Headquarters, Rockville, MD. Special guests: Neighborspac Executive Director Drew Powell and Doug Duncan.
March 29
Fundraiser for _______________ at Georgia Avenue/Forest Glen Road intersection, Silver Spring. (Errr, one problem with this. We can't get any politicians to appear for fear of endangering their lives at the Intersection of Death.)
April 17
Casa de Maryland hosts rally for County Executive Candidate Chuck Floyd, Wheaton. Special guests: District 18 Delegate Ana Sol Gutierrez and Help Save Maryland Founder Brad Botwin. Start of petition drive calling for removal of MCPD Chief Tom Manger.
April 26
Joint Fundraiser, District 39 Senator Nancy King and Delegate Saqib Ali, Montgomery Village. Special guests: Governor O'Malley and Comptroller Franchot. Also appearing: Abraham Van Helsing and Dracula.
May 10
Reverend Donald Wildmon hosts fundraiser for District 18 Delegate Candidate Dana Beyer, Chevy Chase. Special guests: District 31 Delegate Donald Dwyer and District 18 Delegate Jeff Waldstreicher. Also appearing: Itchy and Scratchy.
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Is A Change Gonna Come?
Boy what a difference a few days make. Last Saturday I wrote how Al Wynn, with an assist from Dr. Michael Babula, won the debate at People's Community Baptist in Silver Spring. It was his day. Everything was different last night. Just like the classic Sam Cooke song, the NAACP Debate at PGCC in Largo could be the clearest signal that a new order may be coming to the 4th Congressional District.
Rennie Forum inside the Largo Student Center was a full house where the only undecideds were the reporters and custodians. They waited patiently through 
the Congressional 8th District (Van Hollen seat) and 5th District (Hoyer seat) milling in the lobby trading the latest rumors and stories before the main event of the evening the 4th District debate. By the time the 6 Democrats and 3 Republicans took the stage it was late and the crowd was eager to cheer their candidate on. That's not the news. The news is not the debate itself. All sides will point to a phrase or line that their candidate spoke that proves to all the wisdom of the speaker.
This was the Super Bowl of debates for the 4th District. I have been to four of them. This was the largest and most vocal debate. The audience wanted to take center stage. Sometimes they did. But here we are a week out and you get a gauge of who can organize; whose volunteers are pumped. Which side is gasping to make the finish line.
I collected some wonderful lines from last night debate. All candidates have hit their stride in their message and can connect with the audience. But if I wrote that you will be missing what really is going on. You need to look at the unobtrusive measures. Look at see what is going on around the room.
A sure sign of a campaign's strength is the number of supporters who will come out for you and listen to a debate. Sitting through a debate when you have already decided who you like calls for a hard core supporter. They are committed activists. They are people who will door knock, make phone calls, talk to their neighbors, contribute and most importantly vote. Michael Babula looked to be there alone. Although he did receive several hearty back slaps from a cadre of Wynn supporters afterwards as Dr. Mike again attacked not the incumbent but his main rival, Edwards. George McDermott had a single supporter. Jason Jennings had his mom, wife, members of his church, about ten in total. George Mitchell's supporters were easy to find in their bright yellow t-shirts. His wife and several other family members were there too. His supporters were almost two dozen. Al Wynn had a slightly more than Mitchell, call it around 30. They were either in his light blue t-shirts or wearing his lapel sticker over their suits. 
Michael Steele was among those supporting the Congressman. Donna Edwards support was in the first row to the top row. It was total; it was complete. Her supporters outnumbered, say it was 100, the combined total of the five Democrats and the three Republicans in this joint debate. They were in t-shirts or wearing her button. Edwards supporters cheered as if it was the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl and their team just went ahead. Has Al Wynn become the Patriots to Donna Edwards' Giants? Will the Congressman's unblemished political winning streak of twenty-six years through eleven elections remain intact for one more race?
Who is ahead in this race? 
We don't know. It is a parlor game. There are no newspaper polls. Candidates Jennings and Babula (pictured to the left) along with Mitchell and McDermott don't have the money for a scientific statistically poll. Leaving the two major candidates with polls that are not being released. Candidates don't release the poll numbers if they want to avoid tipping their hand. A candidate that releases a poll is then obligated to have the pollster talk about the entire poll. So if you don't want to show your hand you don't release your internal poll. So how do you tell? You use those unobtrusive measures.
You look for signs of movement. People who are coming out to events. Look at a Sen. Obama rally. Does he not get the biggest crowds? Are people fired up about his campaign? You bet. The audience was pro-Obama and they cheered not for the candidate who was supporting Obama -- Al Wynn. They cheered most often and strongest for Donna Edwards, who remains uncommitted.
You look to see what their campaign ads look like. If you are ahead you run Morning in America ads as Reagan did in 1984. If you are behind you attack your opponent. What was the lasting impression of the debate? As the debate ended and the crowd was leaving on the TV set in the lobby was the latest Al Wynn ad running. It shows (see picture below) Donna Edwards as a puppet being controlled by two white operators. This was not an ad by a 527. It was an ad from his own campaign. He is down in the polls. He needs to vilify his main opponent, Donna Edwards, to win.
Maybe it was best said by Jason Jennings who thought Congressman Wynn was "like a prize fighter who is past his prime". Ads and debates don't win races. Getting votes do. But if this unobtrusive measures hold then we will have an upset to rival Sunday's Super Bowl.It's been a long, a long time coming
But I know a change gonna come, oh yes it will
(A Change Gonna Come, Sam Cooke)
Raskin Proposes to End Civil Marriage
Sen. Jamie Raskin (D-20) has introduced a bill to end civil marriage. Jamie, how do your wife and kids feel about this decision?
The bill follows bravely in the path of those who proposed abolishing public schools in response to court orders mandating integrated public schools. Unlike proponents of that idea, Sen. Raskin's facetious bill is meant to promote same-sex marriage:The bills represent an unusual new tactic in the effort to push legal rights for gay couples through the House and Senate during the legislature's 90-day session. Sponsors of the measure say they are attempting to address head-on the concerns of lawmakers who oppose same-sex marriage on religious grounds.
Under their proposal, all couples -- straight or gay -- would be on equal footing with secular unions. Religious marriage in churches, synagogues and mosques would be unaffected, as would existing civil marriages.
The word "marriage" would be replaced with "valid domestic partnership" in the state's family law code.
"If people want to maintain a religious test for marriage, let's turn it into a religious institution," said Sen. Jamie B. Raskin (D-Montgomery), the bill's Senate sponsor.
It’s Time to Protect Domestic Workers
Back in 2006, the Montgomery County Council commissioned a study by researchers at George Washington University about conditions faced by the county’s domestic workers. The study found that domestic workers were frequently paid less than minimum wage, often did not receive overtime pay, rarely had written employment contracts, did not know their rights under U.S. labor laws and did not have enough contact with their peers to facilitate unionization. On that basis, Casa de Maryland and other groups called for a “domestic workers bill of rights” to protect these workers from employment abuses.
The council did not implement the broad-ranging bill of rights, but Council Members George Leventhal and Marc Elrich recently introduced Bill No. 2-08 mandating employment contracts for domestic workers. Under the bill, any employer of a domestic worker must negotiate a written employment contract with that worker. The contract must specify days and hours of work, wages, paid and unpaid time off, and many other conditions of work. Furthermore, live-in domestic workers must have a private room for sleeping with a lock as well as reasonable access to a kitchen, bathroom and laundry facilities. Employers are forbidden to retaliate against workers requesting such an agreement. Any worker who suffers an agreement violation can file a complaint with the County’s Office of Consumer Protection.
On its face, this is a strong system of protection for a very vulnerable class of workers. But as David Lublin has noted, the bill has its critics – even among progressives. Among other things, they question whether employment contracts with domestic workers who are illegal immigrants are binding, whether an illegal immigrant would have to acknowledge his or her immigration status during the contracting process, and whether increased education would be a more appropriate alternative than contracts.
As I’ve probably told our readers before, I have spent my entire adult career in the building trades section of the labor movement. We have to deal with the anarchic intersection of illegal immigration, sometimes murky tax and employment laws and predatory employers on a daily basis. Believe me that these are not easy issues. The critics’ questions are legitimate and deserve to be answered.
1. Is an employment contract with an illegal immigrant binding?
Contrary to popular opinion, it is not illegal for an employer to hire an illegal immigrant. Under the Immigration Reform & Control Act of 1986 (IRCA), an employer may not knowingly hire an illegal immigrant. An employer has a duty to ask for a list of documents from any job applicant but has no duty to verify them with the federal government. When prosecutors go after an employer for hiring illegals, they must prove knowledge of their illegal status in court, which is not an easy task. (That’s why there are so few prosecutions.)
Illegal immigrants execute all manner of contracts in the U.S., including car purchases, business agreements and even mortgages. These contracts are enforceable in court. Labor unions and other organizations routinely recover wages owed to illegals who have been cheated by their employers. Many illegal immigrants are covered by employment agreements, including union-negotiated collective bargaining agreements. So employment agreements involving illegals do not inherently violate the law.
2. Would an illegal immigrant be forced to acknowledge his or her status by this bill?
Bill No. 2-08 is silent on whether the worker is to be classified as an employee or a contractor. That is a meaningful distinction, but not necessarily for immigration status.
Generally speaking, employers may classify workers as independent contractors if they face substantial business risk from their operations, control their own performance and hours of work and own their equipment and capital. When employers set schedules, control work conditions, closely supervise performance and own the relevant equipment and tools, they are supposed to classify workers as employees. Employees are eligible for social security, workers compensation and unemployment benefits while contractors are not. (Because of the immense costs at stake, this distinction is often abused.)
If a worker is classified as an employee, they will be expected to supply a social security number (SSN) and a number of documents establishing legal residency. The employer has no duty to verify them. Illegal immigrants can and do use false SSNs to establish employment (and credit). I have personally audited construction jobsites on which three-quarters of the SSNs used were false. IRCA’s document requirements have spawned a massive phony documentation industry, but that is an inevitable byproduct of a large number of illegal immigrants and a large number of employers willing to hire them.
The consequences of using false SSNs are usually minimal. When a false SSN is used for social security withholding, the Social Security Administration sends “no-match” letters to employers requesting that they provide corrected SSN information. But there is no requirement that the workers be fired, much less deported. (If workers were frequently terminated over no-match letters, half the construction jobsites in America would shut down tomorrow. Trust me on that.) A recent attempt by the Bush Administration to require employers to fire workers with false SSNs was recently turned back by a federal court. It seems unlikely that a President McCain, a President Clinton or a President Obama would seek to institute such a requirement.
It’s much more likely that employers of domestic workers will instead classify them as independent contractors. In that case, the employer would issue a Form 1099 to each worker reporting their compensation for tax purposes. The Form 1099 reports the recipient’s “identification number.” That could be an SSN or an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), which is available to anyone regardless of immigration status.
The IRS is generally forbidden to share taxpayer information with other federal agencies and is delighted to issue ITINs. As IRS Commissioner Mark W. Emerson told the New York Times last year, “We want your money whether you are here legally or not and whether you earned it legally or not.” In 2006, 1.4 million people used ITINs to file income tax returns and many of them were undoubtedly illegal immigrants.
So under either of the above arrangements, a worker would not have to confess his or her immigration status and any possibility of deportation is extremely unlikely. If the bill really did threaten to cause deportations, Casa de Maryland would not be supporting it.
In any case, while the above issues raise some questions, the workers are not better off working “off-the-books.” In my experience, off-the-books arrangements lead to cheating, abuse and exploitation far, far more than the employment contracts proposed in the Leventhal/Elrich bill.
3. Would greater education be sufficient to protect these workers?
The key determinant of whether a worker’s rights under the law are protected is not the worker’s knowledge of them. It’s the available enforcement mechanisms. I have worked on many organizing campaigns in which education of the workers is an important, early component. But even when workers knew their rights, the employers could and did decide to ignore and violate them. Whether the workers were ultimately able to get their rights respected depended on the vigorousness of government enforcement (which was usually weak), the financial strength of the company and the success of the union’s tactics in countering the law-breaking employer. This is a harsh, HARSH country for workers – even those who are citizens, know their rights and have strong unions.
In the case of domestic workers, education in and of itself would be a challenge. How can the government reach them, especially those who live with their employers? How many languages must the government use? How can the government persuade the employers to respect those rights? And exactly what are the workers supposed to do when their rights are violated? Individual domestic workers have almost no power in their workplaces. That’s why they’re so vulnerable. That’s why they’re in need of real protection.
The way I read it, the Leventhal/Elrich bill will not cause mass firings or deportations of domestic workers. And it may very well bring them up out of the working poverty they currently inhabit. It gives them something almost all union members have: an enforceable, written contract that protects them. It’s a good bill. All progressives should line up to support it, perhaps discuss improvements to it, and ultimately pass it.
Monday, February 04, 2008
Fly on the Wall for a joint Wynn-Edwards Interview
Political Pulse Moderator, Charles Duffy, Congressman Al Wynn, Donna EdwardsWe regularly feature Cable Channel 16 Political Pulse's upcoming interviews. This morning was the taping of a joint interview of the two main candidates for the 4th Congressional District:Al Wynn (campaign site) and Donna Edwards. I was a fly on the wall listening off camera.
Both sides should be happy with their candidate's performance. This 30 minute show covered most of the key issues. Along with the recent NOW program on PBS entitled Divided Democrats, this interview is the best use of streaming video to educate the voters. I encourage you to watch.
When Can I See It??
Political Pulse, hosted by Charles Duffy, is on every Thursday night at 9 on Montgomery County Cable Channel 16. There will be a special showing tomorrow night (Super Tuesday at 9:30 pm).
More importantly for those of you who don't have cable and don't want to set the VCR or TiVo there is an even better way to watch it. The WaPo, which I have criticized for its minimal coverage of this race, will have it up on their site as a streaming video. Look for it in the next few days. When I see it there I will alert you.
About Political Pulse
Charles Duffy covers many of the same issues we do here at MPW. If you have cable, I don't.It was either high speed internet or cable for my budget. This is one of the best places to get a solid news without the frills. He is always prepared. He is fair and balanced. Watch it.
Memorial for Marilyn Praisner
Information on the Viewing, Memorial Mass, and Contributions in Memory of Councilmember Marilyn Praisner.
Viewing on Monday, Feb. 4, and Tuesday, Feb. 5: From 2-4 p.m. and 6-8 p.m. at Hines Rinaldi Funeral Home, 11800 New Hampshire, Silver Spring. A prayer service will be held on Tuesday evening at 7:30 pm.
Interment: Will be private.
Memorial Mass on Saturday, Feb. 9: At 11 a.m. at St. John the Baptist Church, 12319 New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring.
In lieu of flowers: The family of Mrs. Praisner said that contributions can be made to the following:
Ida Raitano Scholarship Fund
c/o Associate Alumnae of Douglass College
181 Ryder Lane
New Brunswick, NJ 08901
Sunday, February 03, 2008
Four Questions for the Next President
From Marc Korman: Here are four questions we in Recently, the Federal Transit Administration torpedoed Dulles Rail. We need to ensure this does not happen when and if we decide to move forward with the Purple Line or Corridor Cities Transitway. There is also a need for increased investment in the Metro system, which is responsible for getting 1/3 of the federal workforce to their jobs. Metro is in dire need of a fixed revenue source to continue operating, which is something most big city transit systems have, but Metro does not. There are 2.9 million federal civilian employees, tens of thousands of whom live in Due to BRAC, Walter Reed in DC and the These are just a few federal questions with a local focus the presidential candidates should be asked before February 12th. But if you have others ideas, please post them here.
Barring an unforeseen event, Maryland’s February 12th primary is actually going to make a difference in determining who the Democratic presidential nominee is. Better yet, the only other primaries that day are in DC and Virginia, so the candidates should be focused on our area. This is a contrast to other years when Maryland’s late primary and secure Democratic status makes it irrelevant. Like Iowa with ethanol and Nevada with Yucca, we now have the opportunity to put our own issues on the agenda of the next president.
A Chicken In Every Pot
It's that time of the year. T minus 10 days to primary day where attacks pick up their intensity. Last night's Debate at People's Community Baptist Church for the candidates for the Fourth District was the most charged of the three I attended. Fortunately for the incumbent most of the charges were focused on his principal rival.
The blogosphere has not been kind to Incumbent Al Wynn. So this may be the first words to highlight his positives. 
This was his night. His skills as a debater came through in spades. The former coach of the Howard University Debate team was on. He had position all night (being the first one to speak in opening and the last one to speak during closing) using both to great effect. The questions favored him. Others made charges against his principle rival, Donna Edwards, sparing him the trouble. No one except her called on him to explain some of his votes. It was the perfect storm of a debate for the incumbent. Edwards had to feel as if it was four against one, with the genial George McDermott refraining from the testosterone festival.
Wynn's Perfect Storm
In his opening statement Wynn took time to honor Marilyn Praisner's work getting all to stop what they were doing to give her a moment of silence. Classy move. He had held his own during the Q&A. None of the questions highlighted his vulnerabilities. He also got a major assist from Dr. Michael Babula, who laid into his principle challenger Donna Edwards early. Jason Jennings and George Mitchell (note link is broken) bunched Wynn and Edwards together on multiple occasions blurring the lines. Al Wynn completed the night by having the final word in closing statement. Harking back "to the old days where politicians promised a chicken in every pot" to voters, Wynn compared what he has done in office to the lack of accomplishments by his opponents.
"She disgusts me"
The first question was on campaign finance and special interest money. Babula, pictured to the lower left, speaking after Edwards and before Wynn went after the former with a vengeance. 
Sounding as if he was reading from the recently filed Wynn complaint against Edwards centered on soft money and 527s, Babula, a former Republican candidate in his native New Jersey, highlighted perceived connections between 527s and her campaign ending with the subhead quote above.
Other Observations
Mitchell, pictured to the right, sounding as if he was the Pastor of this powerful
Baptist church, charged you can't continue to elect the same people and expect different results. He called Wynn and Edwards "two peas in a pod". Babula piggybacked on Mitchell and called Edwards "a wolf in sheep's clothing" and Wynn "a wolf dressed up as a grandmother".
Why the Increase in Charges?
These increases in charges are common and expected. The further down you are in the race the greater the intensity. The closer to the election the greater intensity. This is a race where no one knows who is ahead. We have a crowded six person race. No public polls to digest. No leaked candidates polls. So this is moving time. You either move up or you move out. The uncertainty of the race has all but the main players fighting for their place in the sun.
This is the second debate inside a week where Edwards served as the pinata 
for her male opponents. There were numerous times a finger was pointed and charges directed at her as if she was the eight term incumbent. When people talked of change it was as if she was the one blocking change. Her attempts at connecting with the voters was lost in a sea of "they are both the same".
Debates, or forums as we like to call these things in the 21st century, are just a small part of an overall campaign. More people will read these words than were in attendance. So hopefully, my recollections match others. All sides will spin to highlight their candidate. It will be tough for Edwards to "win" another debate if the attacks continue. Wynn used his oratory skills to great effect. He defended his positions without being defensive. It was the best I had seen him in several debates over two election cycles.
What's Next
The candidates have another debate at PG Community College on Monday evening. I would expect more of the same. Also expect to see and hear more interviews on cable and radio in the coming week.
General Observations After Three Debates
Having sat through three debates and interviews with all candidates but Wynn (still waiting Congressman) here is a thumbnail sketch of the candidates, so far.
George McDermott (pictured to the left), the longest of long shots, continues to bark at a corrupt judicial system and wants you "to throw the bums out of office". He may not win but he is a decent and honest man who is determined to speak out against the faults of our judicial system as he sees it.
Jason Jennings (pictured to the right), who has not mastered the sound bite, has a theme of 'us, working folks vs. them, the rich'. He is the only candidate who was educated in local schools from kindergarten to graduate school. Jennings wants to be a different legislator than you have seen previously. He wants to not just change the representation in this district but he wants to change the way Congress operates completely.
George Mitchell wants you to know that he will speak out for the children. Not that others won't but he will be the first and the most vocal. His facts sometimes are off (e.g., when he mentions the district is 85% PG and almost 20% MoCo meaning the district equals 105% or he cites campaign contribution percentages for his opponents that don't match the public record) but Mitchell gives a good speech. You can tell he has not missed too many Sunday sermons. His cadence is good.
Mike Babula, the newest of the newcomers, wants you to know that without a serious change in our fiscal & monetary policy we face an economic future that rivals Independence Day. He may be right; but it is not the type of message that inspires. He also has some of the more libertarian views on drug control, education, health care, gun control, and foreign policy, though he will reject the use of that label. Somewhere the far right meets the far left and that seems to be where he resides.
Donna Edwards wants you to know that she has been where many have been -- a single parent, without health insurance, trying to raise a son -- all while serving as a public interest advocate. Outside of the Congressman, she is only person who can point to several accomplishments for the public good.
Al Wynn wants you know that he is not about promises but about results. His results speak for themselves though others may disagree. He claims "transparency" on campaign finance. He wants both universal education and universal health care. He sounds as if he got the message in 2006 and is willing to become a more vocal advocate for the district.
All candidates claim to be the latest agent of change in the year of change.
We are in a for wild 10 days sprint to the election. It is All in The Family now.
Friday, February 01, 2008
Marilyn Praisner: Passing of a Titan
Perhaps you have heard about the recent passing of Montgomery County Council Member Marilyn Praisner. I write this post in praise of a legend of county politics, a true titan of public service who will never be forgotten.
Mrs. Praisner has represented District 4 (East County) since 1990. She is the longest-serving woman in the history of the County Council. But she was far, far more than that. She was a former member of the school board, a long-time chair of the council’s Management & Fiscal Policy Committee and a long-time member (and recent chair) of the critical Planning, Housing & Economic Development Committee. Those positions and her long tenure made her one of the county’s most influential voices on budget issues, cable policy, technology, education and land use.
But one of the things I always remembered when dealing with her was her long service in the Central Intelligence Agency, starting as an analyst and moving into the senior ranks. That gave her an unusual skill set for a politician. Mrs. Praisner was the one policymaker who read every page of every report and grasped every single detail. Nothing got past her. She could not be fooled or bluffed. If you were going to see her about an issue, you had better do your homework! Because chances are, she would know your subject better than you did.
Time and again, I saw her use that encyclopedic mind and relentless style to grill the unprepared. I’ll never forget her interrogating State Highway officials at the annual Road Show meetings. The purpose of those meetings was to allow the state officials to brag about all of the road construction work they were doing in the county. But Mrs. Praisner would have none of that. She stood up, armed with a bookful of documents, and flayed the bureaucrats about every project in her district. She wanted to know about every lane design, every curb, every paint line and every traffic cone and exactly when each step was going to be completed. And woe to the hapless bureaucrat who didn’t know the answers to those questions!
But there was another side to Mrs. Praisner. She was a civil and courteous public servant who enjoyed intelligent debate. She insisted on decorum but she liked ideas. She responded diligently to communications and requests. I did not live in Mrs. Praisner’s district but that did not stop her from answering my emails and considering my proposals. If you treated her with respect, knew your facts, did your best to answer her questions and told the truth, Mrs. Praisner was your friend.
She was a woman of incredible intelligence, great fairness, and most of all, unquestioned honor. Nobody was smarter, tougher, harder-working or more honest. She was a towering figure in our county. There will be other people who follow in her position as the District 4 County Council member. But no one – no one – will do a better job than Marilyn Praisner.
One Name; One Memory
What can I say that hasn't already been said about Marilyn Praisner. Here is the announcement on the MoCo Council website.
She had reached that level of awareness that she was came with only one name: Marilyn. If I say "Michael" or "Magic" you knew I was talking about basketball. If I say "Hillary" you knew I was talking about perhaps the next President of the US. And if I say "Marilyn" I was talking about all things MoCo. There were few people that could match her on knowledge of the county.
In looking over the web for more news about Marilyn I came across this video from the Gazette that was done on October first of last year. You will have to scroll down to find it. It was pre-special session in Annapolis. But if you click on it you will get an excellent feel for the person who has left us.
Our paths crossed many times but my most vivid memory was from the campaign trail. I remember seeing her walk in a wet and cold Burtonsville Day Parade in 2006. Two hours later, she was at a Fall Festival in downtown Silver Spring and then yet another event I had long since forgotten after that. I may not remember the final event but I do remember who had the still had a wide same smile on her face, who was eager to connect you, and who still looked marvelous. It was Marilyn. I was dragging but she fed off of the energy of the people she met. So hearing that she put in a full day of work before she went in for heart value replacement surgery does not surprise me.
I recently moved into her district. I had not yet had the chance to vote for her. I don't claim to know her as well as several of our readers but it does strike a chord with me. My father passed away of the same complications several years ago. In some ways that feeling of emptiness never leaves you. Today's news begins back old memories of longing. Sadness can overcome you. I prefer to remember the good times. For me, it will be that cold and rainy day in the Fall of 2006 and the one with the widest smile and unbounded energy was Marilyn.
It is cold and raining outside as I write. I think of them as tears.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
