Maryland Juice reports the news: If there is an open-seat race for Comptroller (read: Peter Franchot runs for Governor), then Del. Kumar Barve will seek the job.
Showing posts with label Kumar Barve. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kumar Barve. Show all posts
Monday, August 15, 2011
Friday, July 08, 2011
Kumar for Komptroller?
The open governor's race in 2014 is causing the dominoes to start to fall. House Majority Leader Kumar Barve is considering taking the plunge for statewide office and running for comptroller if incumbent Peter Franchot runs for governor.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Majority Leader Kumar Barve on Marriage Equality
To me, this legislation is all about family, liberty and respect. I respect the civil liberties of same sex couples who wish to solemnize their relations and families in the eyes of the law. I also respect the values of those in our society who are not comfortable with same sex relationships. Surely there is enough space in America for all of us to build our lives and families as we choose and live next to each
other respectfully.
Monday, February 14, 2011
Rally for Equality in Annapolis
Montgomery leaders at today's rally for the bills on marriage equality and gender identity anti-discriminationon:
Senate Majority Leader Rob Garagiola (District 15)
“As we celebrate Valentine’s Day, no one can argue that the capacity and bond of love is any different between heterosexual and same-sex couples. It is time that Maryland not stand in the way of love and commitment, by providing the right of marriage for all couples, regardless of gender and sexuality.
The opposition knows that we are getting closer to achieving this civil right, so their voice is rising. We must continue to be louder, as we demand marriage equality in 2011.”
House Majority Leader Kumar Barve (District 17)
“I think it is absolutely vital for our community that all people be treated equally, the LGBT community in our state is no exception. Gay and lesbian citizens of our state should have all the rights and privileges that everyone else has.
I am very proud to be a sponsor of this legislation and SB 116/HB 175 is a testament to what it means to be an American and what it means to be free and equal in our society. It is important that there be no distinction to the rights, responsibilities, and privileges that we all have. For that reason, I think marriage equality it vital to our state, our country, and to our society.”
Delegate Ariana Kelly (District 16)
“I support this bill (HB235 on gender identity anti-discrimination) because it is a common sense measure that will protect Marylanders from discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity just as you cannot discriminate based on religion or race. Montgomery County has had an anti-discrimination law since 2007. It has been implemented successfully, with no problems. It is time for all residents of our state to be treated fairly and equally under the law. I am glad the bill’s supporters will be in Annapolis tonight to speak with their legislators and show how strongly people believe in this measure.”
Attorney General, Doug Gansler
“Our nation began with multiple forms of exclusion and discrimination. Dismantling this final barrier to full citizenship for gays and lesbians is a moral imperative and a logical historical inevitability. This equalization of the marriage right is long overdue.”
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Best of the Bad Boy
House Majority Leader Kumar "Bad Boy" Barve was first elected in 1990 and has been wisecracking his way through Annapolis ever since. Here are three lit pieces from early in his career.
1990: "Hey Kids!!" That's right - only Kumar would recruit volunteers by openly calling them "kids."
1990: "Who Cares?" This is an unusual slogan for someone trying to earn votes for office, but this is the offbeat Kumar we know and love.
1994: "Draft Notice." We predict the Bad Boy will not be sending out any more of these!
Monday, November 01, 2010
Kumar Barve's Economy Mailer
This is the second of two general election mailers from House Majority Leader Kumar Barve (D-17).
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Kumar Barve's Education Mailer
This is one of two general election mailers House Majority Leader Kumar Barve (D-17) is sending out this week.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Luiz Simmons Joins the 21st Century
Kudos to former Gazette reporter Doug Tallman for remembering the hilarious email we printed from Delegate Luiz Simmons (D-17) last fall. And thanks to House Majority Leader Kumar "Bad Boy" Barve for being a reliable source of good material!
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
NARAL Responds to Barve
NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland PAC Chair Tracy Terrell has sent the following response to House Majority Leader Kumar Barve (D-17) on his criticism of their endorsements.
Dear Delegate Barve,
The recent NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland PAC press release listed our endorsed candidates as of June 11, 2010. There will be additional endorsements and a press release will be posted after the filing deadline.
As in the past, we will issue a Voting Guide which will be on the website and mailed to our members. It lists all candidates and will identify those who are endorsed, 100% pro-choice, mixed choice, or anti-choice. It will also indicate which candidates did not respond to our questionnaire.
When reviewing the record of someone who has held office, we examine the questionnaire, voting records, and leadership. For all new candidates, we also review activities before becoming a legislator.
I will address some of your comments concerning specific candidates below:
1) Former Delegate Cheryl Kagan has been an enormous champion for NARAL and women’s reproductive health issues. She has not only worked for our National organization, but has worked tirelessly on our behalf on many issues even before we ever asked her to assist the organization including authoring legislation on access to emergency contraception. We endorse those who go above and beyond at the state level. Senator Jennie Forehand will be listed in the Voter’s Guide as 100% pro-choice.
2) Delegate Jim Gilchrist has not turned in a questionnaire and is not eligible for endorsement at this time.
3) Dan Campos is a 100% pro-choice candidate and we are confident that he will be an effective leader in Annapolis.
With the recent attacks on abortion in federal health reform, the U.S. Supreme Court retreating from the protections of Roe v. Wade and the addition of two justices hostile to choice under President Bush, more decisions about the right to choose will be left up to state government. The ballot measure passed in 1992 showed that Maryland was a leader in protecting reproductive rights and numerous legislators and community leaders were integral to that process. But the issue has not been "won" by any definition and dedicated pro-choice leaders are needed now more than ever.
Lastly, we have very limited staff and resources and unfortunately the website section on legislators has not been reviewed or updated in some time. It is not the Voting Guide. However, this is something that will be addressed immediately.
Thank you for your continuing support of women's reproductive rights.
Tracy Terrell
NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland PAC Chair
Monday, June 14, 2010
Kumar Calls Out NARAL
House Majority Leader Kumar “Bad Boy” Barve has called out NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland for a number of mistakes it has made on its website in characterizing legislators’ positions on abortion. He is also criticizing their endorsement of District 17 Senate challenger Cheryl Kagan over incumbent Jennie Forehand. (Barve is running on a slate with Forehand and was himself endorsed by NARAL.) Both Kagan and Forehand are solidly pro-choice, but Barve believes that endorsing organizations should not abandon incumbents with excellent voting records. Barve is not the only one to have this opinion as NARAL’s decision to support Kagan turned a lot of heads. And while Barve does not mention it, we find NARAL’s endorsement of District 17 Republican Delegate challenger Dan Campos mysterious since he does not mention choice at all on his website.
Following is the Bad Boy’s email to NARAL PAC Chair Tracy Terrell along with the screenshots that back up his points.
Dear Tracy:
Thank you for endorsing me for reelection. However, for the first time in 24 years I am stunned by many of the endorsement decisions of the PAC.
As you know, between 1986 and 1990 I was the Treasurer of Maryland NARAL and its Political Action Committee. I served as a member of Maryland NARAL’s Board of Directors from 1989 and 1990. I participated in marches on Annapolis, and I was actively involved in our first fundraising efforts. I count among my colleagues the leaders of the movement in Maryland at that time including Karyn Strickler, Joan Brown, Emily Schacter, Karen Ringen, Mary Gill, Kathleen Nieberding-Ryan and many others.
In those days, the PAC gave extra credit for leaders, but we also indentified all pro-choice candidates in the same press release. For example, in my race in 1990, I received a contribution and an endorsement, and all but one of my competitors was identified as pro-choice as well.
While you are quite vocal as to your supported candidates, you are less so with respect to those who are merely pro-choice. I had to search on your website and finally found what can only be described as an error-filled list of candidates.
First, I am glad that you recognize Delegates Luiz Simmons, Jim Gilchrist and Senator Jennie Forehand as pro-choice. Allow me to provide a little background on Simmons and Forehand. To paraphrase the country-western song, “they were pro-choice before pro-choice was cool” in District 17. Both campaigned as pro-choice as far back as 1974. In those days, Delegates Joe Owens and Frank Shore were highly popular in Rockville and staunchly anti-choice.
Second, your unwillingness to endorse Jim Gilchrist even though you admit he is pro-choice is simply bizarre.
I have found some errors in your website which I think require some clarification.
1. You identify Senator Kathy Klausmeier as “Mixed-Choice”. This is strange because she is one of your endorsed candidates. Is this a mistake or do you lower your standards for candidates in more conservative parts of the state?
2. You identify Kevin Kelly as “anti-choice”. He was one of only four Western Maryland delegates to vote in favor of the codification of Roe vs. Wade in the House of Delegates in 1991 (the others were delegates Betty Workman, George Littrell and Tom Hattery). While he has not supported funding for poor women, I believe he has not changed his position on Roe vs. Wade. Maybe I’m wrong on this and I’d be happy to have new information on his position.
3. The first name of the Senator from District 17 is not “Jennifer”, it is Jennie. Her legal name (as it always appears on the ballot) is Jennie.
4. Janet Greenip is anti-choice, but she is no longer a member of the Maryland Senate. Oops!
Finally, Jennie Forehand. Her challenger, Cheryl Kagan is strongly pro-choice. As a former staff member of NARAL I think we can all agree that she is pro-active as well. But, has Jennie ever done anything but help the cause during her time in office? Neither she (nor Simmons and Gilchrist) nor I have done much more than vote the right way to defend choice, because (wait for it...) we won this issue at the ballot in the 1992 referendum.
Jennie has been an active solid citizen on our issue. Period.
All this is troubling to me. Four years from now I may have a strong challenger for my seat. Can I count on your support for me in my time of need if it were to arise? Or will my past history of leadership be conveniently forgotten if a NARAL employee decides to run against me?
Kumar P. Barve
Majority Leader
Tuesday, June 01, 2010
Bad Boy Backs the Hunk
In an endorsement that had to happen (and that MPW readers knew was coming), House Majority Leader Kumar “Bad Boy” Barve has announced his support for District 19 Delegate candidate Sam “Hunk of the Hill” Arora. Here’s what the Bad Boy had to say.Majority Leader Barve Endorses Sam Arora for the House of Delegates
If Arora gets elected, this will only lead to good times in the blogosphere. Who knows what trouble the Bad Boy and the Hunk will cause on their nights out? Just those nicknames by themselves will generate great headlines! One word of advice for Kumar: maybe you should let Sam do the driving.
Dear [Voter]:
As Majority Leader in the Maryland House of Delegates, I have been working to create jobs and put Maryland’s economy on the right track. We’re making progress, but there is still more work to be done. In tough times like these, we need smart, talented public servants who have the vision to bring creative solutions to the table.
That’s why I am endorsing Sam Arora for Delegate in District 19. Sam is a native of Rockville, a family businessman, and an advocate with more than a decade of experience of working in public service and organizing for progressive Democrats. Please join me in supporting his campaign by making a contribution today.
Sam has been a personal friend for years and a great volunteer on my past campaigns. He is a fighter, and I have seen how hard he worked as an aide to Hillary Clinton, a law clerk to Doug Gansler, and an organizer for the Democratic Party. Sam has what it takes to win one of the two open seats in District 19 and be a leader in Annapolis.
Sam is running an aggressive grassroots campaign, and your contribution will make a real difference:
$24 buys food and water for campaign’s volunteers who are knocking on doors each weekend;
$61 provides postage for the 216 handwritten notes Sam sends to voters in his district each week; or
$96 pays for 31 lawn signs that can boost his visibility in the area.
Will you join me in supporting Sam Arora’s campaign? Contribute today!
Sincerely,
Kumar P. Barve
Majority Leader
Friday, February 26, 2010
Blair Lee Protests Barve Response to Power Outages
Gazette columnist Blair Lee, one of MoCo's most ardent defenders, is crying foul on House Majority Leader Kumar Barve's call for an examination of disproportionate power outages in MoCo during the recent blizzards. In his letter to the Public Service Commission (PSC), Barve noted that Pepco suffered 78,000 outages in MoCo against just 7,700 in Prince George's County and asked the PSC to find out why. That rubbed Lee the wrong way, and he sent the following email to Barve.
From: Blair Lee
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 12:34 PM
To: 'Majority Leader Kumar Barve'
Cc: 'luiz.simmons@house.state.md.us'
Subject: RE: Barve calls for investigation of power outages in Montgomery County
Kumar
I am surprised at your selfish, parochial response to the power outage disparity between MoCo and P.G. Montgomery is a wealthy, privileged community with a progressive world view. Demanding Pepco service at the expense of our less-fortunate neighbors flies in the face of Montgomery’s core principal of adopting a statewide perspective when confronting state issues.
Historically, when others have a need (education funding, teacher pensions, tax increases) we have been the first to sacrifice for the greater good. That’s “The Montgomery Way.” Surely, wealthy Montgomery has the financial ability to pay for its own Pepco service upgrades with local taxpayer funds so more money is available to help our neighboring Prince Georges customers and ratepayers. I am confident that Prince Georges would do the same for us under reversed circumstances.
Finally, I expect that your near-sighted parochialism will hurt you in this year’s elections. Our voters don’t take kindly to politicians who put Montgomery’s self-interests ahead of the state’s other jurisdictions and residents. Perhaps you have forgotten that Montgomery’s mission is to help lift up Maryland’s less fortunate and less enlightened citizens no matter where they live. Again, that’s the “Montgomery Way” for which we are widely known, respected and admired by the rest of Maryland.
Blair Lee
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Barve Calls for Examination of MoCo Power Outages
House Majority Leader Kumar Barve (D-17) has called on the Public Service Commission (PSC) to examine why Montgomery County suffered disproportionate power outages during the recent blizzards. Barve cited the experience of his 83-year-old mother, who had to be evacuated to Virginia, and noted the much lower rates of outage in neighboring jurisdictions. We reprint Barve's press release and his letter to the PSC below.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
February 25, 2010
CONTACT:
Mary Scholl
301 858 3464
410 841 3464
BARVE CALLS ON PSC TO TACKLE MONTGOMERY’S MASSIVE OUTAGE PROBLEMS
Annapolis – Majority Leader Kumar Barve has asked the Public Service Commission to determine what actions are needed to prevent a repeat of the massive numbers of electric outages that took place in Montgomery County during the recent storms.
In a letter to Chairman Douglas Nazarian, Del. Barve expressed concern about the enormous number of outages in the county, especially when compared with neighboring jurisdictions. PEPCO outages cited in the Washington Post as of 10 PM the Saturday night after the first storm included 78,000 in Montgomery County, 7,700 in Prince George’s County and 2,200 in the District. Baltimore Gas and Electric said about 11,000 customers in Prince George’s, Howard and Anne Arundel were without power at that time.
“The storm did not stop at the county line,” said Del. Barve. “We need to look at what other counties are doing and copy them because we cannot afford to put so many of Montgomery’s residents in harm’s way. Public safety issues of this magnitude must be immediately addressed.”
One problem cited by Del. Barve was the enormous number of trees planted by the county directly under neighborhood power lines that have been allowed to grow over and around the utility wires.
“The prior policy of pruning county trees on a regular basis was changed and many neighborhoods now have trees crisscrossing utility lines,” continued Del. Barve. “While I don’t know if there were other contributing factors to Montgomery’s loss of power, I know that when you have 1000 lines down, a major tree trimming effort must become a top priority.”
“The good news is that there are many jurisdictions with an excellent track record of protecting their electric infrastructure in adverse weather conditions. If everyone works together, there is no reason why we can’t do the same.”
####
Following is Barve's letter to the PSC.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Taken for a Ride on the ICC
Imagine that you bring an item marked at $100 up to a store counter. The cashier takes your credit card, rings it up and says, “That will be $200.” Surprised, you ask, “What happened to the price?” The cashier replies, “We had a last-minute adjustment and since I am holding your credit card, I know you will pay for it.”
What was that? You say that has never happened to you? But it will, dear reader, as soon as you drive on the ICC.
Recently approved toll rates for the ICC are among the highest in the country, maxing out at 25-35 cents per mile during peak hours. Those rates are higher than stated by the 2006 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), which assumed a baseline peak rate of 17 cents per mile and did not study any peak rates above 25 cents. Seven state legislators, most of whom ran on anti-ICC platforms in 2006, picked up on that fact and asked the Maryland Transportation Authority (MdTA) to extend the comment period, but to no avail.
Why did the peak toll rate double in three years? It’s not because the project cost doubled. When contract costs increased a year ago, the state reacted by indefinitely postponing service road work near I-95. That kept the project on budget. Instead, the state is relying on a consultant’s report stating that the high tolls will result in “near maximum toll revenue potential.” That’s a change in course from the FEIS, which acknowledged the need to raise money but stated that in setting tolls “consideration would also be given to the desire to maximize use of the ICC so as to decrease traffic on alternative routes.”
Perhaps even worse than the tolls themselves is all the political demagoguery surrounding them. It is one thing for anti-ICC politicians like Council Member Phil Andrews to criticize the tolls. Andrews has opposed the ICC for many years on multiple grounds and his slamming of the tolls is perfectly consistent with his past positions. But the entire County Council, which has several ICC supporters, opposes the tolls too. Nancy Floreen, perhaps the county’s biggest ICC backer, calls the tolls “highway robbery.” We are not inclined to give ICC-boosting politicians a pass on the tolls. How can a politician be pro-ICC and anti-toll when it has been known since at least 1997 that the multi-billion dollar project would be financed with tolls? And is it really a surprise that a very expensive road project paid for by tolls would charge very high tolls?
Then there are state legislators like House Majority Leader Kumar Barve (D-17) and former Delegate Cheryl Kagan (D-17), who backed the ICC but now protest the tolls. Both of them were in office in 1997, when Delegates Dana Dembrow (D-20), Henry Heller (D-19), Adrienne Mandel (D-19), Patricia Faulkner (R-14B) and Raymond Beck (R-39) introduced a local bill prohibiting the ICC from becoming a toll road without the permission of the county’s state legislators. That bill would have given the delegation leverage to block onerous tolls. But neither Barve nor Kagan supported it and the bill died. Now both of them are shocked, shocked by the tolls! Other current state legislators who were in office at the time but did not co-sponsor this bill include Senators Brian Frosh (D-16) and Jennie Forehand (D-17) and Delegate Sheila Hixson (D-20).
Finally, all of these politicians are missing a key point. MdTA has sole authority to set toll rates. It does not answer to the General Assembly and does whatever it wants. It unilaterally decided to charge fees for E-ZPasses last winter, claims it is not subject to state laws like the Public Information Act and now ignores its own FEIS by doubling the peak toll rate. While the politicians are quick to condemn the tolls, none of them present a plan to make this agency accountable to the public.
And what are the results of the agency’s unaccountability? MdTA’s rationale for high tolls is that they are needed to avoid diverting lots of toll revenue from the rest of the state and/or Transportation Trust Fund money to pay off the ICC’s bonds. But the ICC tolls that they have approved are so unreasonably high that drivers may avoid the road altogether. Then MdTA would have to jack up tolls from the rest of the state or seek trust fund money to pay the bonds – which is exactly what they say they are trying to avoid. And the General Assembly has little power to review their actions or stop them.
Where is the outrage over that?
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
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!
Thursday, June 11, 2009
House Majority Leader: Pagnucco Should "Burn in Hell"
Blog-weary Delegate Kumar "Bad Boy" Barve (D-17), fatigued from Kindle, Twitter, Facebook and all online communications, is cutting loose against your author. I know some people hate our blog but this is ridiculous!
Monday, March 30, 2009
Barve Announces Passage of Greenhouse Gas Bill
In the following email, House Majority Leader Kumar Barve announced the House's passage of his bill to limit greenhouse gas emissions. A different version of the bill has already passed the Senate by a 36-9 vote.
March 30, 2009
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTION ACT PASSES HOUSE OF DELEGATES
Dear Friends,
The House of Delegates passed legislation I introduced that requires a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. The bill, which also has Gov. O'Malley as a lead sponsor, requires a reduction of 25% from 2006 levels by 2020.
The passage is a culmination of three years of effort. As part of the workgroup that helped craft this proposal, I was very pleased that so many representatives of labor, industry, science, and environmental organizations testified in favor of the legislation. The companion Senate bill has also passed the Senate, so it seems likely that Maryland will again show its leadership in another area of environmental reform.
Maryland, with 3,100 miles of shoreline, is directly threatened by rising sea levels and flooding caused by global warming. We can no longer treat the atmosphere as though it were a big free garbage dump. We have the technological ability to clean up our air, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and move to a future free of foreign energy dependence. This measure goes a long way towards ensuring these goals.
Governor O'Malley's aggressive support of the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Act has been vital in the crafting of this compromise. His sponsorship of this bill helped ensure passage.
Best regards,
Kumar P. Barve, Majority Leader
Maryland House of Delegates
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Abuser Expungement Bill Rises From the Grave
Yesterday, we reported that a bill sponsored by Delegate Luiz Simmons (D-17) allowing accused domestic abusers to expunge their records was defeated. But we spoke too soon: the House of Delegates acted today to revive the bill and send it back to the Judiciary Committee to be re-worked.
Simmons’ bill would allow people accused of abuse who had their civil protective orders dismissed or denied by a judge to get those records expunged. Simmons and other bill supporters claim that the existence of these records caused problems for the accused in seeking employment and housing even though they were not upheld in court. Opponents responded that nearly all other civil defendants do not have the right of expungement and questioned why that right should be given to accused abusers alone. Others, including Delegate Cheryl Glenn (D-45), claimed that abused spouses are often reluctant to press charges in court, so their abusers should not be rewarded with expungement rights.
The expungement bill’s 64-69-8 defeat attracted substantial coverage from the Post and the Sun yesterday. But in a startling reversal, the House of Delegates reconsidered its vote on the bill today by a 76-63-2 margin, sending it back to the Judiciary Committee for revamping. The bill’s resurrection is due to the following group of 16 Delegates who voted against it yesterday but then voted to revive it today:
Saqib Ali (D-39)
John Bohanan (D-29B)
Rudolph Cane (D-37A)
Virginia Clagett (D-30)
Steven DeBoy (D-12A)
Adelaide Eckardt (R-37B)
Donald Elliott (R-4B)
James Gilchrist (D-17)
Guy Guzzone (D-13)
Marvin Holmes (D-23B)
Stephen Lafferty (D-42)
Murray Levy (D-28)
James Malone (D-12A)
Shane Pendergrass (D-13)
Justin Ross (D-22)
Frank Turner (D-13)
How could these legislators change their opinion on one bill that was not amended in just 24 hours?
Another fact worth noting is that support for the bill split partially along gender lines. On the first vote, female legislators voted against the bill 15-29-4 while male legislators voted for it 49-40-4. On the second vote, female legislators voted against the bill 17-30-1 while male legislators voted to reconsider it 59-33-1.
Among Montgomery Delegates, Luiz Simmons (D-17), Brian Feldman (D-15), Ben Kramer (D-19) and Henry Heller (D-19) voted for the bill both times, Kumar Barve (D-17) voted for the bill the first time but voted against reconsideration, Saqib Ali (D-39) and James Gilchrist (D-17) voted against the bill but then voted to revive it and the rest of the delegation opposed it consistently.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Death Penalty Repeal Dies in the Senate
The Maryland Senate has spoken: there will be no repeal of the death penalty this year. But we learned a few valuable things from the process.
First, Senator Rich Madaleno (D-18) issued this description of today’s events:Earlier today, we finished the debate on the death penalty repeal, probably for the year. Yesterday evening, an attempt to “recommit” the repeal bill to the Judicial Proceedings Committee, a parliamentary maneuver that almost always signals the end of a bill's chance for passage, failed by a vote of 23 to 23. (One anti-repeal senator was absent.) With the votes to kill this bill with this maneuver in hand, the Democratic opponents to the repeal offered the governor a compromise this morning: accept the bill as amended yesterday and no further attempts to weaken or stop the bill would be offered. After an hour of discussion in the Senate, this position was essentially ratified when the bill was passed on to third reading. A final vote will come on Friday. The Senate President was clear that no changes from the House would be entertained later in the Session.
Here are a few things we take away from this experience:
This is a disappointing outcome for those of us who favor repeal. We can find solace in the fact that the changes in the amended bill will reduce the number of executions and significantly diminish the chances of innocent people being executed. However, this “compromise” does not address the serious racial and geographic disparities that exist in the way death penalty prosecutions work. People prosecuted in Baltimore County are twelve times more likely to be subject to the death penalty than those prosecuted in other parts of the state. In addition, while the vast majority of murder victims in our state are minorities, all of the people on death row were convicted of murdering whites. These issues will need to be addressed in the future as this effort continues. As evidenced by the votes, we are just one or two votes short of being able to win a different outcome. And, I am sure that Governor O'Malley will continue to lead this fight over the next few years.
As additional developments occur, I will certainly let you know. I deeply appreciate the hundreds of e-mails I received about this issue. I wish I could report a bigger victory, but at least progress was made this year and a full debate did finally break out on the Senate floor.
Sincerely,
Rich
1. Senate President Mike Miller proved his vote-counting skills once again. He knew from the start that repeal would not pass the Senate but he gave the Governor and death penalty opponents a fair shot.
2. Governor O’Malley is willing to dig in and fight hard on what he sees as a matter of principle, even if it means going against a substantial part of the electorate and annoying Mike Miller. Agree with him or not, the Governor showed some guts on this one.
3. Senator Andy Harris (R-7), who has already declared his intention to run for Congress again, has made a gigantic mistake on this issue. As conservative blogger Brian Griffiths has pointed out, Harris missed a key vote on sending repeal back to committee, which would have effectively killed it. And who made the motion to kill the bill? None other than Senator E.J. Pipkin (R-36), Harris’s primary opponent for Congress last year. We’ll have more on Pipkin next week.
4. Even though his district may not be as liberal as most in Montgomery County, Delegate Craig Rice (D-15) took a politically courageous risk in opposing repeal. Montgomery is full of anti-death penalty activists, but Rice’s letter to the Senators makes for compelling reading.
The real question now is what the House of Delegates will do with the Senate’s bill, which restricts use of the death penalty but does not eliminate it. Miller has indicated that he will not go to conference to reconcile different versions of the bill. But the House will have its own ideas of what to do on the issue. Generally speaking, neither chamber reacts well to a “take-it-or-leave-it” bill from the other chamber. When I asked House Majority Leader Kumar Barve (D-17) about how the House might proceed, he answered:Even though we impose a lot of discipline on the House Floor, we consider Abortion and the Death Penalty as “conscience” votes. We don’t whip these issues and we don’t really care how people vote (except that committee members keep their votes consistent on the floor and committee). So, we’re happy to have the House committee and House chamber do whatever they feel is appropriate. If Miller has a problem with that, it’s his problem, not ours.
That response means the death penalty debate may be far from over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
