Here are four more actual, potential, or improbable at-large candidates.
Guled Kassim, Silver Spring
Kassim is a Somali immigrant who grew up in Kemp Mill, served in the Marines and became a real estate settlement officer. He is young, good-looking, polite and shows up at a lot of events. In 2006, he ran for Delegate in District 19. Despite being on a slate with incumbent Hank Heller and successful candidate Ben Kramer, Kassim finished eighth of eight candidates in the Democratic primary. Unlike many candidates who lost last time, he has stayed active in politics. His active support of Kramer in the 2009 special election will not play well among progressives. Given his last-place finish in a Delegate race, it is hard to imagine him being a top-tier contender at-large. He has a campaign website up but it does not mention the office he is seeking.
Spy: A U.S. Marine Corps veteran and Continental African, Guled could energize the rainbow coalition that helped Nancy Navarro win in District 4. He would need to overcome anti-Muslim prejudice, which he is easily likeable enough to do if he campaigns hard, especially in the Jewish community.
Spy: Guled Kassim had a dismal performance as a D19 delegate. I can say with complete confidence that he has no chance as an at-large candidate, unless he were to mysteriously come across $300,000. Guled's only hope at public office would have been had he been appointed to replace Ben Kramer in Annapolis. Some had speculated such a deal had been made, but with Kramer’s loss, that door has shut.
Spy: Nice kid, better suited for District 19 than at-large Council.
Ben Kramer, Derwood
Delegate Ben Kramer (D-19) came within 63 votes of becoming the new District 4 County Council Member. No one knows for sure whether he will run for re-election as a Delegate, challenge Nancy Navarro, run at-large or not run at all. He never conceded to Navarro and never endorsed her against Robin Ficker, facts that have not escaped the notice of other politicians and activists around the county. Kramer’s capacity for more self-funding is a mystery given that he has loaned his campaigns a total of $220,450 – money that has not been paid back.
Spy: He would certainly have the money (although, I can’t imagine it’s easy for him to spend all of his own money and never fundraise), but I just don’t think he’s that likeable. He is aloof and comes across as if he thinks he’s better than everyone (I think he does, and that he’s smarter than everyone). Not to mention that he talks about himself in the 3rd person! As your research has pointed out, the General Election electorate is not his base and he’d have a tough time with such a crowded field.
Spy: How much is he willing to invest this time?
Spy: Could he self-finance an at large council campaign? Would he have broad appeal - would he work hard for it? Where is his support group? Does he think he is safe in Annapolis? Guess I have more questions than answers here.
Spy: This just doesn’t make any sense. He was the favorite in an open race special election and lost in many of the places where the Kramer brand should be at its strongest. So he’s going to run against incumbents across the whole county?
Spy: May want another go... but I think he would rather take on Navarro again in District 4.
Spy: Will he run on the Trachtenberg slate? Politics makes strange bedfellows. Easy to imagine him winning the Gazette and Post endorsements as a candidate who wants to “run government like a business” but then losing the Democratic primary.
Spy: The only person that comes close to former Delegate Robin Ficker’s record of unsuccessful bids for public office is Ben Kramer. His track record as a candidate has been awful. In this most recent run, Kramer faced his ideal voting population: older, whiter, more affluent, more Jewish. If he can’t win a council seat under those circumstances, he never will. But this raises a more obvious point. Why so many people (including Ben Kramer himself) thought he would easily win the D4 special election is beyond me, but I hope this last campaign puts the fabled Kramer mystique to rest for good. Perhaps a pleasant side-effect from this could be that Rona Kramer faces a strong challenge in 2010.
Spy: Ben Kramer is damaged goods and shouldn’t even try it.
Cary Lamari, Silver Spring
Lamari is a former President of the Montgomery County Civic Federation and is one of the most prominent and knowledgeable civic activists in the county. He finished eleventh of thirteen at-large candidates in 2006 and ran third in the 2009 District 4 special election Democratic primary. Lamari’s biggest problem is money. In the 2009 District 4 special primary, he was outspent 9-1 by both Nancy Navarro and Ben Kramer. That election, which was limited to an area containing Lamari’s best friends and supporters (including many long-time allies in Leisure World) was probably his best chance to win office.
Spy: Cary Lamari has zero chance of winning an at-large seat. The Civic Federation/civic activist population makes up no more than 5-10% of the Democratic Primary population, and that is on a good day. Lamari may think he can pull off a Marc Elrich-like victory built on multiple runs for the Council, but Elrich has something that Lamari does not. Elrich has traditionally been considered a progressive activist IN ADDITION to being a civic activist. In the 2006 primary that carried Elrich to office, there was a clear progressive wave in the primary that was aided by high-profile, head-to-head primary battles up-ticket. With no such action in 2010 AND the fact that Lamari is not very progressive, he stands no chance. Elrich himself might be in danger of losing his seat and would be foolish to slate up with Lamari.
Spy: Nice guy, but please. The voters have spoken. Replace the battery on your hearing aid and listen to what the voters are saying.
Spy: If Lamari runs for Council At-Large, he will likely take votes away from Elrich (who gets backing from the civics, as well). This would not be good for Marc because he’s going to see some names missing in his supporter list in 2010 that were with him in 2006. Lamari does not have the fundraising capability to raise the money necessary for an at-large bid; he barely had enough for the district race.
Spy: Gaining maturity and stature. If he energizes civic activists to get out and work hard for him, he could pull off an Elrich-like surprise - perhaps at Elrich’s expense.
Spy: Three times a charm? More likely three times and he’s out. Lamari tends to know more than anyone about the county issues during debates, but something about him puts people off and it shows in his election results.
Spy: Cary’s strength is with his neighborhood and with the civics - it did not carry him that far in 2006 when he ran at large. I do not think he can finance an at large race - his campaign was underfunded this time and he came in a poor third on his turf. He may well run as he has inferred that - but I would guess he might again try the District 4 race. He also has thrown his hat in for the last two times for the planning board and that went nowhere. He may well win the Stassen label.
Spy: Will run again. This time at-large. He will lose really big time.
Chris Paladino, Silver Spring
Former Red Cross executive Chris Paladino withdrew from the District 4 race before it started due to family health issues. Paladino really believed he could win and our informants tell us he was ready to sink lots of his own money into the race. But we never got a chance to see him in action as a candidate. His fundraising, issue knowledge, people skills, work ethic and campaign savvy were never tested in the heat of battle. He may challenge Navarro in District 4, run at-large or not run at all.
Spy: Same problem as he would have had in the Special – people don’t know who he is and he’s going to get lost in the crowd. He may be able to fundraise, but he’s not a politician and he didn’t have any campaign plan (or intention of hiring staff) for the Special. He’d really need to hire someone qualified, but still, it’s a longshot.
Spy: For five minutes during the special election, Paladino was on everyone’s mind. But he has no political experience and a countywide race requires it. Either that, or a much bigger bank account.
Spy: Yeah right. Paladino is rumored to have $75,000 in self-financing available, but that is a drop in the bucket for a no-name, unestablished candidate in an at-large race. He’ll need many times more than that. Plus, with some of the other names floating around, he stands no chance. The most important question is will any of the incumbents slate up with him. The answer will undoubtedly be no.
Spy: A Knapp wanna-be without any union support. He sees himself as an entrepreneur and thinks everyone else can do it. Not compassionate despite his Red Cross background; had hoped to get the Praisner endorsement and have that propel him into office. Not aligned with any major interest group unless it might be the Chamber - (which was said to have been poised to support him last time - aligned somehow I’ve heard with Cheryl Kagan - more to learn there). Not curious nor charismatic. Does not understand the multi-layered strata of county politics. Can self finance to over $100,000, so he may be in if he senses an opening. At large - doubt it because he has not ventured out across the county yet. Son is in private school which may hurt him.
Spy: Non-entity with little $ and less familiarity. He is totally unprepared and has even less knowledge. No experience in civic matters. A complete unknown and totally unprepared. They'll make mincemeat of him in a forum or debate.
Spy: Unknown to voters and opinion-makers. Will have trouble raising sufficient money.
We will finish tomorrow.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Whispers of the At-Large Race, Part Four
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Ilaya Hopkins for Planning Board
I have no hesitation in suggesting that the County Council should appoint Ilaya Rome Hopkins to the Planning Board. She'd be an outstanding addition and bring valuable skills to the Board.
No question about it, the Planning Board is one of the toughest jobs in Montgomery County. Yet it also among the most important. Here are some of the reasons that I think Ilaya would be an excellent Board member:
Knowledge and Organization. Ilaya has been intimately involved in the Planning process on a number of occasions but particularly in the BRAC/Medical Center process. One of the most complex and quick changes to Montgomery County, Ilaya mastered to material and as is one of the few people I know who really understands what is going on. She has an M.A. in International Relations and is used to working with big organizations from USIA to the Navy. In short, she always knows her brief.
Community. I live in a municipality which brings a lot of institutional advantages. Ilaya organizes a civic association which cannot rely on staff or taxes to help out. Nevertheless, she has made the East Bethesda Civic Association an effective advocate for her community. She has done this even though the neighborhood often has diverse and conflicting interests. No mean feat.
Listening and Respect. Anyone who has been an elected official knows that you need to spend more time hearing from people than talking. This is especially true on the Planning Board where one spends about one minute talking for every hundred minutes of listening to others. Ilaya not only understands how to listen but is actually good at hearing people. She can hear all sides and help bring people together. Knowing how to disagree without being disagreeable is a rare skill and especially useful in Planning.
Independence, Integrity, and Judgment. One might assume that I always agree with Ilaya though that's not the case. She thinks through the issues carefully and independently and forms her own opinion, having listened to all views and the evidence. I don't think I've met many people with the ability to take their own stand and defend it well. Equally important, she knows how to respect the professionals who work for the Board yet also ask the tough questions. Even when I don't agree with Ilaya, I have to respect her opinion and the thought behind it. The Planning Board Staff and County residents will value her approach.
In sum, with no denigration meant to other candidates, the Council can't go wrong if it appoints Ilaya. Will she make mistakes? Yeah, sure. We all do. I also think hers is a rare talent it'd be a shame to miss.
MCDCC Picks New District 18 Member
Following is the press release from the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee.
Gabriel Albornoz Elected to Democratic Central Committee
The Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee met on Tuesday, June 12, 2009, and elected Gabriel L. Albornoz of Kensington, as a Member from Legislative District 18. The vacancy is the result of Member Oscar Ramirez moving out of District 18. District 18 encompasses Kensington and parts of Chevy Chase and Silver Spring.
Gabriel L. Albornoz (Gabe) has a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Maryland and a Master in Business Administration degree from Johns Hopkins University. Albornoz is currently Director of the Department of Recreation, Montgomery County. Earlier he was in managerial positions with the Children's Hospital Foundation, Children's National Medical Center, Latin American Youth Center and the Maryland Multicultural Youth Centers.
Before the vote, Gabe assured the Central Committee that there would be no conflict between his County and Committee roles.
Albornoz may be reached at 301-530-2811 (h), 301-651-1054 (c) or galborno1976@yahoo.com.
Extended biography and photograph available on request.
###
Feldman, Lee Re-Elected as Leaders of MoCo House Delegation
Following is the press release from the Montgomery County Delegation.
NEWS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Sara Hartman, 301-858-3018
Feldman Re-elected Chair and Lee Re-elected Vice Chair of the Montgomery County House Delegation
ROCKVILLE , MD , June 10, 2009 -- The Montgomery County House Delegation to the Maryland General Assembly unanimously re-elected Delegate Brian J. Feldman (D-15) as its Chair to serve a third year and re-elected Delegate Susan C. Lee (D-16) to serve a fourth year as Vice Chair at the Delegation’s annual organizational meeting yesterday evening.
Now serving in his second term in the House of Delegates, Delegate Feldman currently chairs the House Subcommittee on Banking, Economic Development, Science & Technology and is the House Chair of the legislature’s Joint Committee on Technology Oversight. He is also a member of the House Economic Matters Committee.
Outside of the General Assembly, Delegate Feldman is a practicing attorney with a Washington D.C. law firm and an adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University. He lives in Potomac with his wife and two children.
Delegate Lee has been a member of the House of Delegates since 2002. She is a Deputy Majority Whip and a member of the House Judiciary Committee where she also serves as chair of the Juvenile Law Subcommittee. Additionally, Delegate Lee holds the position of 1st Vice President for the Women Legislators of Maryland and she is a member of the National Conference of State Legislatures Communications, Financial Services & Interstate Commerce Committee. Delegate Lee is Of Counsel to a Washington D.C. law firm and lives in Bethesda with her husband.
###
Whispers of the At-Large Race, Part Three
Today we will begin looking at rumored candidates for the at-large race. Some are actual candidates, some are potential candidates and others probably will not run. We examine them in three parts, all in alphabetical order, and supplement our remarks with comments from our all-seeing spy network.
Jane De Winter, Kensington
De Winter is the former President of the Montgomery County Council of Parent Teacher Associations. She has been a civic and education activist in the county for over a decade. Her position with the PTAs gives her access to other education activists throughout the county, a thorough understanding of one of the county’s premier political issues and an acquaintance with the school unions (including the ever-critical MCEA).
De Winter has not run for office before, has not contributed to other state or county candidates and is not known to be affiliated with one wing or the other on the existing council. Her advantages are intelligence and experience. Her fundraising capability is a question. De Winter is running now, with an appearance at Valerie Ervin’s recent fundraiser and an early version of a campaign website online.
Spy: Jane will have an advantage of name recognition county-wide, at least with the PTAs, which will help her some. She has a Ph.D. in Economics from UPenn and could really be an asset on the council as someone who truly understands the economic impact of decisions (and looks at things through this lens). She could really help on the MFP Committee, as well.
Spy: She is off and running and is lining up the MCEA folks - she hopes. She kicked off in February with an exploratory committee. Does not have the repartee needed nor the easy way with a crowd - but her PTA experience and Rolodex could well pay off.
Spy: I don’t know her personally, but she has made no secret of her desire to run. She has been attending D16 events, the Spring Ball, etc. She is ready to go.
Spy: Could also be a strong contender if she sharpens her message and targets one or two specific incumbents and their records. Will be very competitive for the Apple Ballot endorsement.
Spy: Jane De Winter generated some buzz earlier this year, when her name was floating around. That seems to have died down and most political insiders have moved on. She has no name recognition, no known fundraising prowess, and unless she can muscle together some support from incumbents, she will have little chance. The Apple Ballot could provide a lifeline, but it will likely be unavailable unless one of her other cons changes (ie: incumbent suport or money). A strong bid by Jane De Winter could, however, pose problems for other women running at-large.
Pete Fosselman, Kensington
Fosselman has been the Mayor of Kensington since 2006. He ran for Delegate in District 18 in 2002 and finished last of seven candidates in the Democratic primary. He is a principal of Rodgers Consulting and has owned more than one small business in Kensington.
Fosselman is a popular Mayor, has many friends (including your author) and is a major player in District 18. He would be a favorite for any open Senate or Delegate seat in the district. He is also one of a very small number of Montgomery politicians who backed Martin O’Malley for Governor when Doug Duncan was still running. His job at Rodgers and experience as a business owner could help him raise money from the business community. But the Town of Kensington, with its 768 households, is a very small base for an at-large campaign. Fosselman would need a lot of help to compete county-wide. He is not a confirmed candidate for any office other than his current one.
Spy: Nice guy, very approachable and would bring a mixture of common sense and pragmatism to the Council.
Spy: I would describe him as “universally liked and respected.” He has a great temperament for governance.
Spy: He shows up in many places - attended a forum on how to run a campaign in January; could be the first gay candidate for council - but I think he is more Delegate inclined. But what has been his showcase in Kensington - a hot bed of controversy? Street lights were the only thing I can think of - the Safeway and the flower pots on Connecticut - come on - what could he run on?
Spy: He has shown he can actually govern, but the last time he ran for anything larger than the Town of Kensington he came in last. Does a county wide campaign make sense? On a personal note, I really like the guy and he is a great supporter of the county party.
Spy: Pete is energetic, likeable, very popular in Kensington and could pull gay support away from Duchy Trachtenberg.
Spy: Would make a great Councilman. Unknown outside of Kensington. Can raise some $ but enough?. Works hard. In my very humble and unsophisticated opinion he could win but only with a lot of $ and work. I also don’t think the desire is there.
Spy: Pete Fosselman has been spotted around town more times than Elvis. This can only mean that he is at least considering running for another position. At-large council is what seems to come up the most. He definitely has going for him that he's photogenic and sometimes even mistaken for our Governor. Nevertheless, his name recognition is probably not high, and his fundraising prowess is not yet clear either. Most importantly, it is difficult to comment on Fosselman without knowing more about his politics and where he fits in the County political spectrum. Some consider him a protege of Sen. Madaleno, but the only evidence we've seen of this is his opposition to the Purple Line. Does he have backers on the Council? Not that I have heard, but let's wait and see.
Larry Giammo, Rockville
Giammo is the former Mayor of Rockville. We speculated last December that he might be running against District 3 County Council Member Phil Andrews. Since that time, we have heard very little about him. Giammo has been a longtime Independent who, along with Fosselman, supported O’Malley against Duncan. Mayors of Rockville tend to be big players in county politics, but Giammo’s silence indicates he may not be in the 2010 mix.
Spy: Never seemed content to just be Mayor of Rockville - I would guess he has a campaign in his future but he has been quiet since he left office; was never quiet in his disagreements with Duncan - could he be thinking about a county Exec run some time down the line? I don't see him anywhere - so if he is a candidate - he must be doing it in stealth mode.
Spy: Wasn’t Larry Giammo a Republican until recently? I have to believe that the days of party-switching opportunists easily winning seats might be over -- but only so long as his opponents are willing to raise that fact in a primary. If so, it would be a deal-breaker for many Democratic primary voters. The one thing that might save him from this is that it is unclear if people will use resources to call out a challenger on something like this. In any case, I thought Giammo was considering challenging Phil Andrews. If so, he might be more at home in that race, since Andrews seems to be imitating Republicans lately with his anti-collective bargaining, anti-early voting, fiscal conservative positions.
Spy: He is almost invisible outside of Rockville, where I think he is running his business.
Spy: Has support and necessary $ if he wants to raise it. I don’t think the desire is there but I for one will certainly urge him to jump in now that I know his name is in circulation.
Spy: Larry has to decide whether or not he is a Democrat. If he is not, he can’t get elected to the Montgomery County Council in 2010. If he re-registers as one, he needs to explain why he was registered Independent for so long. This will not be a trivial problem in a Democratic Primary. He has a strong base in Rockville and would be very competitive for the Gazette and Post endorsements.
More tomorrow!
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Organizing for America Announcement on Health Care
Following is a call for action from Organizing for America on health care.
ANNOUNCEMENT:
Organizing for America, the former Obama for America operation, is holding a large health care meeting on Wednesday June 10 ay 7:30pm (doors open at 7pm). OFA is a part of the DNC, and is focused in furthering the President's agenda. We expect a fierce debate in Congress and the nation over health care. We want to organize around President Obama’s three principles: Reducing costs; Guaranteeing choice; Ensuring that all Americans have quality affordable health care.
We’ll talk about personal experiences that make health care reform important, review President Obama’s plan, how we can best support that plan, and local health care service events for the weekend of June 27. Dozens of these meetings have already been held throughout Maryland, and thousands nationwide. Join us at the last meeting for Montgomery County as we build towards a weekend of service on June 27.
Please join us on Wed. June 10 for this important health care meeting. (And please don't go to the old meeting place!) We'll also update everyone on OFA's mission and organization. Refreshments available.
Date: Wednesday June 10
Time: Doors open 7 pm, Program starts promptly at 7:30 pm
Location: NEW LOCATION!! At the new MCEA (teachers’ union) headquarters:
12 Taft Court, Rockville MD 20850
Link for directions: http://www.mcea.nea.org/pdf/DIRECTIONSTOMCEA.pdf
(FYI: Taft Court is off of East Gude Drive, near where East Gude meets Norbeck Road; the old location where Obama meetings were held before the election was on West Gude Drive, on the other side of Rockville Pike).
(In case of extreme weather: if MCPS evening school activities are cancelled, this meeting will be cancelled.)
PLEASE RSVP HERE http://my.barackobama.com/page/event/detail/gpclfj OR TO mcforobama@gmail.com
Whispers of the At-Large Race, Part Two
Believe it or not, the County Council at-large race is almost upon us. And of course we have the inside scoop on the incumbents, the prospective challengers and their chances. But there are a number of factors that influence the outcome of any race. Here are the questions we are asking in assessing what 2010 will look like.
1. Who can raise enough money?
A successful at-large campaign will require a full-time campaign manager, a combination of paid and volunteer staff, disciplined use of a voter tracking database, multiple mailings and other ads, a press operation and multi-media outreach (including to blogs!). All of that will take money – lots of it. Our political consultant sources tell us that just one county-wide mailing could cost up to $50,000. We are advising at-large challengers that they must have $100,000 in the bank by January 2010 in order to be taken seriously by the county’s power brokers and should plan on spending $300,000 by the end of the campaign. There are a very limited number of contenders who can raise that kind of money on their own.
2. Will there be any slates?
At the moment, there are no slates. But that may change by next year. There are three good reasons to form slates: mutual protection, knocking off enemies and money. The escalating cost of campaigning is making that third reason especially important since slates can do joint advertising. We may see incumbents – possibly together with one or more challengers – forming at least one slate even if they have to hold their noses to do it. And the creation of one slate may very well stimulate the creation of a rival slate. The current 5-4 split on the council (Nancy Navarro, Valerie Ervin, George Leventhal, Nancy Floreen and Mike Knapp vs. Phil Andrews, Marc Elrich, Duchy Trachtenberg and Roger Berliner) may offer a rough starting point here but nothing is guaranteed. Former County Executive Doug Duncan organized a slate in 2002 and used it evict his greatest adversary, incumbent at-large Council Member Blair Ewing. Would Ike Leggett participate in any slate?
3. What will the unions do?
Last time, the unions went their separate ways more than once. In the County Executive race, MCGEO endorsed Ike Leggett, SEIU supported Steve Silverman and MCEA stayed neutral. In the at-large race, the Police, Fire Fighters and SEIU supported Nancy Floreen but the other unions did not. Labor was relatively united in supporting George Leventhal, Marc Elrich and Duchy Trachtenberg, who non-coincidentally finished first, second and third in the at-large race.
This time, the public employee unions have a common priority: getting rid of Duchy Trachtenberg. They are split on whether to support Elrich, who rubbed some of them the wrong way in voting to hold up the FY 2009 budget because of his disagreement with the structure of the property tax increase. Moreover, the unions may have differing opinions on the challengers.
Labor is always at their best when they stick together. The Apple Ballot, union member canvassing, independent expenditures and PAC contributions are a powerful combination if employed in concert. If labor rallies around one or two at-large challengers, they will maximize their impact on the race.
4. Who can attract support from the business community?
Many activists have two misconceptions about the county’s business community: first, that they are monolithic, and second, that they care only about encouraging development and building the ICC. That is far too simplistic an analysis.
Developers will always contribute to county candidates because their livelihoods depend on land use. But the rest of the business community mirrors the diversity of the county. Check out the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce. It includes representatives of multi-national corporations, real estate firms, law firms, hospitals, banks, IT firms, utilities and even the Gazette and Montgomery College. And there are countless more businesses – especially small businesses – who are members of the local chambers. Two issues unite most of these businesses: transportation and tax policy. Both apply to the state level as well as the county level. Candidates who hope to draw support from business outside of the development community must emphasize how they would successfully deal with these issues.
In 2002, the business community gave substantial support to Doug Duncan’s End Gridlock County Council slate. These days, the Chamber of Commerce is more focused on promoting transportation and pro-business tax policy than it is on promoting politicians. But business money can still be had, and a challenger probably will not be able to win without it.
5. What will be the hot issues?
Education, development and traffic are perpetual issues in Montgomery County. In 2006, a strong economy, crowded schools and congested roads gave slow-growth candidates the edge. Next year, job creation won’t look like such a bad thing. Ben Kramer and Nancy Navarro both prioritized it in the 2009 District 4 race and together grabbed 88% of the primary vote. But the sleeper issue may be crime. Will incumbents who supported cutbacks in the police department pay a price?
Dear readers, we will be seeking answers to all of these questions throughout primary day. But enough! Now we will proceed to what you really want to know. Besides the incumbents, who is running at-large? Who could run? Who has the best chance of winning? Who should avoid embarrassing themselves? Our spies tell all, starting tomorrow. Don’t miss it!
Monday, June 08, 2009
Earmarks
By Marc Korman.
Since January 2009, the US House and Senate have required their members to post their earmark requests on their websites. The links are collected here for the convenience of MPW’s readers.
Earmark requests come in the form of projects and programs. Projects are requests for targeted funding to specific legislative districts or states. For example, the $10 million funding request for the Purple Line by Congressman Van Hollen and others is a project request. Programs are funding for general activities by a government agency. For example, Congressman Bartlett’s $215 million request for Advanced Nurse Education.
Legislators ask for far more than they expect to receive, both in overall projects and the dollar amount of each request. Since legislators strategically ask for far more than they are expecting to receive, the request lists can appear excessive. A Baltimore Sun article declaring that Maryland legislators requested over $1 billion in funding makes good copy, but the amount they will eventually bring home is far less.
When reference is made to earmarks, it usually is to projects funded by the annual appropriations bills Congress passes each year to fund the federal government. However, there are a few other bills where earmarks are common and some legislators also list earmark requests for those even though the rules do not require it.
Barbara Mikulski-http://mikulski.senate.gov/Appropriations/FiscalYear2010/index.cfm
Ben Cardin-http://cardin.senate.gov/legislation/appropriations.cfm
Frank Kratovil-http://kratovil.house.gov/appropriations/
Dutch Ruppersberger-http://dutch.house.gov/approps.shtml
John Sarbanes-Unable to identify appropriations from website. Press reports indicate it is buried within a grants announcement page, but I could not identity it.
Donna Edwards-http://donnaedwards.house.gov/?sectionid=15§iontree=15&itemid=131
Steny Hoyer-http://hoyer.house.gov/issues/approps10.asp
Roscoe Bartlett-http://bartlett.house.gov/Issues/Issue/?IssueID=4853
Elijah Cummings-http://www.house.gov/cummings/appropriations.shtml
Chris Van Hollen-http://vanhollen.house.gov/HoR/MD08/Legislation/Issues/FY10+Projects.htm
On Political Pulse
Montgomery County Council-Member Valerie Ervin (District 5) will be on the "Political Pulse" talk show on Tuesday June 9, 2009 at 9:30 p.m. and Thursday, June 11, 2009 at 9:00 p.m.
Political Pulse is on Channel 16 TV in Montgomery County.
Whispers of the At-Large Race, Part One
Just like the rest of you, we are finished with District 4 and ready to move on to the mother of all MoCo races: County Council at-large. Who’s running? Who may be running? Who could win? Who shouldn’t bother? We asked our immense spy network and boy, were they willing to dish it!
The County Council at-large race is fascinating for several reasons. First, it is the only race along with County Executive that covers the entire county. Not even Congressional candidates have to run in that much territory. Second, since there are four at-large County Council Members, voters can pick up to four candidates. The sort of conventional calculations of candidates taking votes away from each other don’t always work out the way they do in a one-seat race. The winning candidates often attract support from different groups in the county and can have vigorous disagreements after they take office. Third, the resources needed to run at-large draw in all of the county’s political factions: business, labor, civic activists, immigrants, municipal and state officials and more. Everybody gets sucked into the at-large race whether they want to be or not!
We believe all four incumbents are running for re-election. In February, we ranked their chances and have seen nothing to change our opinion since then.
George Leventhal
Leventhal finished first in the 2006 Democratic primary, had a greater cash balance than any other at-large incumbent and has been raising money ever since. He is supported by a broad coalition of business, labor, non-profit, immigrant and civic groups and increased his visibility by working to get Nancy Navarro elected. We still believe Leventhal will finish first in 2010.
Nancy Floreen
Floreen was left off the Apple Ballot in 2006 and finished fourth in the primary. Since then, she has rebuilt her ties to labor and has maintained her business base. She is raising money and also gave substantial aid to Navarro, which should give her additional support. Floreen is a dogged campaigner who should not be underestimated. We are picking her second.
Marc Elrich
Elrich finally won in his fifth County Council race as an Apple Ballot insurgent. His recipe for success combined his Downcounty base, labor support, civic support and backing from the slow-growth movement that was very active in 2006. Elrich has maintained his civic constituency but has not raised any money and has had ups and downs with labor. We believe he must pick up his fundraising and renew his ties with the public employee unions or he will face a challenging race for re-election. One complication for his finances is that he refuses all developer contributions.
Duchy Trachtenberg
Trachtenberg ran as a slow-growth, pro-labor progressive and rode the Apple Ballot to victory last time. She has five big problems. First, the slow-growth movement is not what it once was. Second, her labor record has probably burned away most of her union support. Third, she has not been raising money. Fourth, other than the GLBT community (which she helped as the champion of the transgender anti-discrimination law), no powerful faction in the county has an incentive to work hard for her re-election. Fifth, her hard work for Ben Kramer in the 2009 District 4 special election will not be forgotten by some progressives. She is the most vulnerable incumbent.
Incumbents usually don’t go down easy. But they do go down. In 2002, at-large Council Member Ike Leggett vacated his seat to become Chairman of the state Democratic Party. A ruthless onslaught by then-County Executive Doug Duncan and the business community ousted at-large incumbent Blair Ewing from office, producing two freshmen (Floreen and Leventhal). Four years later, at-large Council Member Steve Silverman left his seat to run unsuccessfully for County Executive. The slow-growth climate and MCEA’s decision to leave Floreen and incumbent Mike Subin off the Apple Ballot combined to again produce an incumbent loss (by Subin) and two freshmen (Elrich and Trachtenberg).
We believe that one or perhaps two at-large seats may turn over next year. And so we tapped our underground informant organization to evaluate the actual, potential and even the improbable challengers. But first we have a number of questions about important factors in the next race. We’ll ask those questions in Part Two.
Sunday, June 07, 2009
Preservation: Looking at Our Heritage and Our Future
By Sharon Dooley.
Growing up in New England, as I did, one becomes infused with history from an early age. In my community and others nearby there were constant reminders; as one drives from town to town, each town is announced with a sign noting when it was founded or incorporated. In my town just north of Boston the sign stated our founding in the 1630’s – that is right – close to 400 years ago. The stone Congregational Church (descendant of the Pilgrims) was built in the 1700’s; the oldest building in town dates back to the previous century. So when I see debates about Historic preservation – I understand the importance of retaining important memories from years and cultures long passed. Many who grew up in areas that had colonial settlements have had similar experiences.
The current debate in Montgomery County – so well described by Ann Marimow in the Post Metro section recently brings this conversation home to Montgomery County.
The question asked was: “ when is a building “just old” and when is it historic?” I might also ask is every old building salvageable? How many old barns do we need to preserve? Should we require a farmer to preserve a building that no longer has a use to him? All of these are important questions and need to be explored further when the council takes up Mike Knapp’s proposal to allow owners to walk away from historic preservation designation if they so wish. But as with many questions in Montgomery County – there are complexities that lie beneath the surface.
Over the years preservationists have saved many structures from destruction and have kept some unique buildings intact. Examples such as the Comsat Building in Clarksburg, the AFI Theatre in Silver Spring and Higgins Tavern in Olney are just a few of the prominent architectural types that dot our county and have had major campaigns to preserve and/or restore them. In Olney, an historic Spring House was discovered along Route 108; it was over grown with vines and weeds but was restored when a nearby building was constructed. (Here the owners revised their development plans in order to preserve the building.)
Some might say that the discussion should be ‘how many old barns should we save’ versus the ‘save every old thing’ crowd. Others might indicate the necessity to understand our heritage by showing where we have been is vital by using places to mark this history - the recent purchase by the Parks Department of Josiah Henson’s Cabin along Old Georgetown Road is an example. (Henson was notable as the slave on whom Uncle Tom’s Cabin was modeled and he and his family went on to prominence in later years.) Several of the most recent historic sites in the County are noted in this map that accompanied the article referenced above.
In my view – since once something is torn down, it cannot be restored, our community should always be cautious with irreplaceable architecture. We need to be able to have a heritage to leave to our following generations. In ancient Greece and Rome the crumbling public structures are maintained and honored by their communities; ours are not 2000 years old - does that mean we should do less? I think not. We need to be careful not to amend our heritage out of existence. We also must be careful not to harm property owners. When properties are designated historic, the owners receive advantages in their taxes since the property has an easement on it and that is considered to reduce its value. When properties are considered in a district other special considerations apply and restrict use and modifications to those in keeping with the area. Therefore some who have advantages in one manner should not be able to have subsequent owners say – “never mind- we are no longer historic.” What should happen if an historic tiny church wants to expand its footprint as the congregation has grown – how should this be accommodated? What should happen if someone wants to place a fast food enterprise in an historic zone – what should be the approved façade? These are all questions that require serious study and should be answered. I hope with the assistance of each of the County interests having a say; these matters can be adequately addressed in hearings.
The council, as Marimow described, is going to consider a bill on Monday that would weaken many current protections and might change historic designations significantly in the future. By requiring a super majority on the historic preservation commission to approve changes, two persons could stall future designations. It appears to me that we should look toward some compromises that might allow a bit of flexibility. If a people purchase property next to a current historic building, there should be some assurances that this is going to remain ‘undeveloped’, so to speak. If maintaining properties are financially difficult for some owners, then perhaps the county could provide some resources to reduce these hardships by means of training artisans who are skilled in the trades of the past. We could have a restoration job corps bank, or a collection of old boards and bricks to aid in maintenance. Owners could apply for grants to preserve upkeep. This, to me is better than the county producing what is in effect a license to tear down buildings that the owner no longer wants. By lowering the bar we reduce our ability to learn from the past; this is not in our collective interest as a community.
Saturday, June 06, 2009
Friday, June 05, 2009
Andres Teams Up with Delegate Al Carr to Bag Some Publicity
Check out the last item in this Gazette article. It's a hilarious - and successful - attempt by Delegate Al Carr and little Andres to promote Al's reusable bag bill. Since the District of Columbia is on the verge of passing a similar law, Al's bill (along with Andres) has a bright future. Andres and the whole family offer their thanks to Delegate Carr and Gazette reporter Sean Sedam.
Little Andres is all bagged up and ready to go!
At Least We Aren’t California, Part Three
By Marc Korman.
In Parts 1 and 2 we explored California’s flawed political structure and failed reform. Today, we will see what warning signs there might be for Montgomery County in California’s troubles.
Before delving into some of the disturbing parallels between California and Montgomery County, we should make clear that the two are quite different in their size, political structure, and problems. But that does not mean we cannot learn some lessons.
Leadership Vacuum
Unlike California, Montgomery County does not have term limits. But a series of retirements, electoral defeats, and deaths have left the County Council short on experience. Exacerbating the problem is the fact that each year the Council has a new President and Vice President. Just as sooner or later, every Californian will be Speaker of their Assembly, every Montgomery County resident will have a crack at Council President.
A change should not be rushed into, but the County should consider increasing the length of the Council President term to two or four years but still have the Council elect one of their own or convert it to an elected office where candidates could specifically run for Council President. A new leadership position could improve political stability and reduce Council infighting.
Flawed Political Systems
Until this past November, Montgomery County had a sensible charter limit on property taxes. It kept the rate low, but allowed seven of nine councilmembers to agree to raise rates above the limits if absolutely necessary. With such a small legislative body, it made sense to have such a high standard to pierce the limit. If voters did not think an increase justified, as one notable regular reader of Maryland Politics Watch would argue, they could make it an issue at the next election.
Unfortunately, the Ficker Amendment turned a sensible policy into a ticking fiscal time bomb. The Amendment to the charter which passed into law in 2008 requires nine out of nine members to agree before the charter limit is pierced. In fact, the Amendment specifically requires nine members, so if there is a vacancy during the budget process, as there was this year, it would be legally impossible for the Council to break the charter limit regardless of the need or popular support.
Rule by Initiative
And speaking of the Ficker Amendment, Republicans in Montgomery County seemed to have discovered their love for direct democracy by embracing ballot initiatives. Robin Ficker has been pursuing his policy agenda that way for years, but last year saw an attempt by some to petition the County’s transgender protections to the ballot with a fear mongering campaign. The ballot initiative was averted only due to a technicality. Complicated legal and political questions should not be dealt with that way. Done poorly, it could lead Montgomery County towards a California-style system where laws are a patchwork of poorly understood charter amendments and repealed statutes with no sensible structure and a complete lack of accountability by elected leaders.
Unlike California, the government in Montgomery County still works well. But seeing what institutional failings have brought California to the edge can serve as a cautionary tale for our county and other places throughout the country.
Thursday, June 04, 2009
WSSC Spills Raw Sewage into Piscataway Creek
PG Politics forwarded us this message about a raw sewage spill by WSSC into a Potomac River tributary. This raises an interesting question: how much pollution is WSSC creating in the Chesapeake Bay?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Kelly Canavan
Date: Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 1:31 PM
Subject: [PrinceGeorges_Discussion] WSSC saved you a trip to Piscataway; put your foot in your toilet instead.
To:
The AMP Creeks Council
The Accokeek, Mattawoman, Piscataway Creeks Communities Council
301.237.5040
301.283.0263 fax
P. O. Box 477, Accokeek, MD 20607
Hello, Elected Representatives, and Friends of The AMP Creeks Council!
Today WSSC spilled 30,500 gallons of raw sewage into Piscataway Creek. (See photo below, taken next to Piscataway Wastewater Treatment Plant.)
On May 11, 2009, WSSC spilled 30,000 gallons of raw sewage into Piscataway Creek.
That's 60,500 gallons minimum so far this year.
In 2008, as documented by WSSC, a minimum total of 7,358,000 gallons of sewage overflowed into Broad Creek/Piscataway.
Since Prince George's County policy makes sustainable farming here nearly impossible anyway, lets cross our fingers and hope for a drought. If the County won't help put food on the table, I don't know if we can depend on them to keep feces out of the water. And when it rains in South County, it frequently pours from WSSC.
The spills were not into drinking water. They were into recreational water that fish swim in. Reconsider fishing in those waters, especially if you plan to eat the fish. Today may not be the day to take the boat out.
Please let us know if you can help tidy up down here.
Thank you, and stay dry!
Kelly Canavan
President, The AMP Creeks Council
Delegate Anne Kaiser's End of Session Letter
April 2009
Dear Neighbors and Friends --
It’s hard to believe how quickly time goes by! Another 90-day legislative session in Maryland is behind us. Again, I was proud to put our shared values into action by advocating for continued progress in public education, equality and fair tax policies.
Let’s get right to it. I’ll go over some of this session’s highlights -- especially the state’s budget, our efforts to repeal the death penalty and also enhance our education policies. I’ll also discuss how our District 14 communities fared as well.
But first, I’d be remiss if I didn’t thank you once again for your trust. It has been my honor and privilege to try my best to foster a better quality of life for Marylanders by providing reasonable, responsive and responsible representation in the Maryland House of Delegates.
I believe the interests of our diverse communities are well represented, especially when Governor Martin O’Malley, Lt. Governor Anthony Brown, House of Delegates Speaker Mike Busch, Senator Rona Kramer and Delegates Karen Montgomery and Herman Taylor and I work together on public policy issues.
As you may know, more than 100,000 people reside in District 14 -- which includes: Ashton, Brookeville, Brinklow, Burtonsville, Calverton, Cloverly, Colesville, Damascus, Laytonsville, Olney, Sandy Spring, and parts of Silver Spring and West Laurel.
Maryland’s Budget: the Great Balancing Act of 2009
Like so many residents in Maryland, our state budget has suffered during these trying economic times. Because of the drop in tax revenues, the governor and the legislature have worked to tighten Maryland’s belt and, unfortunately, close its pocketbook to many worthy programs.
This year’s budget marked the first time in 30 years where the governor and the legislature reduced the operating budget from the prior year. This is certainly very different from the 11 percent increase that marked the end of my first four years in the House of Delegates.
While we certainly made significant reductions to state government operations, we did not lay off hundreds of state employees or turn our backs on the progress we’ve made in education, the environment or health care as appeared probable early in the session.
We continued our commitment to invest in K-12 education, fund teacher pensions, and freeze tuition for the fourth year in a row to make Maryland’s public universities more affordable.
We used to have the sixth highest tuition rate -- but because of the tuition freezes, we’re down to 16th.
The legislature also prioritized funding for the environment by making it possible for the state to purchase additional open space land parcels and to continue the ongoing efforts to clean up the Chesapeake Bay.
Kudos to Governor O’Malley and his team for restoring fiscal responsibility in Annapolis while managing the state’s complicated fiscal matters during very difficult economic times.
President Obama’s American Reinvestment and Recovery Act
Mid-way through the 90-day session, Maryland’s budget forecast became slightly less bleak when President Obama announced that his stimulus package included nearly $2 billion for Maryland.
Because of these new federal funds coming to Maryland over the next two years, we should see more than 50,000 new jobs, improvements to our transportation system and an increase in food stamps for the needy.
High-Fives All Around… Maryland is Number ONE in Public Education
According to Education Week, Maryland now has the best public schools in the nation. The best! I am so proud of our state for this impressive accomplishment -- and you should be too -- especially since the legislature has been allocating so much taxpayer money to the public schools. Since 2007, we’ve invested more than $2 billion in education and school construction and it has obviously paid off.
I firmly believe our state’s willingness to fund both early education and college readiness programs are also crucial components of this success.
In addition, as chair of the Education Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee, I see the state’s ability to provide a quality education for every student as our single most important endeavor for the next ten years -- if not beyond. I was fortunate to have been selected for this leadership role in 2007 by House Speaker Michael Busch.
Growing and Learning as an Elected Official
As a subcommittee chair, I am sometimes called upon by Speaker Busch to explain the intent and predicted outcomes of particular education-related legislative proposals.
These explanations occur during full sessions of the House of Delegates -- when all 141 members are seated together in the chamber with the public looking on from the gallery. Some of these explanations are simple and take just a minute or two, while others require a great deal of preparation.
All in all, I think my ‘performance’ in this setting has improved tremendously over the last two sessions. My understanding of the issues is richer, my public speaking ability is stronger and my preparation is greater, thereby giving your needs and concerns a stronger, more resonant voice in Annapolis.
Statewide Progress on Social Issues of Interest
I believe the death penalty is unfair, unjust and unwise public policy. I do not trust the government to always be perfect at investigating crimes and prosecuting people. Often, convictions and death penalty sentences are overturned for a wide range of reasons.
While I was disappointed that the legislature refused to throw out the death penalty all together -- we did place mighty restrictions on the use of the death penalty by requiring a much higher standard of evidence before a judge can hand down a death sentence.
In regards to other issues, we passed legislation to make it more difficult for domestic violence perpetrators to get guns and easier for same-sex couples to inherit jointly owned homes.
Notable Changes and Enhancements to Maryland’s Public Education Policies
Specifically this session, the Education Subcommittee dealt with a range of issues, including early childhood education; increasing bargaining rights for support service employees in schools; child obesity and related health issues; and making education spending more transparent in Montgomery County schools.
In their own unique ways, each of these issues strengthens our public school system, and I was proud to play a role in moving these public policies forward.
I was also delighted to be the primary co-sponsor of Governor O’Malley’s bill to help reduce the education barriers that many children of military families face when they are forced to move to different states because their parents are carrying out their military duties and orders. A typical military family can move up to nine times in a 12-year period.
This measure first originated in 2007 when I was asked by Lt. Governor Brown and Ways and Means Committee Chairman Sheila Hixson to attend a conference on public education and military families. Governor O’Malley will sign the bill in just a few short weeks and when enacted, it will require schools to be much more flexible and understanding when military children enroll from out-of-state.
Here….Data…Data…Data…Come Out, Come Out Wherever You Are…
Let me be clear: good data is a cornerstone of good policy. There are no ifs ands or buts about that. Unfortunately, though, we don’t always have the data we need to make the best public policy decisions.
That’s why I introduced and passed two bills requiring the public school system to track key data to answer important questions in the near future: Do certain teacher training programs have greater impacts in the classroom? Are more minority students enrolling in and passing advanced placement courses?
One bill assigns an identification number to all teachers and the other creates a standardized course numbering system. These will ultimately expand the state's ability to measure student performance. Maryland has already gotten a $6.5 million federal grant because of these bills. And again, I was pleased to work with Governor O’Malley to pass them through both the House of Delegates and the State Senate.
Getting Our Heads Out of the Sand
It has always seemed odd to me that we penalize students if they come to school late or skip school all together by suspending them from school. While I certainly don’t want to encourage students to skip school -- I don’t believe it’s smart to punish them by making them miss even more school.
That’s why I introduced a measure prohibiting school principals from suspending or expelling a student from school solely for attendance-related offenses.
In addition, I also don’t understand why we withhold financial aid from students who take relatively small course loads. In these tough economic times, people need options for financing their higher education.
Many are working more hours for fewer dollars. I introduced legislation to allow financial aid officers in Maryland colleges and universities to offer aid to students who take 3-5 credits at a time. Some students are a few credits away from graduating but are forced to take fewer classes because of time and cost. Hopefully, this modest measure will help them get their respective degrees.
Notable Local Projects
Since the late 1800s, the Sharp Street United Methodist Church has worked extremely hard on behalf of the Sandy Spring community and will get a $50,000 matching grant from the state to build a new food pantry to better serve those in need in our community.
The Olney Boys and Girls Club provides sports and other programs for more than 7,000 children in our community. It also has a historic landmark on its property called Falling Green, so named by property owner Mary Briggs Brooke in 1824. The District 14 legislative team worked hard to get $150,000 to preserve this historic building and convert it into the organization’s office and caretaker residence.
And -- one of the jewels of our district -- the Olney Theatre will get $150,000 to expand their campus. I hope you have been able to take in a theatre production there -- they are really fabulous!
Also, on the home front, Montgomery County will be receiving at least $26 million for school construction. The Germantown Bioscience Center is slated to receive $32 million over the next two years, complementing the strong biotechnology presence in our county.
A Special Thanks to Artists and Community Groups
I am proud to decorate my Annapolis office with some of the districts finest points of interest, including the work of Miche Booz from Ashton and Donna McNeil from Damascus.
I also have images from the Trolley Museum, Olney Theatre, Olney Boys and Girls Club, the Sandy Spring Museum, Project Change and the Sandy Spring Slave Museum. If you happen to be in Annapolis, I welcome you to stop by my office and take a look at the great artwork.
In Closing...A New Hobby: Terrapin Pride
So…I was never a fan of women’s basketball… until just a few years ago when I started watching Coach Brenda Frese, point-guard Kristi Toliver and forward Marissa Coleman work their magic at the Comcast Center in College Park. It was such a joy to watch this special team win the ACC Tournament this year and advance to Elite 8 in the NCAA tournament.
I am hooked -- they are so fun to watch! Please let me know if you ever want to come with me to a game. The basketball season runs November through March (madness).
Again, it’s my absolute honor to represent our community. My success is completely dependent on your continued guidance, suggestions and support. Thank you for all of your visits, calls and e-mails.
Sincerely,
Anne R. Kaiser
P.S. -- I would love to come to one of your community meetings to discuss your issues of interest. Feel free to call me at 301-858-3036 if I can ever be of assistance. Here’s to a great summer filled with great barbequed food and terrific friends!
Editor's Note: Delegate Anne Kaiser has represented District 14 (Ashton, Brinklow, Brookeville, Burtonsville, Calverton, Cloverly, Colesville, Damascus, Fairland, Goshen, Laytonsville, Montgomery Village, Olney, Sandy Spring, Silver Spring, Spencerville and Sunshine) since 2002.
At Least We Aren’t California, Part Two
By Marc Korman.
In Part 1, we briefly looked at California’s current budget problems and some of the institutional barriers to any real change. In Part 2, we will look at California’s missed opportunity for reform. Then in Part 3 we will draw some parallels with Montgomery County.
In 2002, as Democrats went down in defeat all across the country, California’s unpopular Democratic Governor, Gray Davis, was reelected (Full disclosure, I spent approximately a year interning in Governor Davis’ office and volunteering on his campaign). At the time, California was going through severe budget problems exacerbated by the Internet bubble burst. Even before he was inaugurated for a second term, Davis’ opponents were circulating petitions to recall him. They would succeed in forcing a special election to decide the recall less than a year after Davis was reelected, largely thanks to the funding by wealthy GOP Congressman Darrell Issa.
The 2003 recall ballot was bifurcated. Question 1 asked California’s voters whether they wanted to recall Governor Davis. Regardless of their answer, voters could pick a replacement candidate in Question 2. 135 names would appear in the list of replacements.
The initial Democratic strategy was to encourage voters to vote no on Question 1 and leave Question 2 blank. For at least a week, party officials and Gray Davis tried to convince potential Democratic candidates to stay out of the race, most notably Dianne Feinstein. But the strategy collapsed when Insurance Commissioner John Garimendi, an elected office in California, filed for the ballot. A new strategy was quickly initiated, “No on Recall, Yes on Bustamante,” with the then Lieutenant Governor bumping the Insurance Commissioner out of the race and serving as the consensus Democratic candidate in case the recall succeeded.
Of course, the real notables in the field were not on the Democratic side. On the Republican side, Arnold Schwarzenegger jumped into the race, bumping aside 2002 Republican nominee Bill Simon, Congressman Issa, and former LA Mayor Richard Riordan. On Election Day, Davis was recalled and Schwarzenegger became governor.
Having beaten an establishment Democrat and a conservative Republican (Tom McClintock), Governor Schwarzenegger was positioned with his large personality to bring the state together. His first proposals were basically a rehash of Davis’ solutions to the immediate budget deficit, massive government bonds. But unlike Davis, the new Governor could sell the proposals to the public. He also began courting legislators of both parties, famously setting up a cigar smoking tent outside of the state house to woo them. Of course, it was not a golden age. Schwarzennager also reversed a car fee being used to help balance the budget, a decision he would later regret due to the cost, and spent a lot of time blaming his predecessor and the Democratic legislature for the state’s problems.
But instead of boldly pursuing bipartisan efforts with the Democrat dominated legislature and seeking fundamental reform to the way California does business, the Governor backed a package of four ballot initiatives in a special election in 2005 that managed to anger the Democratic legislators he needed and cause the voters to turn against him. The package included a proposition setting overall spending limits and altering California’s required education funding, an initiative to require independent redistricting of legislative and Congressional districts, an initiative to make it easier to fire teachers who have worked for between two and five years, and a proposal to limit political spending by public employee unions. All went down in defeat.
Some of these reforms might have been necessary, but they also favored the right wing and outraged the dominant left leaning interest groups in California. Had the Governor combined these efforts with some left leaning or moderate reforms, he might have gotten at least some passed. Instead, he spent the next year fighting for reelection and has been treading water since then. Governor Schwarzenneger is very popular at press conferences and Sunday morning talk shows, but the Democratic legislature ignores him and the California Republican Party does not even invite him to their statewide conventions.
The question for California is whether any of the prospective gubernatorial candidates for 2010, when Schwarzennger is term limited, can do any better. The question for Montgomery County is what can we learn from California’s turmoil? We will take a look in Part 3.
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
At Least We Aren’t California, Part One
By Marc Korman.
At the last Montgomery County Young Democrats meeting, Councilmember Elrich was summarizing the County’s dire budget situation. One Young Democrat leader joked “at least we aren’t California.” Everyone laughed, but the thought of the comparison should give us brief pause. In Part 1, we will look at California’s institutional barriers to real reform that are deepening its budget crisis. In Part 2, we will discuss California’s missed chance of reform. Finally, in Part 3 we will examine some of the emerging comparisons between California and Montgomery County.
California and Montgomery County are both wealthier than most of their state or county peers. They are also both dominated by Democrats. Montgomery County’s elected leadership is entirely Democratic. California Democrats are not quite as dominant. The state’s governor is a nominal Republican, though what few friends in the legislature he has are on the Democratic side of the aisle. The state Senate has 26 Democrats and 14 Republicans. The Assembly has 51 Democrats and 29 Republicans.
Earlier in May, California voters (or at least the 28% or so who showed up to vote) rejected five of the six statewide propositions that were designed to save the state from its budget turmoil. California is facing an approximately $24 billion budget deficit. The package of initiatives that recently failed would have plugged most, though not all, of that hole through a combination of fund shifting and borrowing.
Although popular news stories are linking California’s problems to the general economic crisis, they are only tangentially related. It is true that California’s revenues have declined with the economy and California’s massive borrowing has gotten more difficult with the recession. But California was in trouble long before the housing bubble burst and the finance system collapsed.
Those on the left lay the blame for California’s woes at the feet of Proposition 13, the 1978 ballot initiative which capped property taxes at 1% of the property’s assessed value and limited increases in property taxes to 2% a year until there was a change of ownership. Those on the right blame California’s problems on its spending, which has grown quickly despite two major destabilizing California specific economic events in the past quarter century: the end of the Cold War which hurt the aerospace industry and the bursting of the Internet bubble which sent shockwaves through Silicon Valley.
But California’s current structural problems did not begin with the so-called tax revolution or the liberally spending elected leaders from Earl Warren to Arnold Schwarzenneger. Progressive Governor Hiram Johnson helped bring about the initiative, referendum, and recall in the state in the 1910s, firmly establishing California as a bastion of direct democracy. Since then, further statutory and constitutional changes have made California virtually ungovernable by elected leadership. Among the institutional barriers to reform are:
The 2/3 Budget Rule
In order to pass a budget, 2/3 of the legislature is required to vote in favor of it. Even the dominant Democrats have not been able to muster the type of numbers necessary and the partisan politics in Sacramento have prevented most legislators from crossing party lines. This has led to gridlock and brinkmanship during annual budget negotiations.
Overuse of the Ballot
California has a low standard to petition initiatives to the ballot, which can either be statutes or constitutional amendments. Constitutional amendments require an amount equal to 8% of registered voters who voted in the last gubernatorial election. Statutes, just 5%.
These low barriers to the ballot have led to major, complicated legislative packages being passed by the ballot box. The vast majority are bond and budget bills. As a result, California has a debt servicing level of 6% of its budget, compared to just 2% for Maryland. 85% of the state’s budget is controlled by state initiative, as opposed to legislative action. Meaning when it comes time to negotiate that budget requiring 2/3 of the legislature, they are really only negotiating around the edges.
Term Limits
California has strict term limits, holding Assembly members to three two year terms and State Senators to two four year terms. No state has shorter limits than California, though other states share the same length. These have led to three major problems:
1. Expertise in the legislature is almost entirely with the staff, not the elected officials. When I lived in California we had a joke, sooner or later every Californian would be Speaker of the California Assembly. That was because the Speaker would either be a new legislator who did not know what they were doing or a veteran legislature who was about to be term limited out. The job had a lot of turnover.
2. Elected officials care less about the long term effects of their action because they will not be in that office when problems arise.
3. Elected officials are constantly looking for their next political job, even more so than the usual politico. That means they are constantly playing to their base, raising money, and generally ignoring their actual work.
Recall
California famously recalled its sitting Governor in 2003, the second time in US history that has occurred. But recall efforts are being funded on a semi-regular basis to seek political vengeance. To get a recall on the ballot, supporters need to collect signatures equaling 12% of those who voted in that race in the last election. Most recall efforts do not get past the signature gathering stage, but that energy would be better served towards defeating candidates for reelection.
Next time, we will look at California’s missed chance at reform.
Duchy Trachtenberg’s Labor Record
Council Member Duchy Trachtenberg recently wrote to the Gazette protesting a flyer critical of her that was distributed by the Municipal and County Government Employees Organization (MCGEO) at the Montgomery County Democrats’ Spring Ball. The exchange between Ms. Trachtenberg and MCGEO may have been entertaining, but it is time to put aside the rhetoric and focus on the underlying issue: Ms. Trachtenberg’s labor record.
Consider the following:
1. When Council Members George Leventhal and Marc Elrich introduced a bill to require contracts for domestic workers Ms. Trachtenberg criticized it as providing “false promises” and said that education of workers was the answer. After the bill’s advocates pushed back, Ms. Trachtenberg eventually supported it.
2. In 2008, Ms. Trachtenberg proposed a two-point cost-of-living reduction for public employees at a time when the county could afford to abide by their contracts. She did not have enough votes to push the reduction through the council.
3. Last summer, the county’s Inspector General issued a report describing management oversight problems in the disability program. Ms. Trachtenberg and her colleague, Phil Andrews, responded with a bill that would have dictated collective bargaining outcomes even when that idea was never proposed by the report. In the end, only those items agreed to by the County Executive and the police union were approved by the council.
4. Prior to the 2009 District 4 primary, Ms. Trachtenberg did not support a proposal to allow early voting. That proposal would have aided working people with multiple jobs and long hours to vote on days other than Tuesday, including the weekend.
5. Ms. Trachtenberg twice opposed District 4 candidate Nancy Navarro, who was supported two years in a row by nearly the entire county’s labor movement. The candidates Ms. Trachtenberg backed instead were Don Praisner, who voted against prevailing wage, and Ben Kramer, who had the worst labor record of any Montgomery Delegate. Furthermore, Ms. Trachtenberg has employed Eric Hensal, who managed both campaigns opposing Navarro, as an advisor in seeking concessions from the unions.
6. Ms. Trachtenberg co-sponsored the Montgomery County prevailing wage law, which protected labor standards on county-owned construction projects. She deserves great credit for supporting that bill. (Disclosure: your author lobbied for it.) She also deserves credit for being a firm advocate of light rail on the Purple Line, a project that enjoys the support of a large coalition including labor.
Ms. Trachtenberg was understandably unhappy about MCGEO’s comparison of her to the infamous former Senator Joseph McCarthy (R-WI). Those are not the words of your author. We do not believe that Senator McCarthy is a suitable comparison for any Montgomery office holder, including the Council Member.
But Ms. Trachtenberg’s overall record is a disappointment to most of labor. Time after time, they have asked for her support and found her on the opposite side. Labor expects that from Council Member Phil Andrews, a principled budget hawk who honestly – and civilly – disagrees with most of their priorities. It is a different thing coming from Ms. Trachtenberg, who is the granddaughter of a union organizer and still claims to be pro-union even while repeatedly voting against them.
Look at all the labor organizations that endorsed Duchy Trachtenberg in 2006.
Given her record, how empty will that page be next year?
Examiner Writes MoCo Blog Round-Up
Examiner reporter Claire Pak wrote a piece about four MoCo blogs: Just Up the Pike, Rockville Central, Gaithersblog and MPW. On MPW, she writes, "Maryland Politics Watch covers Maryland politics with a focus on Montgomery County. David Lublin and Adam Pagnucco update more than once daily, and their sharp, detailed commentary often sparks heated (but generally civil) debate in the comments."
Hmmm... I wonder if she was thinking about the comments in our now-infamous "Is Leggett Undermining Navarro on Day One?" post?
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Now Nevada is Ahead of Maryland Too
On Sunday night, the Nevada legislature overrode the governor's veto of a domestic partnership law giving same-sex couples essentially the same rights and responsibilities of married couples.
Kagan Sweetens Up District 17
We don’t normally pay attention to many fundraisers. But this one is newsworthy since it is a harbinger of the most competitive Senate race in the county so far in this cycle.
Former Delegate Cheryl Kagan, who is challenging incumbent Senator Jennie Forehand, sent out this sugar-coated fundraising invitation. Check out the people on her 158-member host committee.
For us, the names that jump out are Montgomery County Council Members Nancy Floreen, Mike Knapp and Valerie Ervin, former Senator (and Forehand predecessor) Mary Boergers (D-17), former Delegate Gene Counihan (D-39), career Fire Fighters President John Sparks, Council Member George Leventhal’s Chief of Staff Patty Vitale, former (and perhaps future) County Council candidate Hans Riemer, former Board of Education Member (and former Republican) Steve Abrams, former MCDCC Chairman Stan Gildenhorn and Somerset Mayor Jeff Slavin, a major player in the GLBT community and a prominent supporter of Nancy Navarro. Absent are any sitting state legislators or current members of the Rockville or Gaithersburg City Councils, though few would expect them to take sides against an incumbent Senator. As for Valerie Ervin, we hear that she has given money to both Kagan and Forehand and is not endorsing either of them.
Last February, we ranked Senator Forehand as the Montgomery state legislator who most needed to do more to get ready for 2010. Kagan raised a net $20,634.69 last year – far more than any other potential challenger – and started 2009 with $44,224.76 in the bank. Forehand had $71,044.34 but only raised $4,705.66 net. Kagan is making it clear that she will have more than enough money to be competitive and has already assembled an impressive supporter list.
For weeks, one hot rumor held that Delegate Luiz Simmons (D-17) might also challenge Forehand, making this contest a three-way race. Our most recent information indicates that all four District 17 incumbents (Forehand, Simmons and Delegates Kumar Barve and Jim Gilchrist) will run as a slate. That is good news for Forehand, who will need help fending off her extraordinarily energetic challenger.
One observer who is closely watching the race offered this:It's very interesting that certain high-profile electeds were willing to endorse her this early against a sitting Dem senator, particularly the County Council members (Knapp, Floreen, Ervin, etc.). It's no secret that many of us dislike Forehand and find her ineffectual, but it's suprising that they would say so publicly. To be fair, Forehand has generally voted the right way on most votes in Annapolis, unlike the Ida Ruben/Jamie Raskin race, where Ruben could be pegged as more conservative. And kicking her out would be a blow to MoCo's seniority in the Senate. If Cheryl can make this the next Ruben/Raskin race, she's in good shape, but I think she faces a different climate in a post-Bush world where Dems are generally running the show now, and change is already here. The "we need change" mantra rings a tad hollow after '06 and '08. It's sort of hopping on the bandwagon too late.
And one of our most intelligent spies said this about Kagan’s fundraiser:
I would have thought that electeds would try to be cautious on this one. It's not clear that Cheryl can win. People need a reason to vote against Jennie. And Cheryl, despite being smart and organized, can really rub people the wrong way with her aggressive, brash style. So, all that being said, I am surprised so many electeds and certain well-known D-17 activists agreed to lend their names to this flyer -- especially when we are well over a year away from the primary. I think it bodes well for her that she has "locked them in" so early. But I don't know if it will translate into votes. We'll see. I also worry that Cheryl could "peak too early" at this rate, leaving little excitement and momentum left for summer 2010. On the other hand, this early show of strong support for Cheryl might cause Jennie to think twice about retirement (sort of another Len Teitelbaum situation), since Jennie surely isn't capable of performing well at debates or of doing any door-knocking. I am hearing that the unions will stick with Jennie because she is an incumbent, is reliable, and generally votes the right way.
I'd like to know what Knapp, Ervin, Floreen, and other bigwigs on the host committee have to say about why there are supporting Cheryl this early on.
Another thought - the demographics of D-17 have shifted dramatically in recent years. To the extent that Jennie has a voting bloc, it's the older voters. Of course, they are the ones most likely to turn out for a primary in 2010, but D-17 isn't the sleepy place it was 20 years ago, and Jennie hasn't had a challenger in many years.I think that it serves as a wake up call for Sen. Forehand to kick it into gear and not take Cheryl for granted. Before Cheryl gains any traction or momentum, Sen. Forehand needs to demonstrate that she still believes she has a lot to offer to her constituents and State of Maryland. I believe that Sen. Forehand does have a long list of accomplishments to point to and is generally well liked and regarded. But in politics, I think it is equally, if not more, important to talk about what you will do for your constituents and the state going forward in the future as well. This is something Sen. Forehand needs to effectively convey now - her vision and agenda going forward. And she needs to demonstrate a broad and deep base of support with a host committee of her own or by some other means, all of which I currently think she can do. There is still plenty of time to go!
Yes there is, folks. And you can bet we will be watching!
Monday, June 01, 2009
Welcome, Andres Calisto Pagnucco!
Vital Statistics:
Date of Birth: June 1, 2009
Time of Birth: 12:57 PM
Place of Birth: Holy Cross Hospital, Silver Spring, MD
Length: 21 inches
Weight: 8 pounds, 5.1 ounces
Party Registration: Democrat
Primary Challenges?
By Marc Korman.
Statewide, most of the discussion of the 2010 Primaries revolves around whether Baltimore County Executive Jim Smith will challenge Comptroller Peter Franchot. But two Democrats have recently made noise about challenging Governor Martin O’Malley as well: Former Prince George’s County Executive Wayne Curry and Former Delegate and state Veterans Affairs Secretary George W. Owings III.
Each potential candidate has their own constituency and political base, but either one would have an uphill climb. A January 2009 poll by Gonzalez Research & Marketing Strategies pegged O’Malley’s approval rating among Democrats at 65%, compared to 49% over all. At O’Malley’s low of 37% approval in March 2008, his approval rating among Democrats was 48%.
Owings served as a Delegate from Calvert County until 2002, when he moved to Governor Ehrlich’s administration as Secretary of Veterans Affairs. Owings claims to speak for “solid, working-class Democrats.” His base of Calvert County is a growing force in the Maryland Democratic Party. The County picked up 3,000 registered Democrats from 2004 to 2008 and Obama improved on John Kerry’s performance, drawing 46.1% of the vote compared to Kerry’s 40.6%. O’Malley lost Calvert in the 2006 general election, but he did improve on Kathleen Kennedy Townsend’s vote total by about 3,000 votes.
Wayne Curry served as County Executive in Prince George’s from 1994 to 2002. Since then, he has been rumored for numerous campaigns in both the Republican and Democratic Parties. In 2006, he very publicly floated with the possibility of crossing party lines to take Michael Steele’s place as Ehrlich’s running mate. Curry also endorsed Steele in his U.S. Senate race, a move that did little to help the candidate against Ben Cardin.
Both Curry and Owings would have almost no choice but to challenge O’Malley from the right, given their records. Owings would likely try to draw more moderate white Democrats with a populist message. Curry would be attempting to attract African American Democrats. His message is not as obvious, but he could try to draw more conservative, church going African Americans from the incumbent. The black vote makes up a substantial percentage of the Democratic vote in Maryland and is a necessary ingredient to any Democratic victory.
There has not been a contested Democratic Gubernatorial Primary in Maryland in many years to offer a meaningful comparison, but the odds that either of these candidates has a real shot at O’Malley are pretty long. Primaries tend to bring out base voters, so challenging a candidate from the right in a Democratic Primary is not a winning strategy. That is especially the case in Maryland, where a more moderate candidate will have difficulty painting a progressive Democrat as unelectable.
O’Malley’s running mate will also likely remain Anthony Brown and he was twice elected Mayor of a majority black city. Curry could probably draw some African American votes from the Governor, but a broad shift from O’Malley to Curry seems unlikely absent some new event.
Will either Owings or Curry jump into the race given all these facts? The months ahead will tell.
Is Leggett Undermining Navarro on Day One?
County Executive Ike Leggett was quick to endorse Nancy Navarro in the District 4 special general election after twice opposing her in the 2008 and 2009 special primaries. But Leggett’s efforts to patch things up with Navarro and her supporters may well be hindered by his appointment of a prominent Navarro opponent to a critical position in her district. It seems the battle for District 4 will never end.
On Friday, the Gazette reported that Leggett appointed Joy Nurmi as the new Acting Director of the East County Regional Services Center. Nurmi is a former Chief of Staff to both Marilyn and Don Praisner. But she is far more than that.
Joy Nurmi once worked for Republican County Council Member Betty Ann Krahnke (R-1), who stepped down from her seat in 2000 and died in 2002. The Maryland Voter Activation Network lists Nurmi as a former “Republican Voter” and she contributed to the county’s GOP. She is now a registered Democrat.
Nurmi was never merely a staffer. She was also a political supporter of the Praisners. In 2006, Nurmi bought office supplies for Marilyn Praisner’s campaign.
In 2008, Nurmi was one of Don Praisner’s key supporters in his bid to succeed his wife despite her employment on the council staff. The Post reported that Nurmi and William Klein, a press aide to Council Member Duchy Trachtenberg, conferred with Praisner campaign manager Eric Hensal during working hours. And Don Praisner’s original website, which we preserved, listed Nurmi’s home phone number and email address as his campaign contact.
Don Praisner’s Gazette profile also listed Nurmi’s home phone number as his campaign contact.
Now Joy Nurmi is the Acting Director of the East County Regional Services Center. That is a powerful position. The directors of the county’s five regional services centers are the County Executive’s liaisons to the community, including to the area citizens advisory boards, and coordinate service provision to residents. Some compare them to appointed “mayors” and they are especially important in areas without municipalities – like East County. Regional services directors have lots of direct contact with activists and can make Council Members look good or bad. Nurmi is known to be a friend of Alison Klumpp, Marilyn Praisner’s daughter, who endorsed Ben Kramer and once had ambitions to run for the District 4 seat. Joy Nurmi is hardly the top choice of any Navarro supporter for the East County job, which covers half of District 4.
The regional services directors were once merit positions, meaning that they were filled by competitive application and could only be dismissed for cause. But one of Leggett’s first initiatives upon winning election was to convert those jobs into political positions, meaning that they serve at the pleasure of the Executive. The County Council passed a bill in 2007 making the change.
Sec. 1A-102 of the County Code says this about non-merit positions:(2) a. If the position of Chief Administrative Officer, head of a department or principal office, or any other position in the Executive Branch designated by law as a non-merit position, is vacant, the County Executive must appoint someone to fill the vacancy.
So if Joy Nurmi is to remain in her new position, the County Council must confirm her.
b. The County Executive should submit the appointment to the Council within 90 days after the vacancy occurs.
(3) a. Within 60 days, the Council should vote on confirmation of an appointment.
b. The affirmative votes of a majority of councilmembers in office are necessary to confirm an appointment.
(4) If the Council votes on an appointment, does not confirm it, and does not reconsider the vote, the County Executive must make a new appointment. The County Executive should make the new appointment within 90 days after the deadline for reconsidering the vote.
(5) If the Council does not act on confirmation of an appointment within 60 days, the Council may no longer vote on that appointment. Within 90 days after the end of the sixty-day period, the County Executive should either:
a. Resubmit the appointment; or
b. Submit a new appointment.
Back in 2007, no one imagined the succession of events that occurred in the District 4 seat. And if the Council had believed that the Executive would ever appoint a political opponent of a Council Member to serve as Regional Director in his or her district, they may very well not have approved his proposal to make them political jobs. But that is exactly what is about to happen to Nancy Navarro.
There is simply no way that Ike Leggett and his senior staff are unaware of the above facts. Joy Nurmi is a longtime supporter of Leggett’s and it makes sense that he would want to take care of her. But there are many other positions inside the government in which Nurmi could be placed without picking open the scab of the special elections. Whether it is intentional or not, Leggett’s appointment of Nurmi looks like an attempt to undermine Navarro’s tenure even before it starts. Will the County Council allow it? We’ll see.
