Just got a note from the Harris campaign about two upcoming radio appearances:
Tomorrow at 10:30 a.m. he’ll be a guest on Mike McDermott’s radio show on Pocomoke’s radio station, AM 540.
Friday morning he’ll be Bill Reddish’s guest at 7:40 a.m. (WICO-AM 1320) talking about the special session.
So it’s a chance to hear the candidate speak for himself.
A little over two months ago, I sent the following list of questions to many of those who seek the Congressional seat here in the First Congressional District. The others should have received a copy in their e-mail a month or so ago. But even after I called them all out, I’ve still received only silence.
With that in mind, I’m going to release them now in the hopes that more people call on these candidates (and those from any other district, they’re not written to be specific to mine) to answer what I consider tough questions that provoke thought and seek specific solutions to issues we all face. All I ask is that if you use them on your site, give me credit (Michael Swartz at www.monoblogue.us) A link would be nice, too.
So here goes, questions the candidates are afraid to answer:
It’ll be interesting to see just how far this goes, won’t it? I’m not holding my breath on getting answers, but maybe if enough people with enough pull ask the questions we may get somewhere. How about basing your political contributions on getting answers? That’s a thought – we all know money talks and you-know-what walks!
Crossposted on Red Maryland.
Tonight the hot-button issue du jour is border security and illegal immigration. Hopefully it’s come across in my writings that I’m an immigration hawk, so amnesty does not play here.
At the end of this post, I will also devote space to “catching up” GOP hopeful Robert Banks with the rest of the field. He didn’t embellish his website until last week, so I have to cover what he says about previous issues after I take care of the immigration portion for all the candidates, including him.
I think this time I’ll allow the last to be first and start with John Leo Walter, whose position starts with border security.
Andy Harris devotes probably his largest issues page to the subject.
Incumbent Wayne Gilchrest has this to say:
Wayne has voted for tough immigration legislation including measures to secure our borders with more border control agents and the construction of effective barriers, while opposing proposals to grant blanket amnesty for illegal aliens. Wayne believes that securing our borders is critical to fight against terrorism, and to protect our domestic economy and American workers. Wayne has also co-sponsored legislation to make English the “Official” language of the United States.
I’ll welcome Robert Banks to the fray by recounting his statement:
I do not believe in amnesty for illegal immigrants – no matter what value they have to our economy. Breaking the law is breaking the law. We cannot afford to reward illegal immigrants with a “free pass.” At the same time, we cannot afford to provide healthcare, education, and welfare to those who have chosen to remain citizens of other countries while enjoying our freedoms and benefits.
Immigration reform begins with real border control and law enforcement to ensure our nation’s security. Until we secure the border and effectively enforce the immigration laws on the books, illegal immigration will continue – and I find that unacceptable.
Once again, I refer to Joe Arminio‘s most recent tome for his stance:
How should the immigration problem be solved? New legislation would set legal immigration numbers at the appropriate lower level. (Elsewhere in his book Arminio suggests a number per year of 0.1% of the total population, which translates to about 300,000 immigrants annually.) What is called attrition through law enforcement would enforce such legislation. There would be random searches. Law breaking businesses would be prosecuted. Illegal immigrants would be rounded up and sent back, deep beyond our own borders. In time, fewer buslinesses and fewer foreigners would attempt to breach the immigration laws.
For the Democrats, Frank Kratovil makes it almost a clean sweep of candidates on what’s arguably the most important issue to a number of Eastern Shore voters.
This is a key issue for me, and there’s 25 points up for grabs. Surprisingly, all of those I review will get at least a few.
John Leo Walter has a very sound immigration plan and one I can’t disagree with, except I think that more pressure needs to be placed on the employer side. He leaves that step out and to me it’s right up there with border security. However, he still earns 15 points.
The same can be said for Andy Harris, who has a lot of specifics with the exception of dealing with that part of the equation. Yes, we know the Chamber of Commerce types will scream bloody murder, but that’s the breaks. He also gets 15 points for his efforts.
This is Wayne Gilchrest’s best issue by far with me. With a couple exceptions, Gilchrest has voted about the same as I would have. Probably his only hiccup (and it’s a big one) is co-sponsoring a bill decried as “amnesty” by challenger Andy Harris. True, nothing I read in this bill precludes an illegal immigrant from getting a “blue card”. I’ll give Wayne 13 points based on his voting record.
Robert Banks has much the same message as the others, but less specific – sort of like a carbon copy. But a copy’s never as good as the original, so Banks gets 12 points from me.
I find Arminio’s position interesting in that he goes about the problem from the inside out. He addresses the employer portion but not the border security. The part about “random searches” needs to stress probable cause in order to not violate the Fourth Amendment but the idea is sound. Where Arminio loses me is the extremely tight lid on legal immigration that he proposes. And without border security to stop those who may not be looking for work but for targets of opportunity, the cycle would be more difficult to stop. His solution is still worth 14 points though.
Quite surprisingly for a Democrat, Kratovil comes across as a border hawk. Obviously he’s playing to the local Democrat base on this subject, one that stands far to the right of most of their comrades nationally when it comes to immigration. And as a prosecutor, he’s seemingly frustrated by the revolving door of the legal system when it comes to these lawbreakers. Although it comes somewhat close to promising pork, if Kratovil can prudently follow through with providing required resources to our district to combat the illegal immigration problem he has a winning strategy on his hands. Believe it or not, on this one issue he presents the best arguments for himself – but for a little bit of a lack of specifics he’d get the full point allotment; instead I’ll give him 20 points.
Before I get to the totals, I’m going to backtrack and briefly review what Robert Banks has to say. Since his platform is one web page, I can save myself the copying and pasting and refer readers here for where he stands in toto.
Banks addresses four of my previous issues: trade and job creation (worth 11 points), energy (up to 17 possible points), entitlements (good for up to 19 points) and taxation (21 points). So a lot is riding on how I feel about where he stands.
I’ll start with job creation. Unfortunately, while Banks notes the GOP has generally followed pro-growth policies and has a general disposition toward being tilted in favor of business over government, he’s not specific at all about how he would improve the policies in place now. He gets just one point here.
The same goes for his energy policy. I’m happy he’s owned several SUV’s and it’s good to think about alternative energy, but I’m decidedly against a lot of government “investment” in that field, preferring the private sector lead the way as they know the market best. I also am a bit leery about how renewable and alternative fuels become more accessible because I get the hunch he’s talking about more ethanol and that’s not the long-term answer. I grant him just three points.
Again, I take issue with Robert on his entitlement stance, in particular how he seems to like Medicare Part D. It was an program that we didn’t need at a scale that was too large, and now that it’s here impossible to kill. Agreed, we do not need government-controlled healthcare rationing but once the Part D program gets too big isn’t that what we’ll have in that particular instance? Out of 19 points, I’m going to deduct seven because of this stance that leaves the door open for more and bigger entitlements.
Regarding what I call the role of government, Banks makes a curious choice. Of all the waste and outright fraud that goes on with earmarks and the like, he states:
My first order of business will be to help enact legislation to assess the fiscal management of the War on Terror…I believe we owe it to their families in the U.S. to reassess whether we could be getting the same results for less money.
Is this a backdoor plan to deny funding to the troops? I hope not. Other than that, he preaches accountability without being specific. I’ll leave this as no points either way since the answer doesn’t impress me and leaves me with that key question.
Now I can do the standings with all five GOP hopefuls:
For the moment, Democrat Frank Kratovil is above water with 1 point, mostly because he’s stayed silent on the majority of issues and has one outstanding area. Christopher Robinson maintained his score of -34.
The final installment will talk about our candidates’ thoughts on the Long War and any other intangible issues I find with them.
I don’t think this will be a full volume, but just a few observations. First of all, I made a funny and it didn’t dawn on me until now, calling something that had to do with radio a “volume”. Pretty soon I’ll be on “11” like Spinal Tap.
Anyway, ’twas a good time this morning, and Bill handled his end professionally as always. I managed to get through all my notes I had on things to talk about and then some.
In case readers are wondering, the Ohio election I was referring to was the special election to fill the vacant Fifth Congressional District seat held by the late Rep. Paul Gillmor. It’s almost eerily like our First District race:
Personally I think at the moment the results will also end up similar to the Ohio race, with Gilchrest winning by a small margin but well under 50 percent. Since Buehrer was nominally the more conservative candidate, it may have been that the three also-rans below him cannibalized his vote enough to prevent the win. It’s the same theory that Andy Harris has charged about the late entry into the race by Robert Banks being set up by the incumbent.
One thing I thought about prior to going on but not while I was there was when there’s going to be a public poll taken for our Congressional race because of the high interest both in Maryland and nationally. I’m sure the respective campaigns are running their own internal polls or will be soon, but it would be interesting to know how this election is shaping up.
Since I covered a lot on the special session in previous posts, I won’t revisit that topic. And I plan on doing yet another look at the Congressional candidates with a second post tonight so this personal stuff won’t stay on top too long. Overall, I think I turned in a pretty good performance so I’m hoping to get back there after the holidays for an update on the race and probably more hijinks from the regular General Assembly session.
I think I’ll put this up early enough for Bill Duvall to read it, but far enough away timewise so you have a chance to read the last outstanding post, thanks to the contribution of one Delegate Jeannie Haddaway-Riccio. Trust me, I’m not up at oh-dark hundred.
Anyway, Bill Reddish and I talk politics at 7:40 this morning. You know where to tune. We’ll likely cover the First District race and maybe a few special session thoughts.
The two pieces following are from Delegate Jeannie Haddaway-Riccio of District 37B. The first is an excerpt from a release she put out last Thursday entitled “The Cost of Rushing” and the second came yesterday as an update to what’s going on with the special session. It’s a good perspective from the inside as it were – apparently judging by the original e-mail address Saturday’s message came straight from her laptop.
Here’s Thursday’s article, “The Cost of Rushing”:
You may have heard the Governor talking about the cost of delay, stating that if we do not act on the budget deficit now, major cuts to services and programs will be unavoidable. This statement is incredibly misleading considering the fact that we have a balanced budget through June 2008. Even the Comptroller of Maryland has said, “There is no relationship whatsoever between the timing of the next General Assembly session and the magnitude of Maryland’s structural budget deficit.” It would have been much more logical to wait until the regular session, when we had an actual budget to work on, to start considering changes in our spending and our revenues. Better yet, we could have started on this process during the last legislative session.
While the Governor talks about the cost of delay, I am more concerned about the cost of rushing – rushing through legislation, rushing through changes in taxation and rushing through votes in hopes that the general public will not know what is going on in Annapolis.
This was exemplified by the recent actions of the Senate Budget and Taxation Committee which added new industries to the list of services that will now be taxed without a public hearing. It will be further exemplified in the coming days as legislative leaders rush forward with late night votes and back room meetings. In my opinion, this is nothing more than a money grab from the citizens of Maryland. These same citizens will be the ones who pay the price for the cost of rushing.
Now yesterday’s mid-afternoon update:
As of yesterday the House’s tax bill was amended by the Ways and Means Committee to include the following actions:
- Increasing the sales tax to 6%
- Expanding the sales tax to services that repair any tangible, personal property, including electrical repairs, shoe repair, boat repair, home repair and more
- Increasing the corporate income tax and instituting combined reporting
- Increasing the cigarette tax
- Increasing the hotel tax from 5% to 10%
- Increasing the vehicle excise tax and offering only a 50% reduction for the trade-in value
While we were supposed to go to the floor at 1pm, we have been informed that we will not go to the floor until 3pm or 4pm. It is rumored that the delay is due to a surprise meeting of the Ways and Means Committee at 2:30pm so they can change the legislation again. They are likely to remove the hotel tax and increase the sales tax to 6.5%.
If you are confused by all of this, you are not alone. Legislators on both sides of the aisle are asking for the process to be slowed down because we can’t even keep up with the changes. Why the disarray? There is still no consensus on the tax increases and many delegates are starting to listen to constituents who are asking us to say NO to new taxes. The moral of the story? Keep up the pressure – your efforts are working!
I don’t know about the rest of you, but I think Jeannie should be a blogger in her spare time. Both of these are very well written and get to the heart of the problem. With the special session underway and no FY2008 budget to work with, the Republicans face the task of shadow boxing with no budget cuts that can be suggested to alleviate the problem and far too few bodies in the General Assembly to stop things. If you look at yesterday’s post you can see what steps Jeannie has taken in an effort to slow down the train, but the wrong party is in charge right now.
To bring this issue up to a more national scale, there are many in the Republican Party who said in 2006 (and say for 2008) that maybe we should let the Democrats be in charge and screw up the country, getting the electorate mad enough to place the GOP back in power at the next election. Unfortunately our state is the canary in the coal mine as to why that’s a bad policy choice. While hindsight is by nature 20/20, it’s all but certain Governor Ehrlich would have found other ways to address the future shortfall. Sadly, Ehrlich was a victim to some extent of a general discontent with the national Republican party, so even with his mid-50’s approval rating he was broomed out and our tax-raising Governor O’Malley ushered in.
And for that decision all of Maryland will soon be paying the price.
Crossposted on Red Maryland.
Update: O’Malley Watch continues its yeoman’s work on this and has updated the Legislative Scorecard. Now we have an idea how the House voted. Apparently there were just two separate votes – one combines the hotel tax, sales tax, and car titling tax, the other combines the corporate taxes with the income tax rate hike.
All three local Republicans (Delegates Eckardt, Elmore, and Haddaway) properly voted NO on both issues.
Both Delegate Rudy Cane (District 37A) and Delegate Norm Conway (District 38B) voted YES in both instances FOR raising our taxes. If they run in 2010 it’s our job not to let them live it down.
Delegate Jim Mathias (District 38B) voted NO on the sales tax portion but voted YES on the corporate and income tax portion.
There’s very little change in this from last week, it’s almost a repost because of the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday. I’m taking the liberty of adding an event just past the deadline because it’s one near and dear to my heart.
Thursday, November 15 (tentative): Joe Arminio is slated to speak to the Dorchester County Republicans up in Cambridge.
Monday, November 19: This isn’t a campaign event but according to the Maryland Board of Elections, this is the last day a voter can switch parties prior to the 2008 primary:
To change your party affiliation, submit a new voter registration application or a written request to your local board of elections. If you request a change in party affiliation after November 19, 2007, your request will be held at the local board of elections and processed when registration reopens after the Primary Election.
Monday, November 26: State Senator and 1st District candidate Andy Harris is the speaker for the Wicomico County Republican Club meeting. This is held at 144 E. Main Street in Salisbury; social hour is 7 p.m. and meeting begins at 7:30.
Still no Presidential sightings on Delmarva. Ron Paul came close yesterday with a rally in Philadelphia but that’s about it.
This will likely be the first of two parts, with the second coming about this time next week when the 2007 Special Session is supposed to be wrapped up. What I’ll do here is review what our local Delegates and Senators from Districts 37 and 38 have done and some of how they voted. Unfortunately, the MLS website hasn’t put up the roll-call votes yet but I have some idea on a broad scale of how all the state Senators voted thanks to O’Malley Watch.
I’ll begin with District 37. Delegate Rudy Cane is a co-sponsor of two bills in this special session.
HB24 had a hearing last week, none has been scheduled for HB30.
Meanwhile, Delegate Addie Eckardt has co-sponsored three measures this time around.
All of these bills did get a hearing but no further action has been taken.
For her part, Delegate Jeannie Haddaway has co-sponsored HB25 and HB27 above, also she’s a co-sponsor of:
That bill also had its hearing, so the majority Democrats must feel generous with their time.
District 37 State Senator Rich Colburn has not co-sponsored any bills as of this writing. However, he was the lead sponsor of an amendment to exempt the Eastern Shore from the penny increase in the sales tax, but it failed 31-16.
Moving east and south into District 38, District 38A Delegate Page Elmore is a co-sponsor of HB27 above but no other bills at the moment.
The duo in District 38B, Norm Conway and Jim Mathias, are both co-sponsors of one bill, to wit:
As of this writing, District 38 Senator Lowell Stolzfus has not co-sponsored any legislation during the session.
Because I believe it’s pertinent to the 2008 Congressional race, I’m also including what District 7 State Senator Andy Harris is sponsoring or co-sponsoring. He has four proposals under his wing:
Only SB 7 and SB10 have had hearings, the other two await their time (which probably won’t come in this session.)
With the help of O’Malley Watch, this is how our Senators and Andy Harris voted on three key issues:
I’m hoping by next week the roll-call votes will be up for both the House and Senate so we can see who voted for what. But I’m sure the fix is in for higher taxes and a VLT vote at next year’s general election. That means the ballot will be crowded by at least two ballot issues – don’t forget early voting is on the 2008 election docket as well.
Obviously the O’Malley focus for that campaign will be on how far we’ve come in solving the budget issue, but how it would fall short if video gambling is not included and they’d simply have no choice but to raise taxes again. And besides, it’s for the children.
I had heard about this the other day, but owe the h/t to Elbert for coming across the press release below and sending it along to me:
Maryland League of Conservation Voters and League of Conservation Voters Endorse Rep. Wayne Gilchrest
Groups Applaud Gilchrest’s Outstanding Leadership on Protecting the Chesapeake Bay & Clean Energy Issues
The Maryland League of Conservation Voters (MDLCV) and the League of Conservation Voters (LCV) today announced their joint endorsement of Representative Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD) for re-election in Maryland’s 1st Congressional District.
“Representative Wayne Gilchrest is a champion for Maryland’s environment — from protecting our Chesapeake Bay and waterways to preserving our open spaces — and the Maryland League of Conservation Voters is proud to endorse him for re-election,” Maryland LCV Executive Director Cindy Schwartz said. “Wayne Gilchrest offers a strong voice in Congress for protecting the Chesapeake Bay because he understands that it is both a vital part our natural heritage and an engine of the local economy.”
“The League of Conservation Voters is endorsing Representative Wayne Gilchrest for Congress because he has led the way on common sense solutions to our energy challenges that will make us less dependent on oil, reduce energy costs, and help address climate change,” LCV President Gene Karpinski said. “Wayne Gilchrest understands that by ushering in a clean energy future, we can free our nation from the grip of foreign oil, while also creating good-paying jobs and ensuring a cleaner, healthier environment for our children and grandchildren.”
As an enthusiastic outdoorsman who regularly canoes and hikes, Rep. Gilchrest has been a strong voice in Congress for protecting the Chesapeake Bay and the Eastern Shore. He is a Co-Chair of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Task Force, where he has introduced legislation and led efforts to help restore the Chesapeake.
“Marylanders understand that preserving our heritage and natural resources for future generations is of critical importance, and that the health of our local economy depends in large part on the health of our environment and the Chesapeake Bay,” Representative Wayne Gilchrest said. “I am honored to receive this recognition for the work we have done, and for the awareness that this remains a responsibility for us all.”
Rep. Gilchrest has also been a leader in helping our country transition to a clean energy economy. He has championed legislative efforts to help reduce our dependence on oil, help the environment and save consumers money, such as increasing fuel efficiency measures to make new cars go further on a gallon of gas. As Co-Chair and Co-Founder of the Congressional Climate Change Caucus, Rep. Gilchrest’s has also demonstrated considerable leadership on helping address global warming.
This is the second consecutive election that Gilchrest has been endorsed by the LCV. In 2006 the group took positions in 89 contested statewide and Congressional races, supporting Democrats in 72 of them, Republicans (including Gilchrest and Delaware Rep. Michael Castle) in 15, and two independents (Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Bernard Sanders of Vermont.) So one may be able to judge Gilchrest by the company he keeps.
I suppose my first thought on this endorsement comes in the form of a few questions:
If we’re not dependent on oil for transportation, what would we use? Should be continue to drive up food prices and become dependent on ethanol? Or do we use electricity that comes from burning either coal or natural gas? You do know that we have plenty of domestic oil reserves yet to be tapped, right?
The other comment that jumps out at me is that Gilchrest is a co-chair of the Congressional Climate Change Caucus. While that website hasn’t been updated in awhile, this interview with Gilchrest also sheds light on his somewhat radical environmental views. Call me skeptical about humans causing global climate change because no one’s ever answered to my satisfaction how humans influenced meteorlogical events like the Little Ice Age or the Medieval Warm Period – also long-term temperature shifts – well before the era of SUV’s and electricity. Certainly personal decisions about conservation like lowering the thermostat or buying a smaller car are fine, particularly in this era of near-$100 per barrel oil, but what radicals of Gilchrest’s ilk desire is governmental fiat on personal behavior.
Further, while I have not seen the commercial, apparently the LCV has already gone negative with a TV ad attacking Andy Harris. It’s their right to do so, but does it mean that Gilchrest supporters are running scared?
Crossposted on Red Maryland.
Late edit: A friend of mine steered me to the commercial on Youtube.
Today the Daily Times was nice enough to print a letter I submitted reminding voters of the upcoming deadline to switch parties for the February, 2008 primary (it’s the last letter on the page, I suppose we get the last word after the poultry farm debate.)
The letter as written was originally longer; I shortened it at the behest of the committee. This is the body I actually wrote:
An Open Letter To Voters from the Wicomico County Republican Party
Dear Voter:
As the body that administers the affairs of the Republican Party in our county and represents its interests to the state party apparatus, it is our charge to promote Republican candidates for election to local, state, and national offices.
Next February Maryland voters will go to the polls to nominate candidates for our Congressional seats and for the office of President. We feel that the Republican voters are going to have many good choices for both offices and that the races for nomination, particularly in the First Congressional District, are going to go down to the wire with every last vote being important to determine the outcome.
In the last two decades Wicomico County has become a solidly Republican county based on election results for state and national offices. Since 1988, the GOP candidates for President and Governor have had little trouble winning here with no small amount of help provided by thoughtful Democrats and independents who tend to have values prevalent in the Republican Party but maintain their voter registration elsewhere.
While the election is still over three months away, if you are a Democrat or Independent who wishes to participate in the Republican primary the Maryland Board of Elections dictates that party registration must be changed by Monday, November 19, 2007 in order to participate in the Primary Election held February 12, 2008.
So it is with this in mind that we, the undersigned members of the Republican Central Committee of Wicomico County, encourage you to contact the Board of Elections and secure your opportunity to participate in what promises to be one of the most exciting elections the Eastern Shore has seen in decades.
We know what the recent election results have been, and we think it’s time for the voters of Wicomico County to come home to the Republican Party.
As for the amount of editing the Daily Times did, it was pretty minor so I can’t complain. Either way, the message is the same: if you want to help choose between Wayne Gilchrest and a host of challengers including State Senator Andy Harris, you have just six-plus working days to do so if you’re not already a registered Republican. Switch now or forever hold your peace.
Tonight I grade GOP candidates on where they stand on an issue I call “role of government.” A full explanation of my thoughts is here, but for simplicity’s sake I described it this way when I did the Presidential chapter:
It appears that three Republicans and one Democrat address this issue to some extent, so I may as well get started on recapping and dissecting what they say, beginning with the incumbent.
The statement by Wayne Gilchrest is simple:
With Washington spending out of control, Wayne has voted for deficit reduction measures including the Line Item Veto and tougher limits on federal appropriations, and Wayne voted this year for across the board spending cuts in federal budget bills.
On the other hand, Andy Harris addresses my concerns in three different parts of his website.
For his part, John Leo Walter notes:
Congress has a duty and obligation to (1) continue to reduce the tax burden on the American family and (2) cut spending. Over the past decade, Congressional spending has been out of control – government programs should not live forever; As Congressman, I will endeavor to shrink the size and scope of our ever growing (and controlling) Federal Government.
Surprisingly for a Democrat, Christopher Robinson goes on record saying:
The budget deficit and national debt are a national disgrace and prevent us from pursuing sound, responsible national objectives. We owe it to our children to leave them a legacy of hope, not a mountain of debt. As a fiscal conservative, Christopher Robinson believes that balancing our budget and bringing federal spending under strict control is one of our nation’s most important priorities.
Now it’s time for my to rub my hands in glee, or is it the chilly weather? Anyway, there’s 23 points at stake here so this is an opportunity for those responding to pick up a lot of points with a good answer.
I’ll begin with Wayne Gilchrest. He has a mixed record on reducing government at best. I certainly agree with the line-item veto vote but when he votes to spend money on programs like the SCHIP expansion and generally favors this year’s appropriations bills I can’t see him as one who wants to limit government. I can only give him five of a possible 23 points so he remains in the hole overall.
In my opinion, Andy Harris would not have voted for all of these appropriation bills Gilchrest voted for. Why do I think this? Because he’s voted against 6 of 9 Maryland state budgets since becoming a State Senator and methinks the record becomes 7 of 10 early next year. Included in that string was the final Ehrlich budget which Andy must have felt was too full of election-year pork. He grades down to some extent because of a lack of specifics, but Andy deserves 15 of 23 points.
John Leo Walter says much of the same thing as Andy Harris, but without the track record. He is exactly right though with his philosophy that government programs should not live forever. With them being essentially two peas in a pod on the subject, John gets the same 15 points Andy does.
I can’t pull that much of a trigger on Christopher Robinson, though. It’s because while he talks about being a deficit hawk in one breath, in the next he speaks of increasing federal education funding and making health care more accessible. In a lot of ways Robinson’s stance reminds me of Wayne Gilchrest’s except at least Gilchrest wants a line-item veto. I’ll award Robinson 3.5 points for at least paying lip service to controlling spending, but I don’t expect him following through if elected.
Revisiting the totals, we have a more spread-out field:
For the Democrats, Frank Kratovil stays in front with -19 points to Christopher Robinson’s -34 points.
Over the weekend, I have some catching up to do as GOP hopeful Robert Joseph Banks upgraded his website and now has an issue page for me to study. So I’ll investigate where he stands and rate him accordingly as to whether he’s the centerpoint between Gilchrest and Harris or not.
On Monday, I’ll resume this series with my second-most important issue, immigration and border security. I’ll wrap up efforts next week with that and how the candidates stand on the Long War.
Aside from the neat rhyme I came up with for the title, I think I’m getting this political prediction stuff down a little bit. You may recall what I said when former Presidential candidate Sam Brownback dropped out of the Presidential race:
My money is on (Brownback endorsing) McCain as he’s a fellow Senator and has a similar stance on immigration as well. It would give a little bit of a boost to McCain, who was once the odds-on favorite but slipped deep into the field after the immigration fiasco.
Interestingly enough to me, the basis of the endorsement seemed to be on McCain’s pro-life stance. Not mentioned was the commonality of their views on immigration, which is an issue resonating with more voters.
Overall, it looks like John McCain could be resurrecting his campaign as the anti-Giuliani on social issues. While Mike Huckabee treads much of the same ground, McCain has more experience with Presidential politics and is running one to twelve points ahead of Huckabee in national polling.
Like Tommy Thompson’s tasks within the Rudy Giuliani presidential bid, Brownback moves into a position within the McCain campaign that could draw him to places like Delmarva. As a General Co-Chair, Brownback’s first task was to accompany McCain on a campaign swing through Iowa and Michigan.
Crossposted on Red Maryland.
