Raskin-Hixon Letter on Military Budget

The following letter has been signed by 40 members of the General Assembly and was the center of the Fund Our Communities, Bring the War Dollars Home coalition's press conference in Annapolis yesterday. Progressives from around the State, including members of Progressive Maryland and Progressive Neighbors, lobbied their legislators on this and other issues.

“ Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.”
--President Dwight David Eisenhower, 1953

Dear Senators and Representatives:

We, the undersigned members of the Maryland General Assembly, urge you to do whatever you can to move tens of billions of dollars from the bloated Pentagon budget into the urgent national project of rebuilding our crumbling physical and social infrastructure at home.

The economic downturn has drained our state and local treasuries to dangerously low levels and is inflicting immense suffering on our people. In the context of this crisis, the current unprecedented level of military spending constitutes a shocking misallocation of national resources. We ask you as our colleagues and our leaders in Washington to press for a dramatic shift in federal budget priorities.

We can no longer afford the overgrown “military-industrial complex” which is dominating our politics and economics to an extent that would horrify President Eisenhower, the great general who coined the term when he warned 50 years ago this week in his Farewell Address that, “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

As we struggle to balance Maryland’s budget and meet the sharp rise in human needs caused by the housing meltdown and stubborn unemployment, we ask you to focus on the following facts:

• The people of Maryland will pay (or go into further debt for) for more than $14.3 billion in 2011 as our contribution to the military budget , an amount matching our entire annual State budget for everything, including k-12 education, higher education, health care, public safety and environmental protection;

• The base Pentagon budget is expected to more than double (in constant dollars) between 1998 and this year when it will hit more than $708 billion, a figure that does not include an additional $25 billion for defense spending outside the Pentagon, such as spending on nuclear weapons in the Department of Energy . Amazingly, only 17% of this fantastic increase in the military budget is attributable to the costs of the trillion-dollar wars in Iraq and Afghanistan;

• Military expenditures can be reduced by at least one trillion dollars over the next decade, with no reduction in security to Americans and no harm to American troops, as shown in a bipartisan 2010 report commissioned by Rep. Barney Frank (between 1998 and 2011 D-MA) and Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) . These reductions can thus take place without diminishing in any way the nation’s unwavering and unified support for our brave servicemen and women in the field of combat, a support that we are proud to emphatically restate.

While we are spending more on the military establishment, giant defense contractors and Beltway Bandits than at any time since World War II, including during the Korean, Vietnam and Cold wars, we are badly neglecting basic needs at home:

• The employment situation remains desperate in many communities. Job creation is essential and urgent, in both the private and public sectors, and yet local and state governments are being forced to cut jobs and furlough workers, exacerbating unemployment;

• Funds are desperately needed for rebuilding our eroding infrastructure, including roads, bridges, water systems, mass transportation and environmental protection, and for developing new technologies for a sustainable future. These are public imperatives that will create jobs as well as restore economic vitality to our suffering communities;

• Big cuts to school budgets all over America undermine the quality of our schools and compromise the education of our children. Maryland needs $3.8 billion just to address deteriorating school facilities, a staggering amount of money that is a mere pittance compared to the $770 billion we have spent on the Iraq War alone since it began;

• A dramatic increase in poverty in the U.S. has accelerated the need for emergency food and shelter services. In Maryland, 133,000 children live in poverty each day;

• The physical and mental health needs of veterans are badly underfunded, and America has a huge unbudgeted liability for taking care of our veterans;

For all these reasons, we ask you to introduce legislation in Congress making major reductions in the Pentagon budget, amounting to at least 25% over the next five years as recommended by Representatives Frank and Paul. Savings can be invested in the crying social needs of the nation.

This should be a matter of bipartisan consensus, national urgency and Congressional mobilization. Please remember President Eisenhower.

We stand ready to help.

Very truly yours,

Senator Jamie Raskin Delegate Sheila Hixson

Read More...

Summary only...

Jamie Gets Some AU Love

AU Today--the agitprop organ of the university which employs both of us--has a front-page above-the-fold photo of Sen. Raskin at work with a story about how his recent cancer has helped drive his support for medical marijuana in Maryland.

Read More...

Summary only...

Sen. Jamie Raskin's Start of Session Letter

“Everyone who is born holds dual citizenship, in the kingdom of the well and in the kingdom of the sick. Although we all prefer to use the good passport, sooner or later each of us is obliged, at least for a spell, to identify ourselves as citizens of that other place.”

--Susan Sontag

Dear Friends:

The new legislative session has launched, the Governor has been inaugurated, and I am thrilled to be back representing you in Annapolis.

Before I give you my sense of where things stand politically, I want to thank everyone for your incredibly warm letters, emails, notes, prayers, poetry, hand-painted get-well signs from elementary school classes, care packages, New Age cures, customized “cd mixes” from Blair high school students, homemade dinners and chocolate chip cookies. My cup runneth over with your friendship and affection.

The loving support of my community of friends and neighbors has been integral to my recovery. I am feeling great, the tumor is gone, the cancer is on the run, and I am half-way through chemotherapy, which will end in April (knock on wood) along with the legislative session. I will always keep my passport to the land of sickness and will never forget how many people are living there. This experience—and hearing cancer stories from nearly everyone I meet these days-- makes me all that more passionate about keeping carcinogens and other pollutants out of our water and air and providing first-class health care coverage to all Marylanders and Americans. I cannot imagine what it would be like to go through this kind of thing without health insurance.

Progressive Surge and A New Day in Annapolis

I rejoin a State Senate that has been transformed by the 2010 election. Unlike almost every State Senate in America, we actually picked up Democratic seats--one from the Eastern Shore and one in Frederick County. Moreover, we saw progressive Democrats replace more conservative Democrats in contested primaries in Montgomery County, Prince George’s County and Baltimore. Whereas I was the only newcomer to beat an incumbent Senator in the Democratic primaries in 2006, we saw many cases in 2010 in which Democratic primary voters chose between progressive-change Democrats and business-as-usual incumbents and overwhelmingly voted for a clean break from machine-style let’s-make-a-deal politics.

This progressive surge in Maryland significantly bolsters the power of the District 20 delegation to advance the agenda you have sent us to promote. I believe that this Term, and in many cases this Session, we will pass the following bills that I have been championing and that suddenly look like very good bets indeed:

• The Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, which will permit all Marylanders, straight and gay, to marry the person they love and enjoy all the rights and all the responsibilities of marriage.
  
• An increase in the alcohol tax--which was last raised during the first Eisenhower administration--to pay for badly underfunded programs for the developmentally disabled and the mentally ill.
  

• The Direct Wine Shipment Act, which will give Maryland’s wine-lovers the right that Americans enjoy in 37 states to have wine shipped to their homes and Maryland’s wineries the right to ship wine all over the state and the nation to their growing customer base. This legislation will permit us to recapture between $1-2 million in tax revenues lost every year to neighboring jurisdictions as our citizens have their wine shipped to Virginia or Washington, D.C. and then smuggle it home!
  
  
• Clean the Streams and Beautify the Bay Act of 2011, imposing a nickel tax on plastic bags so we can get the plastic out of our waterways and environment, and the Watershed Protection Act, comprehensive storm water legislation that will require every county to set up a storm water utility with a fee based on commercial and residential acreage. The rain waters today are carrying toxic contaminants, soot and garbage directly into our waterways and this is the fastest growing threat to the recovery of the Bay.
  
  
• A compulsory ignition interlock device for convicted drunk drivers. This is the bill I have been pushing with Mothers Against Drunk Driving for a compulsory built-in breathalyzer that does not allow a car to start until the driver passes a breath test. Similar legislation in Arizona and New Mexico has reduced drunk driving fatalities in those states by more than 35%. We will save dozens of lives when we pass it.
  
  
• Campaign finance reform legislation to compel disclosure by corporations that engage in independent expenditures and to close the myriad loopholes that permit big donors to circumvent all the contribution limits. I was proud again in 2010 to be the only Member of the Senate not to accept corporate and partnership campaign contributions but the continuing flow of special-interest money twists the public agenda and thwarts much of the best legislation introduced in Annapolis.
  
  
• Affordable Health Care Act to make it illegal for insurance companies to drop patients because they have pre-existing conditions or have become ill; to expand health incurance coverage; and to lower the costs of medical care.

The Budget Crisis and Politics on the Spirit Level

The key theme of our legislative session, as in nearly every state in the Union, is fiscal crisis and how to close a budget gap estimated in our state to be more than $1.3 billion. The budget axes and machetes are starting to swing.

As Vice-Chairman of the Montgomery County delegation in the Senate, I will do everything I can to protect and defend level funding of our schools and colleges, essential social services, our health care infrastructure, and public employee pensions.

But there will, no doubt, be fiscal pain administered in Annapolis, which is why I think we need to take a broader and deeper look at the politics and economics of the moment.

There is no way that we can properly address the breakdown in our physical and social infrastructure until we realign federal budget priorities, which are skewed beyond belief in the direction of what President Dwight Eisenhower called 50 years ago this week the “military-industrial complex.” My District 20 colleague Delegate Sheila Hixson and I have asked every Member of the General Assembly to join us in sending this letter to our Congressional delegation urging them to fight for a major shift in federal spending away from military expenditure and war towards investment in domestic priorities and human needs. We hope legislatures across America controlled by both major parties will follow our lead in asking Congress to revisit the wisdom of President Eisenhower who said that the “world in arms . . .is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.”

But our stubborn economic crisis compels us to search even more deeply for flaws in our economic thinking. Anyone who paid attention to the multi-trillion dollar sub-prime mortgage meltdown knows that deregulation and regulatory capture by big business are a recipe for economic and social failure. We are still paying the outrageous price of having government run by lobbyists and large corporations during the Bush, Cheney and Abramoff years.

But there is another major culprit in social breakdown that is identified in an excellent book I just finished reading called The Spirit Level by British public health specialists Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett.

The culprit is inequality.

The authors examine reams of cross-national data about life expectancy and infant mortality, child wellbeing, mental illness, obesity, educational success and drop-out rates, homicide and suicide, crime, imprisonment, social mobility and levels of social trust.

They arrive at a striking conclusion. While all of these public and social health indicators improve dramatically for poor countries as they increase their GNP and average family incomes, once countries reach a certain level of prosperity, wealth and average income have very little to do with the physical and mental health of the population and its happiness.

What matters once basic needs are met in a society is not how rich the society is but how equal it is. In the healthiest and happiest societies, the income and wealth gap between the rich and the poor is much smaller than what is found in societies that have high infant mortality, high crime and violence, high rate of mental illness and suicide, high drop-out rates and so on. High inequality means lots of social chaos.

When the authors turn their attention to the United States, they document the same pattern. The key indicator of public health and wellbeing is not how rich or poor a state is, but how equal or unequal it is. The states that have the worst public health outcomes and the lowest levels of happiness are the most unequal states like Mississippi, Texas, Louisiana, and Alabama; the healthiest states tend to be not the richest ones, like Connecticut, New Jersey or Maryland, alas, but the ones with the least inequality, like Vermont, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Utah and Wisconsin.

Why would this be so? The authors show that everyone benefits from living in a society with “equality of conditions,” which is what struck Tocqueville about America when he came here in the 1830s. When public policy permits huge economic extremes of the kind we see in America today, the “inequality gets under the skin” and erodes social trust, undermining everyone’s sense of well-being and security. It produces anxiety and shame among the poor, who become overwhelmed by the burdens and indignities of going without in the midst of plenty. It forces an anxious middle class, struggling to make ends meet, to constantly play “catch up” with the demands of corporate consumerism and conspicuous consumption. Meantime, the wealthy respond to high levels of crime and disorder in unequal societies by walling themselves off in gated communities with security guards and expensive alarm systems and privatized services of every kind. The “spirit level” suffers as people lose their sense of common experience and their commitment to public things.

The portrait of society painted by these researchers hit very close to home for me. I am committed to working in this session to promote not just fairness but real equality, which produces better health and well-being for everyone. As Dr. King put it, “All life is interrelated. All humanity is involved in but a single process and to the degree I harm my brother, to that extent I harm myself.”

The “spirit level” is a lived commitment to the equal rights and potential of all of our fellow citizens. So I wish you a happy belated Martin Luther King Day in honor of the greatest champion of equality we ever had. The good people of Silver Spring and Takoma Park are working every day to make his dream live. May we recapture in our days the spirit of nonviolence, the passion for justice and the moral solidarity that Dr. King embodied and advanced in his lifetime.

All best wishes,

Jamie Raskin

p.s. You are always welcome in Annapolis, either to testify on legislation or just to see your representatives in action, so do let me know if we can help you in any way arrange a visit. Meantime, I will be at Impact Silver Spring and Progressive Neighbors' legislative forum this Sunday, January 23, at 2:00 pm at Impact Silver Spring, 825 Wayne Ave., Silver Spring.

p.p.s. I wrote a report for People for the American Way recently on the Tea Party and its constitutional philosophy. If interested, you can read it here. And you can also read my "birthday card" to the Citizens United decision in the Huffington Post here.

Read More...

Summary only...

Jamie Raskin on the Separation of Church and State

Read More...

Summary only...

Why Incumbents Lose, Part Five

Most incumbents lose because of themselves, but a few have the bad luck to face great challengers. Let’s look at the upstarts more closely.

Every challenger thinks he or she is top-notch, but very few of them are. We define a great challenger as having the following four qualities.

1. Well-financed
A challenger may not have more money than an incumbent, but a successful one needs enough to compete.

2. Pre-existing base of support in the district
Fly-by-night challengers to incumbents almost always lose. The best ones start off with a base of supporters and volunteers that can match, or even surpass, the incumbent.

3. Knows how to exploit incumbent’s problems
Most incumbents have vulnerabilities. Great challengers know how to expose them and use them to their advantage.

4. Works HARD
Incumbents almost always have money, institutional support and some base inside the district. Great challengers counter their advantages with sheer hard work, often over long periods of time.

Here are the best challengers from Montgomery County over the last four election cycles, along with why they were so special. Note the occasional input from our fabled spy network.

4. Rob Garagiola, defeated Republican Senator Jean Roesser (D-15) in 2002

Twenty-nine-year-old Rob Garagiola seemed cast by Hollywood as an ambitious, energetic young politician. The 2001 Montgomery County Democrat of the Year and former paratrooper started campaigning against the 72-year-old incumbent over a year before the general election. But the race almost did not happen as District 17 Delegate Cheryl Kagan was nearly redistricted into District 15 for a challenge to Roesser. When that fell through, Garagiola was off to the races for a clean shot at the incumbent.

In 2002, District 15 was a swing district. Roesser, a Republican, had knocked off incumbent Democrat Larry Levitan in 1994. Partisan dynamics did not guarantee Garagiola victory in a good year nationally for the GOP. So he knocked on tons of doors, poured in nearly $200,000 in self- and family-financing and beat the incumbent by just 755 votes, or two percentage points. Garagiola’s work ethic still shows in his excellent fundraising and ascension up the leadership ladder in Annapolis.

3. Phil Andrews, defeated County Council Member William Hanna (D-3) in 1998

Andrews, once a high-level amateur tennis player and then the director of Common Cause, is Montgomery County’s undisputed champion of door knocking. He put that skill to good work in defeating a four-term incumbent in a district race. Andrews, who is a former MCGEO member(!), also enjoyed substantial labor support in his first win. That is ironic considering that he is now one of labor’s greatest enemies in the county. Then and now, Andrews refuses PAC and developer contributions.

Spy: Long out of step politically with his district, Bill Hanna had almost been defeated more than once. In a three-way race, though, the anti-Bill votes were divided. In 1998, the field was just two candidates. Phil hustled the progressive votes and ran circles around Hanna.

Spy: Phil had already run an energetic, but unsuccessful campaign for Council at-large in 1994, so he knew a lot about campaigning. The district race was better suited to his strengths as a likable, retail, door-to-door campaigner. His youthful energy and good looks worked to his advantage against the then 77-year-old Bill Hanna, who had developed a reputation as a curmudgeon and a bit of an eccentric. Hanna had alienated labor unions (which Andrews would also eventually do) and had particularly alienated the gay community by opposing domestic partner benefits, which also hurt him among liberals.

2. Jamie Raskin, defeated Senator Ida Ruben (D-20) in 2006

It is certainly true that Senator Ruben, who had spent over thirty years in Annapolis, self-destructed in 2006. But Jamie Raskin was ideally suited to capitalize on her problems. Smart, liberal and devoid of pretense, Raskin was able to bring together Ruben’s enemies (including supporters of banished former Delegate Dana Dembrow) with District 20’s diehard leftists to engineer a stunning coup of Ruben. Raskin had an all-star campaign team boasting David Moon, Ryan O’Donnell, Miti Figueredo, Rebecca Lord and Jonathan Shurberg and a seemingly limitless army of volunteers. He even nearly equaled the incumbent’s fundraising, collecting $227,542 vs. Ruben’s $253,202. Despite making the Apple Ballot, Ruben was blown out by 33 points - the worst performance of any MCEA-endorsed incumbent in that cycle.

1. Chris Van Hollen, defeated Senator Patricia Sher (D-18) in 1994 and Congresswoman Connie Morella in 2002

How many Maryland politicians have knocked off a State Senator, a Member of Congress and a Kennedy? Just one: Chris Van Hollen.

Van Hollen’s 2002 campaign for Congress, during which he defeated District 15 Delegate Mark Shriver in the primary and incumbent Republican Congresswoman Connie Morella in the general, is well-known throughout the county and is even the subject of a book. But he would probably have never made it to Congress if he had not already knocked off another incumbent eight years before. Van Hollen was first elected to the House of Delegates from District 18 in 1990. Four years later, he ran against Senator Patricia Sher, a freshman in the upper chamber who had spent three terms in the House.

Spy: This is one of the most interesting races. Van Hollen was a Sher protegé - she picked him from a crowded field of aspirants to run on her “pro-choice” slate when she challenged longtime incumbent Margaret “Peg” Schweinhaut for the District 18 Senate seat in 1990. But then the young, ambitious Van Hollen bit the hand that fed him and took advantage of District 18’s history of volatility to take out his patron.

Spy: This was a combination of the self-destructing incumbent (see Ruben vs. Raskin, 2006) running into the ambitious, smart, hard-working young challenger.

Spy: Chris out-organized Patty and was already coasting to a big victory. She then shot herself in the foot in a Wash Post interview. Chris won huge and brought in newcomer Sharon Grosfeld on his coattails.

Spy: My most distinct memory of the campaign was this: Chris was already leading in the perception of those following the race (I don’t know if there were any polls), when Patti shot herself in the foot, head, and all parts of her body. During an interview with a TV station, she said in effect that “all the blacks in Annapolis are corrupt and on the take.” Whoa! Patti was not racist, but that stupid statement clinched it for Chris. She doubled her error by claiming she thought the conversation was off the record. Oy!

Spy: Sher did her best to vote pro-business and annoy EVERY municipal official in her district. Also, there was her racist comment at the end of the campaign. Chris just pointed all this out. Also, Chris smartly (does he ever make mistakes?) chose NOT to build a slate against the incumbent delegates (thereby assuring that they would not campaign).

The end result of all of the above was an incredible 50-point blowout for the then-35-year-old Delegate over the Annapolis veteran. Van Hollen’s ability to combine ground game, message, discipline and organization makes him both an outstanding candidate and a great adviser to other candidates, as national Democrats were pleased to find out in 2008. Maryland’s incumbent U.S. Senators better hope that he never runs against them.

So what are the lessons for incumbents from this series? First, if you are not lazy, perform your job decently and lack lots of enemies, you will very likely be re-elected. As one of our informants says, “Basically, if you are an incumbent, and you knock on doors, don’t offend anyone, vote the wrong way or pick your nose (in public) you win.” But as we have seen above, every election cycle generates at least one great challenger. Say a prayer every night that he or she is not living in your district!

Read More...

Summary only...

Why Incumbents Lose, Part Four

Get ready for some fun. Here’s a great category of losing incumbents:

Incumbents with Enemies

Ever wonder why so many politicians are so bland? It’s because they’re being smart. Politicians with big mouths get lots of enemies, and at least a couple knives are bound to hit the mark.

Republican District 39 Delegates Barrie Ciliberti and Mathew Mossburg, Defeated by Democrats Charles Barkley, Paul Carlson and Joan Stern in 1998

District 39 was created in Montgomery County in 1994. Originally, the district went all the way to the northern county line. Its first delegation was 100% Republican. That would not last.

Spy: The Dems ran a GREAT campaign (in spite of Joan). Of the three GOP candidates, none campaigned seriously, one was probably nuts and Mossburg had serious baggage (for example, he missed more votes than the entire Montgomery County Delegation combined).

Spy: The Central Committee formed a committee called the Democratic Upper Montgomery Project (DUMP) to “dump” Republicans in Districts 15 and 39. The committee was chaired by former Washington Redskin and discouraged gubernatorial aspirant Ray Schoenke, who gleefully took on the Republicans in letters to the editors, op-eds and strategic mailings. The Republicans returned fire at Schoenke, allowing Barkley, Carlson and Stern to run a positive, upbeat campaign and win the election.

Delegate Dana Dembrow (D-20), Defeated in 2002

Dana Dembrow was first elected in 1986 and soon began battling the rest of his delegation, including Senator Ida Ruben and Delegates Sheila Hixson and Peter Franchot. Franchot is a man who knows something about feuds. If he was locked in solitary confinement, he would likely start a feud with his mattress. But Dembrow’s biggest enemy was Ruben, and she would engineer his takedown in 2002. Strangely enough, Dembrow would rematerialize briefly as a Carroll County Commissioner candidate in 2006, but he did not make it to the election.

Spy: This one has all the elements of great literature, perhaps a Greek tragedy. The rivalry between District 20 Senator Ida Ruben and Delegate Dana Dembrow paralleled the rivalry between Captain Ahab and Moby Dick (except it’s not clear who was the captain and who was the whale). The two of them hated each other with a passion and drove each other to distraction during 16 years of joint service to the district until Dembrow finally made a crucial error. One sad night in April 2002, likely under the influence of alcohol, he got into a conflagration with his wife Suzette. The exact circumstances of the conflagration remain unclear. Suzette Dembrow ultimately refused to testify, Dana Dembrow was acquitted of the charge of assault, and the Dembrows reconciled and lived happily together until Suzette’s tragic death from a stroke (unrelated to the allegation of domestic abuse) four years later...

Nonetheless, Suzette made a panicked phone call to 911, the transcript of which was released to the public by Ruben’s campaign. Dembrow couldn’t shake the image of a wife-beater in the county’s most liberal district and ended up losing his seat to lackluster challenger Gareth Murray, who was elected on a slate with Ruben allies Sheila Hixson and Peter Franchot. Murray failed to hold onto the seat four years later, when Ruben herself was knocked out by Jamie Raskin. Much of the organizational energy behind Raskin’s campaign came from the many Dembrow supporters who blamed Ruben for Dembrow's defeat. The case could be made that the Ruben-Dembrow blood feud ended both of their political careers.

Delegate Joan Stern (D-39), Defeated in 2006

Stern was part of the District 39 Democratic Delegate challenger team that took out an all-Republican Delegate delegation in 1998. But after two terms, her colleagues became fed up with her and kicked her off their slate. She had the misfortune of drawing a talented challenger, the now-famous Saqib Ali, who got onto the Apple Ballot and smoked her by 1,238 votes.

Spy: Joan alienated and annoyed too many people. She was somewhat eccentric and not liked by her colleagues.

Spy: When her district mates dumped her from the team after serving with her for several years, the stage was set for the upset. When the teachers followed up with an apple ballot endorsement of her opponent, her fate was probably sealed.

Spy: Joan was not well-liked in her district or in Annapolis. First impressions matter, and her reputation never recovered from her first piece of legislation, a bill to require Maryland restaurants to allow customers to dine with their dogs (Joan was single and very fond of her dog). Joan was also unfairly criticized for taking on the obesity issue before it was widely perceived as a public health epidemic. She campaigned hard for a third term, but Saqib campaigned harder.

Senator Ida Ruben (D-20), Defeated by Jamie Raskin in 2006

Why does District 20 have all the great rivalries, blowups and feuds? Is it the raging tradition of hyper-activism in Takoma Park and inside-the-Beltway Silver Spring? Is it the unending conflict among competing species of communists, socialists, anarchists and other “ists?” Is it the volatile personalities that are drawn to such a boiling soup of liberalism? Maybe it is all of the above.

Ida Ruben is a woman of big personality, big grudges and lots and lots of enemies. In the wake of her decapitation of rogue Delegate Dana Dembrow, the Dembrow refugees formed an unholy alliance with super-liberals who had never liked Ruben. Their rival of choice: civil liberties professor and lawyer Jamie Raskin. Raskin was a great candidate with legions of volunteers and a superstar organization led by David Moon, but Ruben lost this race with mistake after mistake. First, she went after students at Blair High School for writing a school newspaper endorsement of Raskin. (Never mind that the students were not old enough to vote.) Next, she targeted a Takoma Park ice cream shop that named a flavor “Askin’ 4 Raskin.” When the ice cream was given out for free on the Fourth of July, she wanted it to be recorded as a campaign contribution. Finally, she released a flyer alleging that “Jamie Raskin helped put George W. Bush into office,” prompting MPW founder David Lublin to denounce it as “utterly ridiculous drivel.” District 20 voters felt the same and Raskin won by 33 points.

None of the above says much about the challengers. We’ll pick out a few great ones in Part Five.

Read More...

Summary only...

Montgomery County’s Most Influential People, Part Two

Our respondents collectively nominated 53 elected officials as the most influential leaders in Montgomery County. We present the leaders starting today, along with some commentary from myself and our spies, in reverse order of their number of votes.

15 (tie). Kumar Barve, House Majority Leader (D-17)
13 Votes

Reader: The Speaker’s point person on any number of issues, he is well liked in Annapolis and knows how to use the weight of the powerful Majority Leader position.

Reader: Universally liked, and that means something. I would bet there’s not an influential person on your list that hits ignore when he calls their cell phone.

Adam: Funny, charming, smart Bad Boy. Earns extra points for marrying way out of his league. Would be a wildly entertaining Speaker of the House if he could get there.

15 (tie). Karen Britto, Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee Chairwoman
13 Votes

Reader: She runs the Democratic Party with a tight fist and is working hard to see that all of the now-incumbents she selected for the legislature are re-elected in 2010.

Reader: Runs a tight ship that has helped keep the County Dems so popular.

Reader: She knows everything about every district and every precinct, and works day and night for the party and its electeds.

Reader: Puppet master, and I mean that in a good way. She understands what this county will look like in a few years and is making sure that the Democratic Party reflects that.

Reader: Our MCDCC head should be nicknamed the “hidden hand.” While your average voter likely knows little about her, Karen Britto works hard to try and keep the peace in the Democratic Party and has also been known to tip the scale when legislative vacancies occur. More importantly, she works hard to advance a vision for the party and its interests in the region. Remember that there are zero Republicans representing Montgomery County at the County Council, State House or Congress.

Adam: A gracious, wise and exceedingly well-connected woman. Easy charm conceals tempered steel. Anyone who wants to run for office in this county must see her first.

15 (tie). Marc Elrich, Montgomery County Council Member
13 Votes

Reader: I’ve been impressed with his pragmatism, and yet I believe he doesn’t stray from his core beliefs (which I don’t always agree with but I respect his commitment to them.) I don’t think any other Council Member enjoys the office more than Marc, or who puts the time into the job as he does.

Reader: Dogmatic and rigid, yet has managed to touch a chord with those that wish for a County of yesterday – rolling hills, cul-de-sacs, and a sprinkle of people of color so we can feel good about calling ourselves “liberals.”

Reader: Drops in influence now that he lacks a majority on the council and has to hustle for re-election. He should be fine, but doesn’t have a lot of money or bills to point to after four years.

Reader: A real opinion leader. First, you think he’s crazy. Next, you turn around and tell everyone about his ideas. Finally, you begin thinking they’re yours.

Adam: Show me a local politician with a more visionary idea than Elrich’s county-wide BRT system. No, I didn’t think you could.

13 (tie). Donna Edwards, U.S. House of Representatives
14 Votes

Reader: Now an icon of the netroots and the national progressive movement, Edwards has a lot of influence to wield. Some are disappointed in her performance so far, but the fact remains that for candidates for office in CD4, her endorsement will mean a hell of a lot.

Reader: Politico ranked her as one of the top incoming Congresswomen, and her super-liberal stances on every issue both reflect the liberal stances of CD-4 and her national donor network, but she has a lousy, unresponsive staff and her best skill seems to be burning bridges. She’s trying to play locally in Prince George’s to build a local base, but not in Montgomery. Most of the elected officials and activists who supported her in 2008 are dissatisfied, and she has a big problem with the local and national Jewish community. Apparently Van Hollen and Sheila Hixson got angry because they started receiving constituent calls because Donna’s office wouldn’t return them. Her poll numbers among black men are abysmal, and if Glenn Ivey runs and AIPAC raises money for him, along with a Herman Taylor challenge picking off a few votes in MoCo, she might not lose, but she’ll certainly have a fight.

Reader: At the Obama event at the University of Maryland campus when Obama introduced the top elected leaders from Maryland present at the rally, Donna Edwards was received like a rock star among the students. It was really remarkable considering she has only been in office for a year and a half. She appeals to young voters and is obviously really popular among young people. She is a relentless fighter on all the issues that matter to progressive democrats. She works hard, does her homework and is a relentless campaigner. I think that she has a brilliant future in Congress or whatever she chooses to do in the future. It is interesting to note that she is the first African American woman ever elected to congress from the state of Maryland. African American women vote in huge numbers in Democratic primaries in Maryland and in many other states. This fact alone could make her a contender in a statewide run for governor or the US Senate. There is nobody out there that can beat her in a debate. She has to make sure to listen to people who are telling her to beef up her staff which many perceive as weak.

Reader: Everyone knows her staff is her biggest problem, and her constituent services aren’t winning her any points, and she needs to be more thoughtful in how she speaks on Israel-Palestine issues, but overall Donna Edwards has shown herself to be a true progressive, bold, and highly intelligent in her approach to her job. Progressives in Montgomery County will stick with her, especially labor and the LGBT community, because despite her flaws, she’s everything we never got from Al Wynn.

Reader: Giant killer. If she can turn back prospective challengers from MoCo and PG next year, she has a bright future statewide.

Adam: Still a progressive hero despite the faults of her staff and her occasionally testy nature. Chews up opponents and spits out the broken bones.

13 (tie). Mike Knapp, Montgomery County Council Member
14 Votes

Reader: Being chair of the Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee, he controls land use issues in MoCo.

Reader: Has respect of labor and business. Solid. Leader. Doesn’t knee-jerk like most politicians.

Adam: A decent, genial Upstate New Yorker who has never let his political success go to his head.

12. Rob Garagiola, Senator (D-15)
15 Votes

Reader: He has the ear of the Senate President, which can have a huge impact.

Reader: A rising star in the State Senate, he is Montgomery’s representative on the powerful Senate Finance Committee and has the ear of the current Senate President, Mike Miller, and the possible future President, Mac Middleton.

Reader: Politically, I think he’s way too conservative, but is a solid State Senator and is the county’s counterpoint to Jamie Raskin. In looking at people to fill Van Hollen’s seat, Garagiola is among the top contenders, especially for moderate Democratic voters.

Reader: Bright and decent man with a conservative bent – thinks it serves his district well – some wonder – in comparison to Raskin – very different agendas.

Reader: Paying his dues with Mike Miller while earning creds with workforce legislation.

Reader: Tough, courageous and smart. Willing to take risks and violate liberal orthodoxy. Another possible Senate President.

Adam: I know all you spies like to gossip about Garagiola’s relationship with Big Daddy. But it’s time that we respect him for his intelligence, his ability to work the levers of Annapolis and his aptitude for learning policy and politics quickly. He is a legitimate contender to be Senate President someday.

11. Peter Franchot, Maryland Comptroller
16 Votes

Reader: Doesn’t get much respect, doesn’t give much respect. But don’t underestimate the guy. No one out-hustles Franchot.

Reader: It is remarkable how someone holding statewide elected office could have so few friends and so many detractors. The ultimate self promoter in Maryland politics. He is on this list solely by virtue of the vast authority conferred upon his office.

Reader: The State Comptroller may rub some people the wrong way, but he knows how to garner ink and is one of three votes on the Board of Public Works. His position is powerful in the State as compared to Comptroller jobs in other States.

Reader: Outspoken. Love him or hate him – he’s still underrated. He was right on slots and has an agenda. Two terms as Comptroller a guarantee and will be a challenge for Gansler to hold MoCo votes in the Governor primary in 2014.

Reader: Now that he’s cooled his jets he can refashion himself. But for a Comptroller he casts a big shadow, he knows how to use media and isn’t averse to switching gears.

Reader: In contrast to some of our more conciliatory County politicians, Comptroller Peter Franchot has been willing to ruffle feathers. Where others see challenging Governor O'Malley and Mike Miller as heresy, Franchot has stepped into the ring and usually on the progressive side of the equation. Unfortunately, though many of our politicians act like lemmings, Franchot almost always finds himself alone in his crusades. One would think this would be a sign of his lack of influence, but in fact, somehow it has all worked out and Franchot looks headed for safe reelection.

Adam: Here’s Franchot’s dilemma. When he’s noisy, he gains visibility but infuriates other politicians with whom he needs to have relationships to get anything done (assuming he’s interested). But when he quiets down, he loses influence. Franchot can still make a splash in the media but because he is not at all a team player – and never will be – his ability to move any policy issues is limited.

10. Jamie Raskin, Senator (D-20)
22 Votes

Reader: Jamie Raskin has proven that outspoken liberal does not have to mean ineffective. He’s peripatetic but still gets a lot done.

Reader: Our legislatures are filled with lawyers, too many of whom give that noble profession a bad name. Jamie Raskin, on the other hand, is exactly the kind of lawyer I want in my legislature: smart, principled, liberal, and academic. Officials and activists in Annapolis turn to him because of the knowledge and skills he brings to the table as a constitutional lawyer, qualities that make him unique in the Montgomery County state legislative delegation.

Reader: From freshman Senator to instant leader! It is as if Jamie has been in Annapolis for ever! Or he is just one smart politician. Either case, none of the other freshman from 2006 have had the impact he’s had. People from other counties who could care less for Montgomery County know his name. That’s got to be influence baby!

Reader: Since he beat Ida in 2006, his base has only kept growing. He’s a progressive star in the state, and will move up to higher office soon – he’s a favorite for Maryland AG once Gansler vacates for governor in 2014 or Van Hollen’s seat, whichever he chooses or comes first. In a county represented by Donna Edwards and Chris Van Hollen, Jamie could not be better positioned to run for higher office. He’s particularly influential now, as many potential and declared 2010 challengers look to him for advice.

Reader: Has emerged as a leader of the Progressives – some say he is too brash and will not be content to grow and become part of leadership in the traditional seniority and favor driven Senate of Mike Miller. He does have good, sometimes quirky ideas, but he is shaking up the formerly sleepy District 20.

Reader: Well loved by progressives, managed to be effective in Annapolis without being marginalized which is no small feat given how outspoken he is. But he has humor and great integrity.

Reader: No other Montgomery County politician can claim the legions of diehard groundtroops that Jamie Raskin has mobilized since first taking office in 2006. He is a true movement progressive, as evidenced by his inspiring speeches, involvement at the national level, and the true grassroots organizing he engages in with his supporters. The rumors are persistent that Raskin is planning a 2014 run for Attorney General, a position he should be a natural for, given his background as a Constitutional law professor, but he is also often mentioned as a successor to Rep. Chris Van Hollen.

Adam: Raskin is becoming an icon who is embraced by all the feuding camps of people who call themselves progressives.

8 (tie). Phil Andrews, Montgomery County Council President
24 Votes

Reader: Continues to set the standard for graciousness and how elected officials should conduct themselves.

Reader: You always know where he is on issues. He will not play games, even when one does not agree with his positions. He is to be respected for standing his ground.

Reader: He was at least a year ahead of his colleagues in understanding what was coming with the county budget, and he got a bunch of crap for it.

Reader: As his year as Council President comes to an end, Andrews made sure that issues affecting his district - the controversial I-270 widening and even more controversial Gaithersburg West Master Plan - are in the spotlight, framing the conversation of how Montgomery County will grow in the future. Like Adam wrote before, he is the person to watch in the I-270 debate.

Reader: Any higher aspirations that Andrews has will be stymied by his having pissed off so many core democratic constituencies during his time on the council.

Reader: For all of my disagreements with Phil Andrews, it is hard to say that he is not providing a steady and measured hand as Council President. It just proves that you can take strong positions on issues, tangle with those who disagree with you, and still get along with others at the end of the day. Andrews’ colleagues and especially those that wish to succeed him as Council President would be wise to take notes.

Adam: A budget-cutting President in a budget-cutting year. Andrews was a lone ranger on fiscal issues three years ago but now many of his views are dominant. He is also a decent, competent and civil public servant in a county that could use more of them.

8 (tie). Doug Gansler, Maryland Attorney General
24 Votes

Reader: By his own standards, he has been low key. But the Office of Attorney General in Maryland routinely makes legal decisions that impact the lives of every Marylander.

Reader: The antics of Peter Franchot aside, if he wants it, I think Gansler's the next Governor. Both reasonable and effective.

Reader: Doug Gansler has positioned himself well to be Maryland’s first governor from Montgomery in awhile. Accomplished good things and gained a reputation as a workhorse, not a show horse, especially in comparison with Peter Franchot but also in comparison to his rep as State’s Attorney.

Reader: His race for governor begins in November of 2010. He manages to show up to everything in the county while still being an active presence everywhere else in the state.

Reader: Not mixing it up in local or state circles right now, but almost certain to be the next Governor.

Reader: I suspect that Doug Gansler has been preparing a run for governor since at least 1987. Since becoming Attorney General, Doug Gansler has set himself up nicely for when he decides to run for the Democratic Party nomination. For instance, his vocal support for marriage equality legislation in early 2008 provided a strong contrast to Governor O'Malley’s deeply offensive reaction to the state high court's anti-equality decision a few months earlier. I suspect there are a lot of Montgomery County Democrats who are looking forward to volunteering for a Gansler For Governor campain in 2014 - and wish he were running instead of O'Malley in 2010.

Reader: Montgomery County’s strongest statewide office holder. Unlike Franchot, he understands how to accomplish things in Annapolis. He also hasn’t made any enemies, but he isn’t actually too influential on the lives of Montgomery County residents. He’s a strong candidate for Governor in 2014, but he’s not too progressive, and while he has an early money lead, who knows what will happen in 2014.

Reader: Mr. Gansler is a fundraising machine and has name recognition throughout the state. Let's hope he doesn't disappoint progressives, who are waiting with baited breath to see if he will do the right thing and issue the opinion that, according to longstanding legal precedent, Maryland must honor marriages between same-sex couples legalized in other states.

Reader: Doug Gansler has taken a strong stand in the past on marriage equality, and is about to issue a ruling on marriage equality that will have a direct effect upon my life. While that might not make everyone’s list of “Most Influential,” to me, few things matter more than an official who takes seriously the concept of equal protection under the law.

Reader: Not much impact directly on Montgomery County, but clearly a force to reckoned with at the State. He’s avoided letting his ambition push him into attention getting behavior. I think he’s better behaved than he was as the County Attorney.

Reader: Our Attorney General seems to have many enemies and haters but somehow continues steamrolling up the political ladder. The “silent majority” would be a term best used to describe Gansler voters, because I can’t seem to locate anyone who is willing to admit they actually voted for him. To his credit, he has raised ungodly amounts of money and at this point in time is entering the 2014 gubernatorial contest from a much stronger position than any of his potential rivals. Unless something changes, I predict we will be bowing down to Governor Gansler in a few short years.

Adam: Goes everywhere and raises money for everybody. Clearly running for Governor once O’Malley leaves and is, right now, the heavy favorite to win.

7. Brian Feldman, Delegate (D-15)
29 Votes

Reader: House Chair of Montgomery County Delegation. Going places.

Reader: House Delegation Chair, finishing his second term in the House. Helps give the whole delegation credibility with his demeanor and talent.

Reader: Strong job as Chair with no competitors.

Reader: As head of the Delegation, he can help unite the state delegation to pass (or stop) priority legislation for the state. Smart and respected as well.

Reader: Cool, calm and collected. A measured and serious legislator.

Reader: Does a good job as Montgomery County Delegation House Chair. Is seen by others in Annapolis as a calm, reasonable representative for Montgomery County issues.

Reader: As head of the County Delegation – holds a lot of power in setting the Legislative Agenda – since he is among the more cautious members of the Delegation – wonder when he is going to step up with a more progressive agenda.

Reader: He is Chair of the Delegation for a reason. He is confident and smart and understands the politics of everything very well. He plays the game well in MoCo and in Annapolis where he is well respected.

Reader: Mover and shaker in Annapolis who knows how to get things done.

Reader: I’ve gotten to like him a lot better. He’s quietly effective and has a lot going on in his head that you don’t see. He’s good with his colleagues, he’s respected and thoughtful.

Adam: Grows in stature every year.

Come back tomorrow for the Super Six!

Read More...

Summary only...

Barbara Mikulski and the MoCo Dominoes

Rumors are swirling that President Obama is considering Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski to be the next Health and Human Services Secretary. So let’s play a game, shall we? What if the President asked Senator Mikulski to take the job? And what if Governor O’Malley picked Maryland’s most formidable Congressman, Chris Van Hollen, to be the next U.S. Senator? Then who in Montgomery County would run in a special election for the District 8 seat? And who would win? Let’s find out what the spies had to say!

First of all, several informants spanked me for even bringing up the scenario. “Don’t be silly!” one of them scolded. Many sources believe that the Governor would face irresistible political pressure to create Maryland’s first African-American Senator – probably Lieutenant Governor Anthony Brown or Congressman Elijah Cummings. One spy said this:

As much as we might like to see Van Hollen in the seat, the racial politics of the state will be too much to bear for O'Malley. Anthony Brown is too young for the Senate seat and would only continue the tradition of creating political backlog. Elijah Cummings in the more attractive pick for all involved because of his race and age.

Others believe that Van Hollen may want to stay where he is. But our sources were willing to play the game just for fun. After all, Van Hollen’s seat will open up someday and it’s never too early to stir the pot!

Our informants collectively named the following people as most likely to run for Van Hollen’s seat if he leaves: Senator Jamie Raskin (D-20), Senator Rob Garagiola (D-15), DNC Member Susan Turnbull, Senator Rich Madaleno (D-18) and Montgomery County Council Member Phil Andrews. Garagiola lives in Congressional District 4 at the moment but that's something a real estate agent could easily fix. Many sources also speculated that Senator Brian Frosh (D-16), Delegates Saqib Ali (D-39), Heather Mizeur (D-20) and Brian Feldman (D-15) and County Council Members Nancy Floreen and Valerie Ervin might consider a race.

Our informants had no consensus on who would be most likely to win. Four spies picked Raskin, three picked Madaleno and two each picked Garagiola and Mizeur. One source makes this case for a Raskin victory:

I think Raskin would be the odds on favorite to win this seat for two reasons – none of the other candidates have had to run serious races recently, so they haven't been forced to stay visible and build a current crop of activists. Plus, Raskin’s followers are Kool-Aid drinkers – ie: they really believe in him (and with good reason, I would add). People sometimes laugh at D-20’s activists, but I have to say, if you’re trying to get something done, there's no other District I’d rather represent – the constituents are progressive workhorses, and Raskin’s a real motivator. He could run a campaign that would be more impassioned than Van Hollen’s... The big question for him would be whether he sits this out, lets the bloodbath happen, and then waits for Gansler to leave the AG’s post in 2014.

Raskin supporters do need to remember an important fact listed by another of my informants: 14 of District 20’s 24 precincts are located in Congressional District 4. Only 2 of District 18’s 37 precincts and 9 of District 15’s 32 precincts are located outside Congressional District 8. That gives Madaleno and Garagiola a leg up.

Haven’t heard enough rumors? Check out these tidbits from our informants:

Spy #1:

If for whatever reason Van Hollen leaves his safe, 8th district Congressional seat, Montgomery County politics will never be the same. My crystal ball says watch for two scenarios – either a realization that a battering primary (in which many current state elected and county politicians would have to give up their seats) would be bad for the County in the big picture, especially in Annapolis, and people start to get behind a consensus pick. Or the second scenario – all out political warfare that will shape county politics for a decade.

Spy #2

If it winds up being a donnybrook, it may break down according to demographics and how many candidates are from the same base. So if there are 2-3 Takoma / Silver Spring people, that could open the door for upcounty or western county people, or allow Josh Rales to parachute in with all his money.

Spy #3:

Say Garagiola, Raskin, and Madaleno run during a regular election (not a special election to fill the seat) and leave their Senate seats open. In D-15, Feldman likely wins that seat in a cakewalk. Heather and Tom run like hell to take Raskin’s office. District 18 is a different story. Ana Sol would give it thought, I think, but D-18 is used to having someone on B&T with a wealth of knowledge on budget issues. Also, the GLBT community would want to keep a seat in the Senate. Mizeur can fill that slot in D-20, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see some lobbying and support behind Pete Fosselman (Kensington mayor). Pete’s an ally of Governor O’Malley and the only elected Democrat in Montgomery County to have endorsed MOM’s campaign during the primaries. If it went to the Central Committee, which it likely will, Pete’s stock should rise.

Spy #4:

Who would win? The one with the most money.

Well now. I think that’s enough gossip for one day, don’t you?

Read More...

Summary only...

Anti-Spying Bill Introduced

Senators Jamie Raskin (D-20) and Brian Frosh (D-16) and Delegates Sheila Hixson (D-20), Sandy Rosenberg (D-41), Heather Mizeur (D-20) and Tom Hucker (D-20) introduced a comprehensive bill today to prevent improper spying by the state police. Following is a press release from their offices.

Legislative Leaders Introduce Comprehensive Bill to Ensure Police Spying on Peaceful Activists Never Happens Again

January 22, 2009

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

On behalf of Senators Jamie Raskin; Brian Frosh, Delegates Sheila Hixson; Sandy Rosenberg; Tom Hucker, and Heather Mizeur

ANNAPOLIS – Calling for swift passage for a bill to ban police spying on political activists in Maryland, state legislative leaders today held a press conference to announce their introduction of The Freedom of Association and Assembly Protection Act of 2009. The leaders believe that the First Amendment protects the rights of all Marylanders to organize to advance their political and social views free of the chilling specter of government surveillance and dossiers. However, Maryland now has no law that protects these most basic of rights to organize, peacefully assemble, and petition our government. Lead bill sponsors are Senators Jamie Raskin and Brian Frosh; and Delegates Sheila Hixson, Sandy Rosenberg, Heather Mizeur and Tom Hucker.

The legislation seeks to codify the recommendations of the report issued in October by former Attorney General Stephen Sachs. Specifically, the bill will mandate that law enforcement use of covert techniques and compiling of criminal intelligence dossiers about Marylanders’ political views and activities be based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.

State Senator Jamie Raskin (D-20): “The State Police are not Maryland's thought police. Marylanders have a right to work for environmental protection, an end to the death penalty, marriage equality, peace, and bike lanes without being spied upon and called terrorists by law enforcement officials. Our bill will forbid covert tactics against our citizens unless there is specific reasonable suspicion that they are engaged in criminal activity. It will also forbid the Orwellian practice of keeping political dossiers on citizens that are not part of actual criminal investigations. At a time of staggering financial crisis, let's stop wasting our money spying on people nonviolently exercising their political freedom.”

State Senator Brian E. Frosh (D-16): "Obviously, we've got to make sure that this kind of surveillance doesn't happen again. Police need the tools to do their jobs in cases of criminal wrongdoing. But surveillance of law-abiding citizens shouldn't be an option."

Delegate Sheila Hixson (D-20): “My colleagues and I were shocked and appalled to learn of the covert police surveillance of our neighbors who were simply expressing their beliefs regarding the death penalty, the war in Iraq and environmental concerns. Still further and inconceivably, we learned that their names were entered on a ‘terrorist’ list. We ask: what has happened to our freedom to express ourselves? For that reason we have crafted legislation to prohibit inappropriate law enforcement that interferes with First Amendment rights.”

Delegate Tom Hucker (D-20): “At a time when the state is cutting health care, transportation, and environmental protection, it boggles the mind to learn our state police were using precious tax dollars to spy on our constituents. We wrote this bill to make sure state tax dollars are never again used for surveillance of peaceful activists. We have a constitutional right to assemble, and we will fight to protect it.”

Delegate Heather Mizeur (D-20): “Takoma Park residents share a proud history of civic engagement and issue advocacy. Sometimes we have to fight to be heard. At other times, we’re being listened to when we least expect it. State sponsored spying on peace activists and death penalty advocates is a mark of shame on Maryland. We are here today to reaffirm the most basic of our rights granted by the First Amendment – that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Here and now, we make our petition: Never again will this be allowed to happen in Maryland.”

Delegate Samuel I. (Sandy) Rosenberg (D-41): “People exercising their First Amendment rights should not be subjected to the chilling presence of undercover police officers.”

ACLU of Maryland Legislative Director Cynthia Boersma: “The ACLU of Maryland applauds the bill’s sponsors for answering the call of Mr. Sachs’ report, which condemned the police surveillance that has taken place as ‘inconsistent with an overarching value in our democratic society—the free and unfettered debate of important public questions.’” Mr. Sachs believes such police conducted ‘ought to be prohibited,’ and we believe that legislation is necessary to ensure that the protection of our most basic rights do not change with changing administrations. This bill establishes clear standards to protect both our First Amendment rights and our public safety by directing that criminal intelligence and counter-terrorism resources are used to respond to suspected criminal activity rather than spying on legitimate political activity.”

Since July 17, 2008, when the ACLU of Maryland uncovered that the MSP engaged in covert surveillance of local peace and anti-death penalty groups for over a year from 2005-2006, we have learned that the Maryland State Police has engaged in a far-reaching program of covert surveillance of political groups in Maryland. Dozens of individuals and organizations have been targeted by the Maryland State Police which maintained criminal intelligence files on their political beliefs and activities, labeling them as suspected terrorists and security threats. According to their own files, the MSP had no evidence or suspicion that any identified target was engaged in criminal activity of any kind.

Go online to learn more about MSP spying on political activists:
http://www.aclu-md.org/Index%20content/NoSpying/NoSpying.html

Read More...

Summary only...

MoCo Delegation Speaks Out on Slots, Part Three

The Montgomery County Sentinel’s series on the MoCo delegation’s positions on slots concludes this week. Following are the positions of legislators from Districts 19, 20 and 39. The Sentinel did not report responses from Senators Mike Lenett (D-19) and Nancy King (D-39) and Delegates Hank Heller (D-19) and Kirill Reznik (D-39), but as we have seen, that does not necessarily mean that those legislators did not contact them. Of the legislators who are quoted in the Sentinel, Delegates Roger Manno (D-19), Sheila Hixson (D-20) and Tom Hucker (D-20) voted for the referendum and Senator Jamie Raskin (D-20) and Delegates Ben Kramer (D-19), Heather Mizeur (D-20), Charles Barkey (D-39) and Saqib Ali (D-39) voted against it.

Delegate Ben Kramer (Against):

Kramer voted against the referendum during the special session and said he has some difficulty understanding why many voted for the referendum last year and now claim they oppose it. “I question their rationale,” he said.

Kramer said he would like to see, as an alternative to slots, a repeal of a tax cut that was disapproved.

Editor’s Note: Can someone explain to us in the comments section what this alternative could be?

Delegate Roger Manno (Against):

Manno said he will vote against the slots referendum on the November ballot. “I do not believe that the slots proposal offers a stable or justifiable source of revenue, even if we assume the most generous slots revenue projections,” he said.

“As a legislator,” he continued, “my focus is to protect vulnerable populations, shore up critical infrastructure commitments, fulfill our contract with retirees who have paid into the system, and eliminate waste, fraud and abuse.”

In lieu of revenue from the slots proposal, Manno said cuts and efficiencies in the range of $100 million to $200 million are “likely unavoidable. In addition, alternative revenues include cracking down on the misclassification of employees (yielding some $200 million annually in other states), and implementing combined reporting to capture revenue from corporate tax loopholes (yielding perhaps $100 million annually). If enacted, these measures would close the portion of the budget shortfall that slots revenue would assume.”

Senator Jamie Raskin (Against):

Raskin said he voted against the slots proposal in the Senate and intends to vote against it at the polls as well. “To me, it seems like a low road for the state to go down,” he said. “After so many home foreclosures, risking bankruptcies and staggering consumer debt, I cannot imagine that it’s a good idea to set up 15,000 slot machines in our state.”

He said if there was universal health care, universal accessibility and a stronger safety net, then the state could, perhaps, responsibly rely on people’s gambling losings to fund essential state services. “We don’t have a real social safety net,” he said. “Just a tight rope and it’s already shaky enough for a lot of people and kids right now. I don’t think the government should help push people off of it with the introduction of slot machines.”

Raskin said he believes there are people of good will on both sides of the issue. “Our economic problems, flowing downhill from the fiscal recklessness and out-of-control spending of the Bush Administration, are deep and will require sustained attention,” he said.

Alternatively, Raskin said he would like to see a tax on liquor and continued pruning of the state budget, including a repeal of the death penalty, which, according to the Senator, will save millions of dollars a year.

Delegate Sheila Hixon (For):

Hixson said that without slots, the budget would be very tight. “We have given the voters to choose,” she said. “If they want it, they will vote for it.”

Delegate Tom Hucker (Against):

“While there is no question that the state needs additional revenue,” Hucker said, “any significant revenue from slots won’t arrive until fiscal year 2012, too late to fix the budgets for next year or the following year.”

He said the revenue from slots is “overestimated” and will be “offset by millions of dollars that will be needed for increased bankruptcies, gambling addiction treatment, domestic violence and other crimes that typically increase in the states that legalize slots.”

Hucker said he has been an organizer and vocal advocate for a progressive state income tax for years and said he was proud to vote last year to finally make the income tax progressive. He said he also worked in 2003 and 2004 to close the Delaware corporate tax loophole, which dozens of large companies, according to him, were using to cheat Maryland out of hundreds of millions of dollars.

“We need to end our state tax breaks for yacht owners, gold bullion collectors and country clubs. And most important, we need to enact combined reporting to make sure multinational corporations pay taxes in Maryland just like the rest of us. Taking those steps would raise more than $500 million annually – enough to close our budget deficit next year, not years down the road.”

Editor’s Note: As we will see in an upcoming post, next year’s budget deficit is projected to be $1.3 billion. That’s a lotta gold bullion! Hey Tom – how many of those “gold bullion collectors” live in District 20?

Delegate Heather Mizeur (Against):

“Maryland is the wealthiest state in the nation for a reason,” Mizeur said. “We invest in our people, in their skills and in our communities. Our state thrives on job creation fueled by creativity, research and new technologies.”

Mizeur said slots are “a regressive throwback to 19th Century thinking.” She said that the state should focus on science and technology and not slots to help balance the budget. “Instead of betting on slots, Maryland could expand its individual and corporate tax bases by promoting economic winners like nanotechnology, renewable energy or biotechnology,” she said. “Let’s bet on science, not slots.”

Delegate Saqib Ali (Against):

Ali said that slots are a tax on the poorest members of society. “I think the detrimental aspects of slots, like addiction, ruined finances and broken homes, outweigh the fiscal benefits.”

He said he is also concerned that the gambling companies will be unjustly enriched by the referendum.

Ali said he would like to see the same budget cuts the government has made in the past. “Additionally, I see no reason why alcohol taxes in Maryland shouldn’t be raised,” he said. “They have not been raised in more than a generation.”

Delegate Charles Barkley (Against):

“I am not a fan of gambling,” he said. “We shouldn’t base our revenue on slots because too many things come with it.”

Barkley said he is afraid, like many others, that the social problems that are attached to gambling such as crime, corruption and gambling addiction will burden the state.

“Cutting certain programs and spending could help turn around the budget crisis,” he said.

Read More...

Summary only...

Navarro Announces Kickoff

The Navarro campaign sent out the following announcement.

You Are Invited:
Nancy Navarro Campaign Kickoff

Where: Good Hope Community Center at 14715 Good Hope Rd, Silver Spring, MD
When: Monday, March 10th @ 11:00 AM
RSVP or to Volunteer: Mike Hamby jmhx9c@gmail.com

Please join Nancy Navarro and her supporters for a County Council campaign kickoff rally. Nancy's belief in the politics of possibilities and her inclusive vision of governance will be reflected by the diverse lineup of speakers who will announce their support for her candidacy:

Congresswoman-elect Donna Edwards
State Senator Jamie Raskin
State Delegate Ana Sol Gutierrez
County Councilmember Valerie Ervin
and more!

We hope you can make it! In the meantime, please visit NancyNavarro.org for campaign updates and to donate.

By authority: Friends of Nancy Navarro, Laura Barnitz, Treasurer.

Read More...

Summary only...

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.

Read More...

Summary only...

Mike Miller Meets the Bloggers: Part Two

In Part One, we laid the scene for you: on one side of the table sat the fearsome, powerful old bull, the indomitable Senate President Mike Miller. On the other side sat a gangly, geeky band of bloggers, united only by their common desire for a post-meeting trip to Ram’s Head Tavern.

A few comments on the Senate President. For more than twenty years, Mike Miller has reigned over the Senate with a gregarious combination of ego, fear and patronage. His personal magnetism is so overwhelming that he could likely charm a bird out of its nest and onto his open palm. But if the bird voted the wrong way on a must-have bill, the hapless creature would be quickly crushed and tossed to the back of the Senate chamber. This demonstrates the Miller Rule, which is a simple one: “Work with me and prosper. Work against me and suffer.” Most Democratic Senators respond to this rule predictably, although there have been exceptions.

We asked Miller a lot of questions, and he gave us a lot of answers. For the benefit of our readers, I did my best to keep up with the exchange. Following are the Senate President’s responses to a few of our prods and pokings. If anyone else in the room recollects it differently, please comment and we’ll adjust the record.

On Governor Ehrlich
A few people remember that at the beginning of Governor Ehrlich’s term, Miller was ready to establish a pragmatic working relationship with him. But that approach ran into problems. “Ehrlich was a nice guy, but he didn’t work, and the state suffered,” Miller grumbled. He was “surrounded by yes-men” and rarely came out of his office. “All he did was put bandages on things!” The old warhorse was clearly relieved to see him gone.

On Governor O’Malley
Miller gave O’Malley lavish credit for moving to act on a deficit that he inherited, even if it cost him politically. “O’Malley knew his numbers would go in the toilet no matter what he did, so he did the right thing.” Miller attacked some of the Governor’s opponents, criticizing them for being “mean-spirited” and spreading rumors. “The Governor is a very progressive person,” Miller insisted. But he warned, “This Governor, in order to get his numbers up, will have to do some things you won’t like.” As an example, he mentioned a new emphasis on crime prevention, not always the highest priority of liberals.

On Slots
As perhaps the greatest champion of slots in the state, Miller’s views are well-known. “We have got to have that money!” he cried. The Senate President predicted that a possible recession would hurt tax revenues, thereby making slots money all the more necessary. “We need to get the slots bill passed whether you like it or you don’t like it!” Miller thundered. So in case you were wondering if Mike Miller had changed his mind on slots, the answer is NOPE!

On Transit
I asked Miller if he had a choice to fund the Washington suburbs’ Purple Line or Baltimore’s Red Line, but not both, which of the two he would pick. I was sure he would dodge this one, but to his credit, he did not. “The Purple Line!” he declared. “You know, I was a University of Maryland – College Park graduate.” Miller pointed out that he proposed a 12-cent gas tax last year but he could not round up enough votes for it. “We need to move forward as quickly as we can on mass transit.”

On Illegal Immigration
“There aren’t more than 2% of the people that understand immigration,” Miller snorted. “If you crack down on illegal immigrants too much, they’ll just bring their families over here.” The Senate President does not support the draconian measures implemented in parts of Virginia, saying, “John McCain tells the truth on this issue.” As for drivers licenses, Miller says, “The Governor has spoken on this. He considers this a national security matter. It’s a tough issue.” Miller did not contest the Governor’s decision to abide by the federal RealID law and end the state’s practice of issuing drivers licenses to illegals.

On the Regressive Nature of the Special Session Tax Package
Regular readers will recall how I criticized the Senate President for the regressive character of the special session tax package. Leaping into the jaws of the lion, I asked him the following question:

“The tax package that was passed by the special session collected the majority of its revenues from raising the regressive sales tax. If you could have that one back and do it over, would you have taxed the rich a bit more to give the working people a break?”

Miller did not back down from the sales tax. He described it as “the most regressive but also the most acceptable” of the taxes, claiming that he received little protest on it. “But I wish I could have had more from the income tax.” Miller noted, accurately, that part of the Montgomery County delegation, backed by their County Executive, pushed back against the Governor’s rate increase for the top income tax brackets, thereby limiting the legislature’s ability to raise them. “You need 24 votes to pass something through the Senate and I didn’t have the votes to spare!” For the record, let’s stipulate that nobody – absolutely nobody – knows more about getting 24 votes in the Maryland Senate than Mike Miller.

The Senate President has a point and perhaps I was unfair with him. It is true that a substantial portion of MoCo legislators pushed back against the top income tax rate hikes but did not criticize the sales tax. If that part of the MoCo delegation did not protest the tax hikes on the rich, there would have been less need to rely on the more regressive elements of the package. And who knows? Perhaps there would have been less pressure to resort to the much-hated computer services tax.

So while I don’t agree with Miller’s assertion that the sales tax increase is in any way “acceptable,” I will no longer criticize him as primarily responsible for encouraging regressivity in the tax package. There’s plenty of responsibility to go around for that.

On the Computer Services Tax
“The computer tax is not a good tax, but it’s $200 million and I’m going to fight to keep it!” The principal reason for keeping it? “No one can agree on a replacement.”

So other than David Lublin’s Big Question, which I’ll address in Part Three, that’s what I have from Mike Miller. Even though many liberals occasionally disagree with the Senate President, let’s give him his due. He implemented a tough agenda of deficit reduction on the Governor’s behalf. He is more straightforward in answering questions than most politicians. And he keeps a lid on the natural parochialism that might otherwise prevail in the Senate through a hardened mix of guile, intimidation and pragmatism. With a weaker Senate leader, the special session may very well have failed and the need to raise taxes this year would be much greater. So you may not like Mike Miller. But you should respect him.

Even though Senator Jamie Raskin of District 20 (Silver Spring/Takoma Park) attended our blogger fest, we did not flay him as we did his colleagues. In Part Three, you’ll hear from House Majority Leader Kumar Barve.

Read More...

Summary only...

Mike Miller Meets the Bloggers: Part One

It had to happen. Superman met Muhammad Ali. The King met Nixon. Alien met Predator. And last night, Maryland Senate President Mike Miller met the Bloggers.

How on Earth did this epochal event occur? Senator Rich Madaleno, political patron of the left-wing blogosphere, summoned us to Annapolis for an audience with the most powerful man in Maryland history to never serve as Governor. And so nine of us came from every corner of the state, some emerging from filthy basements, some crawling from cigarette-strewn alleys and others reluctantly shuffling out of comic book shops. None of us knew how the greatest culture clash since cream cheese Sushi was going to turn out.

A note on the bloggers. This may shock you, but they tend to be on the dorky side. Really. A white kid from Baltimore walked in with bright green earrings and a furry Afro. Following him was a middle-aged MoCo liberal with gray hair screaming down his back to be let loose from its unkempt pony tail. One blogger ranted about Massachusetts transportation policy to a glassy-eyed Senate President. Another earnestly pressed his essay on “Green Rail” into the hand of every legislator who would take it. The middle school teacher seemed fairly normal until he began reciting long-lost Industrial Workers of the World leaders unknown to even this former labor history instructor. Look, I’m not naming you guys, but I know you’re reading this and you know who you are.

Golly Wally, we’re a bunch of cross-eyed geeks! So why would Mike Miller and fellow attendees Madaleno, Senator Jamie Raskin and House Majority Leader Kumar Barve want to talk to a raggedy crew like us?

The answer lies with Senator Madaleno. As an occasional blogger himself, Madaleno understands that blog readers are becoming a critical niche in the state’s political scene. Blog readership may never exceed the levels achieved by MSM outlets. But Madaleno knows that blog readers tend to be better-informed, more inclined to civic activism, and more likely to volunteer and contribute to political campaigns than the average MSM readers. That makes you, dear readers, a valuable political constituency. And the Maryland Democrats are starting to realize this.

So by talking to us, Senators Miller, Madaleno, and Raskin and Delegate Barve are really talking to you. What is it that they want to tell you? You’ll just have to keep chewing on that towel and wait until Part Two to find out.

Read More...

Summary only...

Upcoming Public Forums

Councilman Roger Berliner will host a public forum on Woodmont East II tonight January 8th, from 7-9pm at the Bethesda Chevy Chase Regional Services Center located at 4805 Edgemoor La. in Bethesda.

Public Hearings on the BRAC DEIS (that's Base Closure and Realignment Commission Draft Environmental Impact Statement or, as I like to call it, BRACasaurus) for National Naval Medical Center (better known locally as "the Navy Hospital") on January 9 and 10 at the Pooks Hill Marriott. On January 10th, the Planning Board also has a planned briefing and public meeting on the same topic at 1PM.

Town of Chevy Chase Town Council meeting on January 9th at 7pm in the Town Hall at the Leland Center. The meeting should attract more interest than usual due to the introduction of a proposal for an emergency moratorium on construction (excepting additions of less than 500 sq. ft) and a petition in support of it.

Councilman Marc Elrich will discussing his proposed changes to the County's Forest Conservation Law at a forum sponsored by the League of Women Voters on January 10th at 7 p.m. at the County Council Building at 100 Maryland Ave. in Rockville

District 20 Sen. Jamie Raskin, Del. Sheila Hixon, Del. Heather Mizeur, and Del. Tom Hucker will be holding a town hall meeting on Sunday, January 13th from 4-6pm at the United Methodist Church located at 52 Randolph Rd. in Silver Spring.

Finally, County Exec. Ike Leggett is holding a series of six public forums on the county budget throughout this month. I must say that the County Exec has admirable stamina for holding so many of these events.

Read More...

Summary only...

District 20 Senate Race Gets Meaner

The Washington Post has written a piece on the rough race for state Senate in District 20 between challenger Jamie Raskin and incumbent Sen. Ida Ruben.

The latest polling scuttlebutt is that Ruben now trails Raskin the polls which may well explain why she has sent out an incredibly dishonest flyer about Raskin just before the election. The flyer claims that "Jamie Raskin helped put George W. Bush into office." The piece goes on to say "his support for the third party candidate helped deliver the Presidency to George W. Bush." There is also a photo of President Bush with a bubble saying "Thanks, Jamie!" Utterly ridiculous drivel.

Heard on the campaign trail: "The only person who could beat Ida Ruben is Ida Ruben and she is more than capable of doing it."

The polling from District 20 also suggests that incumbent Del. Sheila Hixon and Takoma Park Councilwoman Heather Mizeur are locks for two of the delegate seats. Indeed, Mizeur may come in first. Incumbent Garreth Murray, Aaron Klein and Tom Hucker are fighting it out for the third slot.

Read More...

Summary only...