Progressive Neighbors Debates Maryland's Foreign Policy

Lots of issues came up at the Progressive Neighbors Forum in Takoma Park yesterday but the issue that generated the most heat was American Studies Association boycott (ASA) of Israeli scholarly institutions.

Two bills have been cross-filed in the Maryland General Assembly directed at undermining the ASA boycott. Montgomery Del. Ben Kramer has filed HB 998 with a number of cosponsors: Delegates Barkley, Barve, Bates, Boteler, Cardin, Cluster, Costa, Cullison, Eckardt, Frank, Fraser, Hidalgo, Frick, Gaines, Gilchrist, Glenn, Haddaway, Riccio, Hogan, Hucker, Impallaria, Jacobs, Kach, Kaiser, A. Kelly, Kipke, Lafferty, Luedtke, McComas, McConkey, W. Miller, Morhaim, Myers, Olszewski, Otto, Pendergrass, Ready, Reznik, B. Robinson, S. Robinson, Rosenberg, Serafini, Simmons, Stein, Stocksdale, Szeliga, Valderrama, Vaughn, Waldstreicher, M. Washington, Weir, Wood, and Zucker.  Due to timing, Baltimore Sen. Joan Carter Conway did not have time to seek cosponsors for the parallel bill in the Senate, SB 647.

Peace Action Montgomery distributed flyers at the forum (see page 1 above with 2 and 3 below) arguing strongly against the bill as unconstitutional and just plain wrong. Although many in the audience opposed the bill--no one in the audience expressed support--the bill is not on Progressive Neighbors' very lengthy priority list.

Sen. Roger Manno was in the line of fire at the meeting. He attacked the boycott and defended the bill's central goal in the Washington Jewish Week:

In an interview after the hearing Manno explained, “My responsibility as a lawmaker and as a member of the Senate budget and taxation committee, which writes that check, is to ensure that the dollars are spent wisely and that it reflects the values of our community. … And we don’t support [the boycott that the ASA is supporting].”

The same article notes that UMBC has issued a statement condemning the ASA boycott, as have many academic institutions.

There is a certain irony to Peace Action Montgomery's opposition to the bill. The boycott's proponents handed out flyers lauding the long history of boycotts to promote social justice from India to South Africa . . . in order to condemn the proposal that the State of Maryland boycott ASA as a statement in support of its view of a more just world.

Thought experiment: What would Peace Action Montgomery's response be to a proposed ASA boycott of HBCUs?

The arguments that the bill violates academic freedom are specious. The proposed legislation would not ban any professor from supporting ASA's boycott, attending ASA conferences, or membership in ASA. It just wouldn't permit Maryland institutions to pay for it. Universities regularly decide which scholarly activities they deem worthy of support. We may not agree with them but the State has a right to decide how to spend its money and which endeavors to support.

In political science, we are experiencing this up close. Oklahoma Republican Sen. Coburn successfully amended the bill that funds the National Science Foundation so that grants may only go to proposals that aid national security. As you might suspect, this has not gone down well with most political scientists. But no one questions its constitutionality or claims it violates the First Amendment.

This issue has a profound potential to alienate Jewish Democrats and other supporters of Israel. I believe heavy majorities of Jewish Democrats strongly support, even yearn for, a negotiated peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Secretary of State John Kerry is working doggedly to address the real barriers to a workable and lasting peace despite extreme difficulties. Nonetheless, ASA's efforts to isolate Israel offend deeply and undercut them. Jews may not be unanimous on this issue (we seem incapable of it; just watch either the Knesset or Life of Brian) but the vast majority strongly oppose efforts to boycott Israel.

Not to mention that Israeli universities are often the center of efforts to build peace within Israel, which makes one suspect that the academic body of scholars focused on studying America perhaps doesn't know too much about it. Regardless, I imagine that I am not the only one amazed at the idea that the world awaits with bated breath the opinion of academic organizations on various issues of the day, particularly those completely outside that organization's area of expertise. (OK: irony of blog-writing academic condemning pronouncements on issues of the day by academics is duly noted.)

Jews are passionate for peace and for Israel. Trying to make them choose is a losing strategy. I don't think legislators or candidates are going to find it easy to straddle this issue.

Read More...

Summary only...

Ballots, Ballots Everywhere

MCEA is the acknowledged master of precinct day ballot handouts with its famous Apple Ballot, but now several other groups are getting into the act today. Will it mean anything?

We have heard that six groups will be distributing ballots listing their endorsed candidates today: Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 35, SEIU Local 500, Casa in Action, the Volunteer Fire Fighters, the Sierra Club and Progressive Neighbors.

Here’s a copy of the Volunteers’ ballot.



Here’s the District 15 version of SEIU’s Purple Ballot.



Here’s the Sierra Club poll piece.




Here’s a copy of Casa in Action’s ballot.



And here’s Progressive Neighbors’ ballot.


Just because these organizations intend to distribute ballots does not mean they will actually do so. Montgomery County is a huge jurisdiction with 246 voting precincts. A group that wishes to cover them all would ideally field three shifts of two volunteers each, or 1,476 total distributors. Not even MCEA, which maxes out at somewhere around 500-600 distributors, can get anywhere close to that number. Alternatively, a group could simply leave its ballots on the precinct tables, but that almost guarantees they will not be read.

Some of the above groups may be able to deploy several dozen volunteers if they work really hard. Others may only be able to send a couple dozen, and yet others are probably just blowing smoke. But some of these “little Apples” will get passed out. The big question is where. More than one ballot group will be targeting the District 14 Senate race in an effort to get rid of incumbent Rona Kramer. (The Volunteers are the only organization listed here who endorsed her.) But that district may not have many members of these groups. This sort of unpredictability makes it hard to believe that any ballot other than the Apple will have a big impact on any state legislative race.

But there is one contest in which geography is irrelevant: Council At-Large. Every ballot handed out in every precinct has the potential for affecting that race. Here are the at-large candidates who are listed on each of the ballots.

Apple Ballot
Marc Elrich
George Leventhal
Hans Riemer
Becky Wagner

Other Ballots
Marc Elrich: Police, SEIU, Sierra Club, Casa, Neighbors (5)
Hans Riemer: Police, SEIU, Sierra Club, Volunteers, Casa (5)
Nancy Floreen: Police, SEIU, Casa (3)
George Leventhal: Police, SEIU, Casa (3)
Duchy Trachtenberg: Sierra Club, Neighbors (2)

So if these ballots have any impact at all on the at-large primary, it is likely to benefit Elrich and Riemer (who is the only at-large candidate listed on the Volunteers’ ballot) and damage Trachtenberg. We may not be talking about a lot of affected votes, but there does not have to be very many. On primary election night in 1998, Steve Silverman led Pat Baptiste for the fourth at-large seat by just 640 votes. In 2002, challenger George Leventhal defeated incumbent Blair Ewing for the fourth at-large seat by 1,140 votes. With Riemer looking strong, Floreen holding steady, Trachtenberg having problems and Becky Wagner going negative, anything can happen in this election. And any factor that swings a few hundred votes here or there could make the difference.

Read More...

Summary only...

Campaign Finance Fun Facts

Here’s a few tidbits from the immense State Board of Elections campaign finance database!

1. Marc Elrich has long disavowed development industry contributions and Duchy Trachtenberg told Progressive Neighbors that she was also turning them away. But Elrich took $3,000 from the Maryland Realtors PAC on 8/13/10 and Trachtenberg took $3,000 from them on the same day. Aren’t realtors part of the development industry since someone has to sell all those buildings the developers put up?

OK, reasonable people can disagree on that question, but Trachtenberg also took $1,000 on 5/11/10 from HBW Group of Rockville, a “commercial real estate and construction company.”


Now that is indisputably development money. So Trachtenberg snowed Progressive Neighbors and got away with it since they endorsed her. Do they have the balls to retract their endorsement or are they just going to lie down and get played?

2. Our informants are baffled by Duchy Trachtenberg’s spending. She started the year with $289,198 – far more than any other candidate and mostly raised out-of-state in four-digit checks. Since then, she has spent more on tracking polls and consulting ($35,000) than she has on printing, direct mail and postage ($33,817). Contrast her printing, mailing and postage total to those of Senator Mike Lenett ($129,378) and Delegate Saqib Ali ($104,876), each of whom is running in a district that is one-eighth of the county. Trachtenberg’s ads in Bethesda Magazine, Washington Jewish Week, Leisure World News and Takoma Park Voice – purchased for a combined cost of just $7,230 – have been no substitute for the robust mail program she could have afforded. She has done just one mass mailing and was, incredibly, beaten to the mailbox by Becky Wagner.

As of August 29, Trachtenberg was sitting on $209,629 with just sixteen days left to spend it. Television could consume that amount of money rapidly, but we have seen no sign of any such ads. And it’s getting late – VERY late. Some sources are speculating that she is so sure of victory that she is saving the money for a County Executive run. Unless she has a grand strategy that has not shown up in her finance reports, she could very well be the richest loser in MoCo history.

3. County Executive Ike Leggett and Marc Elrich have long been political allies even if they have had occasional disagreements. So Ike kicked in $2,500 to his campaign account on 8/19/10.

Well, just twelve days later, Elrich filed an affidavit to help 9:30 Club owner Seth Hurwitz obtain a temporary restraining order against Ike’s pet project, the Fillmore in Silver Spring. The Executive Branch was blindsided and immediately began investigating whether Elrich broke the ethics law by aiding a lawsuit against the county.

How’s that for gratitude? Is it too late for Ike to get his money back?

4. Speaking of the County Executive, he may not have a Democratic primary opponent or a slate, but he has given money to a number of candidates this year. They are:

Vanessa Atterbeary: $300 on 4/21/10 (given as an individual)
Bo Newsome: $6,000 on 7/8/10
Craig Rice: $3,000 on 7/12/10
Judy Docca: $1,000 on 8/2/10
Jay Hutchins: $1,000 on 8/3/10
Martin O’Malley: $4,000 on 8/10/10
Pat O’Neill: $1,000 on 8/11/10
Bonnie Cullison: $1,000 on 8/15/10
Marc Elrich: $2,500 on 8/19/10
Craig Rice: $250 on 8/22/10 (from Catherine Leggett)
Rona Kramer: $3,000 on 8/23/10
Mark Winston: $2,500 on 8/27/10
Bo Newsome: $250 on 8/29/10 (from Catherine Leggett)

One curiosity: A month after contributing to Atterbeary, Leggett endorsed the District 18 Democratic Team.

Another curiosity: Bo Newsome contributed $600 in “rent” to Leggett on 8/19/10.

5. Kyle Lierman reported having just $6,298 in the bank on 8/29/10. Ariana Kelly, his principal rival for the District 16 open Delegate seat, reported having $51,025. (That’s what self-financing can do for you!) Lierman had to replenish his coffers somehow, and we won’t find out how until after the election.

6. Senator Nancy King (D-39) paid $8,000 to Momentum Analysis of Washington, DC, the same polling firm that worked for Big Daddy’s tobacco-financed slate, on 8/12/10 as a “consulting fee.” The timing is interesting since the payment was made about two weeks before King launched her attack website against Ali. If this payment was indeed for a poll, did it say something that prompted King to go negative?

7. Here are the biggest recipients of campaign contributions (excluding loans) this year in MoCo.

Council Candidates
Hans Riemer: $171,392
Nancy Floreen: $146,838
George Leventhal: $111,338
Marc Elrich: $87,435
Craig Rice: $84,173

Senate Candidates
Nancy King: $116,105
Saqib Ali: $76,866
Brian Frosh: $54,623
Roger Manno: $53,769
Jamie Raskin: $51,251

Delegate Candidates
Kyle Lierman: $106,191
Mark Winston: $62,580
Hoan Dang: $56,723
Heather Mizeur: $55,718
Craig Zucker: $49,054

8. Here are the biggest spenders of campaign money this year.

Council Candidates
Becky Wagner: $126,119
Hans Riemer: $122,241
George Leventhal: $112,418
Nancy Floreen: $105,047
Duchy Trachtenberg: $94,709

Senate Candidates
Saqib Ali: $180,591
Mike Lenett: $174,185
Rob Garagiola: $134,139
Cheryl Kagan: $87,152
Nancy King: $84,322

Delegate Candidates
Vanessa Atterbeary: $129,780
Kyle Lierman: $99,893
Dana Beyer: $98,825
Hoan Dang: $89,195
Craig Zucker: $69,906

9. Here are the biggest self-funders of the cycle. This statistic includes contributions and loans to self from 2007 on, but does not include self-funding for the 2009 special election.

Council Candidates
Becky Wagner: $95,000 (from husband)
Hans Riemer: $50,000
Robin Ficker: $22,358
Jane de Winter: $17,115
Ilaya Hopkins: $12,500

Senate Candidates
Mike Lenett: $200,713
Rich Madaleno: $30,000
Michael Griffiths: $6,200

Delegate Candidates
Vanessa Atterbeary: $107,250
Ariana Kelly: $85,381 (includes $6,266 from husband)
Dana Beyer: $75,000
Charlie Chester: $55,000
Jay Hutchins: $47,772 (includes $2,635 from wife)

We’re sure there is a WHOLE lot more, but it’s time to go back to posting negative mail!

Read More...

Summary only...

Barking for Transparency

You’ve seen this before. It’s a quiet night in the neighborhood. Then one dog barks. And then another. And another. Soon the entire neighborhood is full of barking. So it is with liberals howling on behalf of transparency.

This round of noise in the night started with Delegate Saqib Ali (D-39), who proposed a bill based on a good idea: committee votes should be just as accessible on the General Assembly’s website as are floor votes. Ali worked the press hard on this issue, obtaining editorial support from both the Post and the Sun. But Delegate Heather Mizeur (D-20) said that Ali’s bill was not enough, arguing along with Common Cause Executive Director Ryan O’Donnell for a package of bills. And then Delegate Luiz Simmons (D-17) slammed Mizeur for not addressing the ancient practice by Committee Chairs of putting bills “in the drawer,” or not holding votes on them at all. Most improbably, individuals associated with Montgomery County’s Progressive Neighbors claim credit for the idea too, even seeking to trademark Las Vegas’ celebrated tourist slogan for themselves. Don’t they understand that successful advocacy groups heap credit upon their bill sponsors and not upon themselves? Now even the Republicans are involved.

And then this shameful squabble erupted on Delegate Ali’s Facebook page. The bickering goes on too long to fit on one screenshot, but it is enough for our readers to get the idea.


Meanwhile, little logistical work has been done. Who is briefing the presiding officers and their staff? Did anyone bother to do that before running off panting to the newspapers? Who is talking to the relevant Committee Chairs who will consider the bill(s)? Who is lobbying the committee members? Who is assembling research on how other states disclose committee votes, and on the benefits that ensue? Who is putting in the difficult, but invisible work of actually getting something passed? Is anyone? Or is everyone so busy getting their names into the press that no one is doing any work?

The only result of all of this barking for attention so far is to create mirth in the halls of Annapolis. One spy in the capital had this comment on the fracas:

The transparency proposals are modifications of an idea that Republicans started pushing three years ago. In 2007, Warren Miller and Alex Mooney (two of the most conservative Republicans in the legislature) sponsored a transparency bill (it failed). In 2008, they brought it back, and it passed unanimously. In 2009, Verna Jones sponsored a bill (which passed unanimously), and the Senate began putting committee votes online. This year, everyone's trying to get in the mix. Heather Mizeur and Saqib Ali introduced bills. The Republicans in both chambers proposed rule changes. Nancy King wrote to the Senate President to request a rule change. And Common Cause is floating around, hopelessly unaware of what's happening or how to affect the outcome. If anything is going to happen, look for the Democratic leadership in both chambers to make the issue their own and resolve it without legislation... long before a hearing is even scheduled on Mizeur or Ali's proposals.

And so the most likely outcome is a limited administrative change. As for the broader agenda pushed by squabbling liberals? All of you Redskins fans should be acquainted with the phrase, “There’s always next year.”

Read More...

Summary only...

More on County Council District 4

Here’s our latest roundup for D4 residents and MoCo political junkies. (Yes, we know that you junkies need help, but in the meantime, keep reading our blog!)

Dan Reed at Just Up the Pike has posted an interview with Nancy Navarro. Once again, Dan shows off his knack for picking out the most interesting, and even the most provocative, statements from his interviewees.

Progressive Neighbors has posted interviews with Nancy Navarro and Don Praisner. These interviews contain the most detailed positions on issues so far released by either candidate. They even address our beloved CARR bill! Progressive Neighbors did not endorse in the contest.

Navarro has wrapped up the vast majority of union endorsements in the county. The only union to have endorsed another candidate is the Montgomery County Federation of Teachers, an American Federation of Teachers local union, which is supporting Don Praisner. MCFT has no contracts with the county and should not be confused with the Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA), which represents county teachers and has endorsed Navarro.

Steve Kanstoroom and Pat Ryan have websites up. Don Praisner has completely redone his website and it is much improved.

The recent County Council committee changes hinge on who wins the District 4 race. If the winner disagrees with Council President Mike Knapp’s assignments, they could change next year.

Kevin Gillogly and I are working on a joint post about last week’s candidate forum. Hurry up, Kevin! We know you are still grumpy because of your decision not to run, but that is no excuse for not covering this race for our all-important readers. The Gazette’s coverage of the forum is here. They missed the central exchange in the debate over the relationship of the education budget and the county’s deficit, but we will cover that for our readers.

Read More...

Summary only...

Stop Slots Maryland Promises Aggressive Campaign

Aaron Meisner, Chairman of Stop Slots Maryland, promised a group of MoCo activists today that his organization would wage an aggressive campaign to defeat the slots referendum. What is his plan and will it work?

Meisner made his remarks at a public meeting of Progressive Neighbors, a liberal group based in Silver Spring and Takoma Park. He started by noting that most recent slots referenda have failed, a point previously demonstrated by Free State Politics blogger Eric Luedtke. So while slots have a 60%+ favorability in Maryland polls, victory is possible.

"We can win, but it won't be easy," Meisner said. "It's not easy to transform a grass-roots lobbying organizations into a statewide campaign. It's taking time to shift gears." Meisner indicated that the organization is recruiting political operators with statewide campaign experience in Maryland and is in heavy talks with several religious groups. He described the evolving coalition as a group of "strange bedfellows" including secular progressives, rural values voters and religious organizations. "It's a big challenge to get organized," he admitted.

Meisner did not get into specifics, but upon reading a hard copy of this blog post, he indicated that the new plan would resemble what we have outlined. Overall it seems that Stop Slots Maryland is just getting moving. As he says, they have a real challenge: radically changing the organization in the midst of waging its most critical and difficult campaign yet. It is very, very tough for any organization to change so much while on the move, but that is what has to happen for them to win.

Right now, the big questions on this issue are:

1. Will the Governor campaign in favor of the referendum?

2. How will Stop Slots Maryland raise the money needed to win?

3. How will the organization liaison with the street-level activists who will be critical to victory?

Elbridge James, President of Progressive Maryland, hinted at the answer to a fourth big question at the same meeting. When asked whether Progressive Maryland would "help lead the fight against slots," James said that the issue would be decided at a board meeting of the group in late January. "The question is will we oppose slots vigorously, oppose slots passively or not oppose them," he said. While James declined to provide a hard prediction of what Progressive Maryland would do, few of us left the meeting believing that the group would fight hard against slots. Several of the group's union affiliates may in fact support slots because of hopes to unionize casino workers, perform the construction work, or gain more public funding. This creates a significant possibility that Progressive Maryland will sit out this fight, thus lessening the chances of slots opponents.

Pay attention to this one, folks. The fighters are still in their robes, bouncing in their corners. Michael Buffer is only now reaching for the mike. I'd advise you to place your bets, but ah... maybe that's the wrong metaphor.

Read More...

Summary only...