I decided to leave the Deborah Johns interview up an extra amount of time because so many people were reading it. Thanks for the comments, I’m glad you enjoyed it. I also enjoyed the time off from posting, although I spent some time redoing my links last night.
Tonight I’ll get back to a normal schedule with a report on the WCRC meeting last night and tomorrow I may be able to make another announcement.
Last week I devoted part of a post to the my interview subject, who as I reported was preparing to embark on a two-week barnstorming tour of America; a tour intended to point out the deficiencies of Barack Obama as Commander-in-Chief. She’s a Blue Star Mom who’s proud to support the military and has been termed by FOX News as one of their favorite military moms.
Today I bring back my Ten Questions (even though I actually asked a few more) feature with Deborah Johns, spokeswoman for the pro-troop organization Our Country Deserves Better and soon to be political tourist. As part of her sixth such effort, she will be in the region as her tour wraps up in Washington, DC on October 29th.
monoblogue: According to the press release that brought your upcoming national tour to my attention, you thought it was worth giving up two weeks of your life to defend the honor of your fellow Blue Star Mom, Vice-Presidential nominee Governor Sarah Palin. Were you a John McCain supporter beforehand or did the Palin selection and subsequent fallout goad you into action?
Johns: I supported John McCain since the primary and have been even more energized with Senator McCain’s selection of Gov. Palin to be his vice presidential candidate. I can’t tell you how proud I am to see a Blue Star Mom on the verge of making it to the White House!
monoblogue: In looking at the planned route, you’ve scheduled a pretty ambitious 14 day agenda which will cover a number of swing states, including ones your PAC is running ads in. How is the fundraising going for the trip, and is the schedule pretty much set now?
Johns: The fundraising is going very well, however, on every cross-country patriotic tour I’ve been involved with (and this will be my sixth one!) we have always had to work very hard to raise the money it takes to fund the trip (renting vehicles, paying for gas, hotel rooms, etc…) and to get the word out! So many times people have heard we are passing through their city, and call frantically asking us to stop, and if our schedule will accommodate it, then we will make every effort to greet supporters.
monoblogue: Your son William’s devotion to his mission (having served three tours of duty in Iraq) is obvious but is there a military tradition he’s following in the family? Corollary to that, did you have a history of political involvement before becoming involved in the Move America Forward and Our Country Deserves Better political groups?
Johns: I come from a long line of military family. I have uncles, great uncles and grandfathers that have served from WWII, Korean and Vietnam. They have all been in either the Army or the Navy. William is the first Marine in the family.
I have never had any political involvement prior to becoming involved with Move America Forward and/or Our Country Deserves Better. All of this was because of a request my son made and God laid this on my heart to do the right thing. Casey Sheehan was killed in April 2004 from volunteering to be a convoy driver to drive supplies to a forward Marine Unit (my son was in that forward exploratory unit), Casey’s convoy went the wrong way and his vehicle was hit by an IED. In May of 2004, Cindy Sheehan had begun to make a lot of noise against President Bush and the War. My son called home at Mother’s Day, and asked what was going on back in the states, and questioned why the American people don’t support the troops any longer. William told me about all the good things that the troops were accomplishing, and asked me, “Mom please don’t let us come home to another Vietnam.” So that is when I began to appear on talk radio shows, television news programs, and speak out at public events and rallies – to tell the stories of what the troops were doing. Things have just blossomed from there and others have been inspired to start up their own non-profit organizations to support the troops, and their families.
monoblogue: Given that you’re a military mom who’s working for a pro-troop organization, it’s inevitable there will be comparisons between you and Cindy Sheehan. What are your thoughts on Mrs. Sheehan and how she handled the death of her son? And how have you prepared yourself for that possibilty affecting your life?
Johns: I certainly do not stand in judgment on how Ms. Sheehan has handled the death of her son. The loss of a child is something I hope I never have to go through, and how someone deals with the loss of a child is different for everyone.
However, let me make it clear that I certainly do stand in judgment on how Ms. Sheehan has attacked our country and our military. I take issue with the fact that she has made statements calling the al-Qaeda terrorists, “freedom fighters from other countries.” I take issue with her attacks on U.S. troops who went to New Orleans to help in the wake of Hurricane Katrina – she declared their presence made it “occupied New Orleans.” I take issue with her endorsement of the murderer, Marxist dictator of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, who Ms. Sheehan praised: “I admire President Chavez for his strength to resist the United States” and “I’ve always admired President Chavez for standing up to imperialism.” Finally, Ms. Sheehan has called President Bush, and U.S. troops the “real terrorists.”
Well, just as Cindy’s son, Casey, wore the uniform of the United States Army, my son wears the uniform of the United States Marines, both boys were in Iraq at the same time, and neither of them are murderers or terrorists. I am completely offended by these statements and that she had gone around the world and supported dictators like Hugo Chavez saying she wishes he was her President. Her hateful, anti-American rhetoric has inspired insurgents and terrorists to continue to pick up their weapons and kill our American Soldiers and Marines and that is Ms. Sheehan’s cross to bear. Her actions since the death of Casey and taking it out on the Soldiers and Marines who gladly serve this country are deplorable.
As for my preparing for the untimely loss of my son – William, I have had a very detailed conversation as to what I am to do if he is killed while serving his country, so all of those details are in order. However, I don’t think one can ever be prepared for the knock on the door. Each time William has been deployed, he has lost guys in his unit. I remember in January 2007 when his unit was on patrol and 2 Marines were killed. We all knew it was someone from the 21 MEW, and in a special forces unit, but we had no idea who. I was gripped with fear, tears and tons of emotions over fear that I was going to get the knock on the door. I could not leave my house for 3 days until the notifications came out. That waiting is something no one can imagine unless you have been faced with it. Then when you finally get word as to who it was, you have a split second of relief, but then you feel horrible from survivors guilt and you have even more tears and a different wave of emotions for the loss of the Marine and his family who did get the knock on the door. It is a pit in our stomach you never get over.
monoblogue: Closing the book on Sheehan, most people are aware that she’s running for Congress against Nancy Pelosi. Do you see a run for office in your future or is the involvement you already have politically enough for you?
Johns: Sheehan running for Congress – I gave it great consideration to run for Congress against both Cindy Sheehan and Nancy Pelosi. However, I would have had to uproot my 2 sons at home and move to the Bay Area, which is something I was unwilling to do. Although I feel I could have been a formidable opponent to both of them, as a single parent my sons have to come first. This may be a consideration in 3 years when my youngest graduates from High School.
monoblogue: Getting back to your national tour, what sort of press reception are you expecting for your message? Do you anticipate any negative reaction from Obama supporters like protests or threats on your safety? (I see you have a stop scheduled in his hometown, that should be interesting.)
Johns: Well the press obviously has a biased opinion when it comes to reporting fair and balanced events from McCain to Obama. The press is doing everything they can to distort things against the McCain/Palin campaign. Cindy Sheehan always had way more press than I did when John Kerry was running and she was their poster child. I do expect that we will have some press coverage, but it is anyone’s guess as to how much local and/or national press coverage we will get.
As for Obama supporters etc. – I have gotten death threats when I spoke out against Cindy Sheehan. I do expect to get them again with this campaign, and some of the staff has already had some breach of privacy from Obama supporters. They are very ruthless, and will stop at nothing to get what they want by intimidation, up to and including physical harm.
monoblogue: It’s also worth asking with your connection to Move America Forward (whose PAC is supporting a number of Congressional candidates) whether you’ll be coordinating your efforts with those candidates, or is this simply a “stop Obama” tour?
Johns: Currently this is a “Stop Obama” tour. There is probably no doubt that we will probably end up doing some joint support work with good candidates who can make change happen in Washington.
monoblogue: President Eisenhower once noted, “Politics ought to be the part-time profession of every citizen who would protect the rights and privileges of free people and who would preserve what is good and fruitful in our national heritage.” Obviously you were an average mom who took it upon herself to get involved, much like Governor Palin. What advice would you give to someone who would like to get involved in the world of political advocacy?
Johns: Anyone wishing to get involved in the world of political advocacy needs to have a passion for their cause. If you are not passionate about it, then you will come off as a fake. You need to be genuine, authentic, articulate and well informed about what you are speaking about. You also have to have a thick skin, because the media critiques everything about you from your hair, clothes, shoes, weight, what you say and your family and then they say very nasty things about your family, then death threats if they really don’t like you. So you have to be strong, and don’t let them see you sweat.
monoblogue: Final question. If, despite your efforts to the contrary, Barack Obama takes the Presidential Oath of Office next January, will you remain in the political realm and if so where would you channel your efforts?
Johns: Well I don’t think I will have to worry about Obama taking that oath of office in January, because I am confident it will be John McCain taking the oath of office. But just for the sake of answering your question, I will probably remain in the political realm working with the Veterans Administration helping our veterans and advocating for their benefits and helping them transition from active duty to civilian life.
**********
I’d like to thank Deborah for her participation. As she noted in one of her answers, there’s always a demand to place a stop on her route and I made my play for a stop here on the Eastern Shore – however, they revised the tour slightly to exclude a couple Virginia stops and she’ll arrive in Washington from the north.
I’ll leave you with her closing comment from the correspondence she sent to answer my question:
I would love to try to get to the Eastern Shore of Maryland to see you and your great supporters, hopefully we can work that out.
Thank you again for your interest in Our Country Deserves Better, because it does, it deserves John McCain and Sarah Palin.
Semper Fi
No, Deborah, thank you, and best of luck for your tour and your family.
I actually received this e-mail on Thursday, but the National Taxpayers Union insists that we have “No More Bailouts!”
Are you tired of hearing about how your tax dollars are going to bail out government-sponsored enterprises and private institutions? We are.
Did you send your hard-earned money to the IRS to cover the fiscal mismanagement at Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bear Stearns, and AIG? We didn’t.
Do you like the sound of a new $25 billion bailout for big auto companies? We don’t.
It’s time to say “enough is enough!” Sign our “No More Bailouts” petition to Congress and the President today.
Unless people like you speak out, there’s no end in sight to this abuse of taxpayer dollars. Act today!
The sentiment was originally written by Kristina Rasmussen at the Government Bytes blog I link to. But she’s right, we have to be ever-vigilant about OUR money, particularly in this time of economic slowdown.
This is what the petition reads; it’s sent to the White House, your state’s Senators, and your Representative (in my case Cardin, Mikulski, and Gilchrest respectively. Actual results may vary.)
As a taxpaying American, I demand an end to the public bailouts of government-sponsored enterprises and private institutions.
America’s economic success is largely due to our free-market system, in which risk is a fundamental element. Some businesses succeed tremendously, some fail spectacularly. But they should do so on their own, not with the backing of millions of reluctant citizens’ paychecks.
If troubled institutions seek relief, they should restructure their businesses the way millions of families have had to restructure their budgets, rather than bellying up to Congress’ trough.
Bailouts that keep mismanaged organizations afloat delay natural corrections to unsound business practices. In the long run, bailouts do not “rescue” anyone because they stall the adoption of necessary reforms that would prevent future repeats of bad choices.
Enough is enough. No more bailouts. Not with my tax dollars.
So I signed the petition, but I was only signer number 3,492 which tells me that there are too many people who just nod their head in agreement when it’s said that this is necessary to save the financial markets. More alarming to me are those who say, “yeah, the government needs to step in – but this has to be the last time!” There is no last time if we do it this time, because something like this will happen again. When unscrupulous people get to play with other peoples’ money and they find out they can get wealthy beyond their dreams, they’ll continue to game the system regardless of whatever laws are passed. Thus, I’m not sure regulations are the answer and the argument has been posed in many quarters that regulations have led to this mess in the first place. In fact, regulations are the reason the automakers want their bailout, to comply with more stringent CAFE standards.
While we may be well beyond a tipping point in both this situation and regarding government in general, the fight needs to be continued – even if it is a rear-guard action – against adopting more and more red tape which both strangles initiative and keeps millions of paper-pushers doing busy work. The way I look at this situation, it’s not lack of regulation which led to this crisis but the collision of the lack of ethics in some and the lack of common sense in others. We’re just left to clean up the mess.
On a completely different note…
Overnight on Friday night I will be one of the hundreds of participants in Wicomico County’s annual Relay For Life. It’s the first time I’ve done this, but last year at this time I had no inkling that a family member of mine would be afflicted with cancer so that makes it personal for me.
One thing that I like about how this works is that I don’t need to get pledges or even collect money (although I can and will with a select group of people) – instead it’s as simple as visiting this webpage and making a donation. I just set it up the other day with my own money to get the ball rolling, but you can help the effort too if you have a few dollars to spare. I know we’re all not living in Fat City here, but you probably have a similar story someplace in your family too. I’m just going to spend part of my Friday night at Perdue Stadium as I’ve done many times before, just without a ballgame to watch.
If you’re there Friday night, I’ll be the guy with the purple #18 Shorebirds jersey on – the Relay for Life 2007 jersey I purchased. Little did I know that months later their cause would hit home.
Unquestionably there’s a lot going on in the national political arena but today’s post shows one example of the grassroots element of politics. From Lincoln or Reagan Day dinners (or their Democrat counterpart, Jefferson/Jackson dinners), to booths at the county fair, to opening the county headquarters just before the election, to the average political club meeting, millions of Americans participate in the political process not just by voting but taking time out of their lives for a social get-together where they can meet their elected officials and candidates. Today was one such occasion here.
What I’m going to do from this point will mostly be a photo essay on the get-together we had today. Just hold the mouse over the photo for the explanatory caption.
So we had a pretty successful day and a good turnout. Afterward I went over to our headquarters and put together signs for later distribution. Then I came home and got my road work in. I’m just throwing the last picture in because I thought it was neat, taken as the sun set on another political day on Delmarva.
I’m definitely an America-firster, almost to the point of telling people “love it or leave it.” But if this is Democratic Vice-Presidential candidate and incumbent Delaware Senator Joe Biden’s idea of patriotism I may have to rethink my position. Yesterday in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America” Biden exhorted the wealthiest among us to take one for the team, accepting a tax increase so they could cut taxes for those making under $250,000. While that sounds good in theory, there’s a reality which has to be addressed as well. This is well pointed out by writers at the Center For Individual Freedom, who state in part:
When times are tighter, a “soak the rich” agenda has a certain superficial appeal to many voters. After all, why shouldn’t fat cats pay an even greater share of the nation’s taxes, since they continue to prosper while working families struggle? While working families strain to put food on their tables and gasoline in their automobiles, why shouldn’t those in the top five percent bracket pay an even higher share of taxes?
This is an understandable sentiment.
As understandable as it may be among struggling families, however, here is the problem. Because most of those filing in the upper five percent are actually small businesses, which create most new jobs in America, many of those families will go from struggling to put food on their tables to not being able to put food on their tables at all. And they’ll go from having difficulty filling their gas tanks to not being able to fill their tanks at all.
To explain, one must understand an important – but little-known and little-discussed – fact about individual income tax filers.
Namely, that most small business owners, otherwise known as “S corporations” or “S-corps,” file taxes as individuals.
(snip)
According to Internal Revenue Service (IRS) data, fully 75% of individual tax filers in the top bracket are actually small businesses. More importantly for purposes of working Americans, small businesses create 75% of new jobs in America.
Voters should therefore ask themselves whether small businesses encountering softening economic conditions would be more willing, or less willing, to hire new workers after their taxes are raised.
A similar take by Dr. Jim Pelura, Chair of the Maryland GOP, brings the point home to Marylanders:
“Joe Biden said yesterday that paying higher taxes is a ‘patriotic act’. He also pledged that he and Barack Obama would raise taxes. Barack Obama and Joe Biden both voted, in 2007, to raise taxes on anyone making above $40,000 a year. With our economy struggling, the last thing that our leaders in Washington and Annapolis should do is raise taxes. Marylanders have already suffered through the largest tax increase in state history last year. They can ill-afford afford additional skyrocketing taxes on income, life savings, and energy.”
“If paying higher taxes is patriotic, then Maryland citizens are possibly the most patriotic Americans in the country!”
You have that right, Jim. And bear in mind that the General Assembly earlier this spring placed into law something similar to the Obama/Biden plan, enacting what’s popularly known as the “millionaire’s tax” to replace a service tax aimed at the computer services business. Using the CFIF article as one piece of evidence, apparently the small businessman in Maryland had a target on his or her back in either case.
And to listen to Biden, one would think that wealthy Americans aren’t paying much in taxes. However, data from The Tax Foundation shows that the 1% who are most well-off shoulder a tax burden which nearly doubles their share of income; even more telling, they pay a share of taxation which equals that of the bottom 95% of all wageearners. Maybe Obama’s plan is to eventually have the top 1% pay every dollar of taxes and redistribute that to the other 99 percent, making sure that his buddies in the federal government get a generous cut as the cash passes through.
If you want a perspective on what this would lead to just go out and get one of my favorite books, Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. (That’s why I have the Amazon link on my site.) Instead, let’s work toward making taxes fairer and flatter, or even better encouraging saving and investment by shifting to a consumption-based tax. Would we be bailing out Wall Street firms if people had saved their money instead of overstepping their credit bounds? It’s rare that I advocate tax policy to regulate behavior, but in this case there wouldn’t be a targeted group because everyone would pay a share of this tax.
True patriotism is showing a love for country and desire to defend our national interests, not having more money stripped from your wallet because you’ve managed to become an achiever in life.
I heard it from a friend of mine that Wayne Gilchrest, our so-called Republican Congressman, went out and pledged his support for Democrat Barack Obama today. This according to a Politico.com article from Ryan Grim at The Crypt blog that came up just after noon today, which in turn led me to this from WYPR-FM in Baltimore. Quoting Wayne:
“My perspective is that the ticket is Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden that they have the breadth of experience, I think they are prudent, they are knowledgeable. We just can’t use four more years of the same kind of policy that’s somewhat (haphazard) which leads to recklessness.”
In all honesty, you could argue that Senator Biden has plenty of Washington experience but Gilchrest’s nine terms have placed him in Washington a full 14 years longer than Senator Obama has served in that august body. If Republicans pegged Gilchrest as being too much of an insider before, this endorsement will seal his fate.
The obvious question is how this affects the First District race. There are a number of voters who would have probably assumed that, while Wayne was backing a Democrat in the Congressional race, he would stay loyal to the GOP and back John McCain in the Presidential race – after all, my friend also informed me that Gilchrest was the chair of McCain’s Maryland efforts in the 2000 Presidential race. But these voters were incorrect, and there’s many of them who may question the benefit of the Gilchrest endorsement for Obama when Frank is trying to run as far away as he can from being pegged a liberal Democrat. I don’t know if there’s a lot of Gilchrest’s former supporters in the GOP who are going to admit to previously backing him now that he’s gone all the way to the other side, or at least as far as possible without actually switching parties. Wayne does join a few who claim to be Republicans for Obama; it’s worthy of note that Rep. Leach and Sen. Chaffee are both former elected officials who no longer serve in office.
Perhaps this is the final step before Wayne says goodbye to the GOP for good. It’s worth thinking about a possible matchup in 2010 should Andy Harris succeed in being elected to Congress; a contest that would see Harris seeking re-election against a former Republican-turned-Democrat who would be somewhat to the right of that party at-large but well left of Harris. While Harris soundly thrashed Gilchrest west of the bay in February’s GOP primary, it was a fairly even race between the two on this side of the Chesapeake. (However, you can’t discount the Pipkin effect on that primary – a race between Harris and Gilchrest without Pipkin may have turned out more favorably for Andy.)
In the meantime, it may be whatever advantage Kratovil had with moderate and independent voters because of Gilchrest’s backing may evaporate somewhat by the addition of Obama’s far-left policies to the equation. With the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate, it’s difficult to have an image of Barack Obama being a centrist and voters in the First District are going to have a more difficult time buying the argument that Obama, O’Malley, and Kratovil aren’t just different flavors of the same unappetizing gruel.
So far, so good. At least as far as television spots are concerned Andy Harris has yet to go negative in this general election campaign. His latest spot is called, “Service”:
For the most part, the commercial is relatively biographical and not issue-oriented. It is worth noting that Harris did serve in the Naval Reserve during Operation Desert Storm but didn’t serve in the Middle East theatre. However, it doesn’t diminish the service because the Navy didn’t place him on the front lines – thousands of active military personnel likely didn’t see combat in the Persian Gulf during that conflict. This actually ties in nicely with some of the themes evident during the Republican National Convention and certainly backs up the character aspect Andy wants to focus on here.
Quite honestly, aside from quibbling over the factual extent of Harris’s claims, there’s not much of a response possible from Frank Kratovil’s camp. Yes, Andy is a medical doctor, he served in the Naval Reserve, and he is a legislator who has proven to be taxpayer-friendly for the most part. (Devotion to taxpayers has led Harris to make votes which Kratovil and his allies have deemed anti-environment, like voting no on the “flush tax.” In my eyes, that’s the proper balance.)
Kratovil did have an objection to last week’s fundraiser Andy Harris and Governor Mitt Romney shared, and threw in for good measure more bashing of the Club For Growth:
(Last Friday), Queen Anne’s States Attorney and Democrat for Congress Frank Kratovil released the following statement concerning a fundraiser in Baltimore featuring his Republican opponent Andy Harris and Former Republican candidate for President Mitt Romney.
“Andy Harris was able to win the Republican primary by bringing in out of state money like the more than $1 million from the Club for Growth, an organization that has labeled senior citizens “the new welfare state.” Bringing in Mitt Romney is just more of the same, it’s not a surprise, considering so many of his individual donors have been from out-of-state, this strategy just won’t work in the general.”
“My campaign is broadening as I garner support from Democrats and Republicans who live right here in the First District. I couldn’t be happier with the support I have received from my friends and neighbors who share the same ideals and principles.”
First of all, I’m happy that Frank Kratovil again is proud to be a Democrat. If you watch his TV commercials he won’t admit to it. Maybe he’s pleased his good friend Martin O’Malley bumped the approval rating back up to 45 percent.
However, I do have to warn Frank to be careful about that out-of-state money commentary. At least it’s evident by FEC records that Andy Harris gets contributions bundled by the Club For Growth, which is a group of like-minded individuals who believe in the same concepts of limited government that Andy Harris believes in. We don’t truly know from which state the many labor unions who contribute to Frank Kratovil get their funds from or whether those workers whose dues are used would even vote for Frank if they had the chance to do so.
And be very, very quiet, Frank about some of these out-of-state campaign committee donations you received earlier this year:
And the biggie…
So if you’re one of Frank’s friends and neighbors who share the same ideals and principles as Nancy Pelosi, well, chances are I’ll hear about it in my comment section.
The other item I want to have verified (and generally Frank’s staff is pretty good about this when they write releases, which makes the omission here questionable) is where the Club For Growth states that senior citizens are “the new welfare state.” That deserves to be looked at in context.
Now the question becomes – will Kratovil throw the first negative stone in his next 30 second commercial?
After going through the Smart Growth Listening Session we had locally last night, tonight I turn my attention to what all the hubbub was about. Let me begin as they did with their description of Smart Growth:
“Growth is smart when it gives us great communities, with more choices and personal freedom, good return on public investment, greater opportunity across the community, a thriving natural environment, and a legacy we can be proud to leave our children and grandchildren.” (Emphasis mine.)
This passage comes from a pamphlet called “This Is Smart Growth” which can be downloaded here. Unfortunately, knowing that it’s the state of Maryland who is planning this I doubt we’ll actually get the more choices or personal freedom. And it’s worth pointing out that the Smart Growth folks talk about a good return on public investment, but no mention is made of whether they’ll encourage private investment. It goes without saying that too much restriction on land use will naturally discourage innovation and capital investment. While the perception in these parts is that things are too developer-friendly my fear is that the pendulum will swing too far in the other direction with this new statewide plan. It might just take the “One Maryland” concept espoused by Annapolis liberals too far. (I despise it because there’s at least three Marylands insofar as I can tell, split by Chesapeake Bay and that very thin strip where Virginia and Pennsylvania nearly touch.)
However, here are the 12 Visions that the Task Force on the Future for Growth and Development has drafted up thus far:
Oh my gosh, this is wrong on so many levels it’s not even funny. But I’m going to go through these one at a time anyway.
The very first point describes “universal stewardship.” The way I read this fits right in with the topdown concern I had about the whole state planning process. In other words, you’re just an individual who may think he or she can be the steward of one’s own property but in reality you must do what we determine is for the common good. Maryland has had sustainable communities for over 300 years, but apparently these bright folks think they can handle them better by placing themselves in charge of all – they know what’s good for you.
The next topic of public participation is nice, but the trick in that is having a well-informed, well-educated public and I’m not so sure that we have that at the moment. Sure, there are a few but the majority of people have no desire to be leaders or to make many of their own decisions – a sad commentary, but true. Besides, my responsibility should be to my own self and my family first, well before the responsibility in achieving community goals. That’s not to say I should shirk my tasks there, but the order this places responsibility is out of whack.
Number three is lofty in principle, but restricting growth to certain areas makes both the land outside those areas less valuable and the land inside those areas too pricey. This is why California, one of the largest states in the country, has the highest home prices – they restrict land usage to a great degree. I believe in the concept of highest and best use, which is inverse to restricting growth.
Let me define the terms in number four:
Compact – multifamily dwellings where you share walls, or homes with little to no private yard space. Playtime activities are limited to what you can do in a small area or using community parkland.
Mixed-use – essentially what it says, but limiting in terms of retail.
Walkable – discouraging the use of personal transport in favor of public modes of transportation (hence “located near transit options”). Certainly there’s benefits to walkable neighborhoods, but the option of having a car should be encouraged too.
“preservation and enhancement” – see number one under “universal stewardship.”
I guess the other question is whether all historical, cultural, and archeological resources are worth preserving, and who decides?
Regarding infrastructure (#5), the way I saw this was that if growth areas had these attributes, to heck with the rest of you who choose to live outside of them. Eventually it could lead to the whittling away of that population outside growth areas and the radical environmentalists’ dreams of large green corridors for wildlife restored and safe from nasty human interaction.
Sixth, we have a long way to go to achieve a well-maintained transportation system, particularly in some of those multi modes. Personally I’d like U.S. 13 to be upgraded to an interstate highway from Wilmington to Norfolk and another bay crossing closer to home, but I suspect these planners are thinking more along the lines of public transportation (the term “affordable” gives that away).
As for the seventh point, housing, don’t we already have this range in the market as it is? I can buy a 3,000 square foot house with a large yard, a 700 square foot house in town, a condominium, and so on and so forth. Or I could live cheek-by-jowl next to someone in an apartment. Something tells me that these folks with the bright ideas in Annapolis all live in the former situation but want the rest of us commoners to live in the latter. The market has shown people want bigger and better but that contributes to sprawl and sprawl must be banned, according to the Smart Growth folks.
Number 8 is economic development. (I’d place it number one myself, but that’s just me.) The key phrases in this passage are “public” services and “public” facilities. One can certainly read that to mean that private enterprise in those areas is discouraged. Also troubling is the concept of employment opportunities for all income levels. Is this to say that there’s going to be a quota of lower-skilled jobs which has to be met? Maybe they need to clarify that one some more.
Number nine needs no more explanation than to say that things will be regulated to the nth degree. Hell, Maryland’s almost there now when they already dictate the new cars which can be sold and the soap your dishwasher uses, among many other things.
To me, resource conservation (number 10) means no growth. One can maximize efficiency of resources to a degree and achieve a little bit of growth, but real growth by necessity means using more resources. I could use 10% less steel in a car and increase production from 1 million cars to 1.1 million, but I couldn’t ramp up to 2 million if the market dictated it without needing more steel.
Number 11 offends me because the order is exactly backwards. It should be up to residents to take the lead, not be led by the nose by a power-hungry government. And it’s more evidence of a topdown process.
As far as the final point, implementation, goes they actually have the order of items correct in some cases; however, the rest of these points belie the listing of the local level first. But as I noted in number 10 above the concepts of “growth and development” and “resource conservation” are pretty much mutually exclusive.
There’s no doubt that I can hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth from those who will react to my piece. And I know I have a LOT of education to do when they polled the opinion on these twelve visions at the Listening Session. I wrote down the results on the question of whether you strongly agreed, agreed, were unsure, disagreed, or strongly disagreed with the 12 Visions.
It doesn’t add up to 100% because not everyone clicked in, so I gather that 21% had no opinion or were afraid to be politically incorrect like I am. But I doubt there were more than 100 people in the room so that would mean exactly ONE person strongly disagreed. Any guesses as to who that was?
The educated one, apparently.
(Editor’s note: a link has been added to the New York Post story by Amir Taheri – h/t MAF PAC Blog.)
It’s a long title, but the folks at Move America Forward apparently think a New York Post story about Barack Obama’s Iraq trip hasn’t gotten enough play – at least not as much as the brouhaha over whether Governor Sarah Palin actually set foot in Iraq during her visit to that theatre of operation.
Move America Forward’s political action committee, MAF Freedom PAC, today condemned Barack Obama for “putting his own political objectives ahead of the safety of U.S. military personnel in Iraq.”
Iraqi government sources have revealed to the New York Post that Presidential candidate Barack Obama demanded Iraqi officials stop negotiations with the Bush Administration to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq. Fearful that the success in Iraq would harm his political aspirations, Obama sought to keep U.S. troops in Iraq so he can continue attacking the Bush Administration for not imposing a timetable for withdrawal.
“If these allegations prove to be true, it should be the end of the Obama campaign,” asserted MAF Freedom PAC Chairman, Melanie Morgan. “Obama should have the decency to recognize that he lacks the moral character to serve as Commander-in-Chief, and he should withdraw from the ticket. I have never heard of any candidate deliberately trying to get Americans killed to prove their point.”
According to the New York Post story, not only did Obama seek to get the Iraqi’s to stop negotiating with Americans on the troop drawdown, he also tried to bully General David Petraeus to agree to a hard withdrawal date.
“The hypocrisy of Barack Obama to say in the United States that he wants a speedier troop withdrawal date, while telling the Iraqis to stop negotiating is appalling. Even supporters of a quicker U.S. withdrawal must be sickened by his conduct in Iraq. If there was ever a candidate who has demonstrated the lack of character and leadership to represent the United States in foreign affairs, it is Barack Obama,” Morgan concluded.
MAF Freedom PAC is the political action arm of Move America Forward, the nation’s largest pro-troop organization. The patriotic group is led by San Francisco pro-troop activist and renowned radio and television personality, Melanie Morgan.
Melanie Morgan certainly can write in such a manner to draw attention, but the point is valid. What makes it even more saddening is that Obama has no compunction about “bullying” one of our commanders in the field but wouldn’t extend that attitude toward our enemies, as in agreeing to meet with terrorist-sponsoring national leaders without preconditions. And didn’t we go through this with President George H.W. Bush and his supposed mission to Iran prior to the 1980 election? The story goes that Bush went to Iran and sought a deal to keep the 52 American hostages they were holding through the election so Ronald Reagan and he could more easily defeat President Carter. (Not that Reagan needed much help.) That tale was proven false, but not until after a Congressional investigation was called for. Good luck getting any such investigation in this case.
I disagree with Morgan on one point, though. Personally I think John Kerry had more of a “lack of character and leadership in foreign affairs” than Barack Obama has so far shown, but admittedly Obama is making it a close race to the bottom.
Also, I can update you on another story relating to the folks at MAF. I asked and I shall receive an interview with Blue Star Mom Deborah Johns, all that needs to be worked out is the particulars. It’s something I’m looking forward to doing sometime in the next few days.
Tonight I made it out to Wicomico High School and said my piece in front of about 90 or so people. I honestly suspect this would be a monumentally long post if I tried to do it as one article, so tonight I’ll talk about the meeting itself and tomorrow I’ll look into what the state wants to accomplish with these listening sessions.
Once they got the issues with showing the PowerPoint presentation corrected (I told you we were guinea pigs), the meeting actually went pretty smoothly and lasted about 2 hours. I can give those after us in line a bit of a heads-up on how the meeting itself goes. We first had some introductory remarks by Jon Laria, who is the Chair of the Task Force on the Future of Growth and Development. This is yet another task force created by the General Assembly in 2006, with some revision in scope occurring last year and the first meeting of the 21-member group occurring earlier this year. They have a report that’s due to be delivered in December so these meetings are a bid to solicit public input on the state’s planning process, since growth is a “critical, defining (and) generational” issue for the state of Maryland.
Laria turned things over to the Maryland Secretary of Planning, Richard Eberhart Hall. He was the one who had the issues with the equipment, but once things got in order the audience used their own remote devices to answer a series of poll questions which were placed on the screen. (I’ll be interested to see if this becomes part of the report or if these results are posted beforehand.) But while the nonperforming projector was being replaced, Hall noted that it was Governor O’Malley’s charge to “instill” sustainable growth for the state, in part by highlighting the best practices through studying which incentives and ordinances were successful in that aim.
There were two slides that Hall showed which I assumed were supposed to have impact, but I picked out something which brought me to think about them further. The first of these two was a graph which showed three categories: population, number of households, and number of jobs for the Eastern Shore. Slowest to grow amongst them was the number of jobs, which I feel is truly unsustainable growth. Undoubtedly there’s a factor of retirees moving here from more urban areas but they should create service jobs at the very least. Having that job number growing the slowest would mean the local economy would stagnate compared to other areas and that definitely needs to be addressed.
The other slide was inserted to show the developed area on the Eastern Shore in 2002 and two projections for 2030: developed areas under current regulations and developed areas with Smart Growth, which supposedly would take up about 1/4 of the acreage. The prediction using current law is an additional 90,000 acres developed, and using my handy-dandy calculator I worked that out to roughly 140 square miles. It sounds like a lot if you look at it as a 14 mile x 10 mile area, but spread out among nine counties it’s not all that much.
Hall also alerted the gathering that the average lot size for a residential home was increasing while the share of growth in designated growth areas was decreasing. He opined that growth should be funneled as much as possible into Priority Funding Areas, areas the state deems to need an economic boost. (Perhaps making the state more business-friendly would help, but that’s a post for another time.) One other item I’m sure 98% of those in the auditorium were unaware of was that Maryland has been by law supposed to have a state development plan in place since the 1970’s but has never undertaken one until now.
The survey itself was conducted by our third scheduled speaker, Vienna Mayor Russ Brinsfield. One thing I found out is that I have some education to do because I was in a small minority on some issues, but the questions were sometimes those which led themselves to a politically correct answer and I ain’t politically correct (just right.) That’s part of my topic for tomorrow, but we got to the public input portion of the program after the survey.
As I expected, a number of speakers came up representing various environmental groups. But out of 17 speakers, they were not the majority. Friends of the Nanticoke, Wicomico Environmental Trust, Assateague Coastal Trust, and Heart of the Chesapeake (part of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation) all had someone say their piece. They spoke about “strong measures to protect an agricultural-based economy”, “green infrastructure”, “enhancing smart growth”, a “lack of will” among local officials to change cluster zoning regulations, and of course eliminating the subsidies for development, just to pick out a few general principles. One speaker not affiliated with these groups even managed to bring up the global warming aspect which I found disappointing because, as everyone should know, the earth’s temperatures have been steady or slightly cooling for the last ten years.
We also had other speakers who weren’t necessarily affiliated with the more radical environmentalists, but wished to preserve the status quo. One quoted Jim Perdue as saying that “sprawl represented the biggest threat to agriculture” in the region, while another stated that “the Eastern Shore doesn’t need to be Long Island”, suggesting that the money which would be used to build another Bay Bridge would better serve the Eastern Shore in creating jobs. Yet another came back to that theme of preserving agriculture, speaking about other states wanting our poultry industry to relocate there. He also talked about Salisbury as a “donut city” with the development on the outside and empty in the middle.
There were also a few elected officials who took to the microphone. Probably the best of them was Wicomico County Councilman John Cannon, who called on the planners to maintain a respect for private property rights and just compensation for transferable development rights, or TDR’s for short. Mayor Brinsfield also echoed the need for TDR’s, saying they have to be part of a planning solution. Sheree Sample-Hughes, who also sits on Wicomico County Council, took issue with the comment about a “lack of will” from County Council, a comment that “(did) not sit well” with her. She pointed out the county had “dissected” the issue and was moving forward with it to the county’s Planning Commission and eventually a public hearing. And Delegate Rudy Cane, who serves on the growth and development task force, felt he had to “stand in defense of the state of Maryland” when it was suggested that this planning may be too much of a “top-down approach”, contending this meeting was among the ways the state was making this a bottom-up process. Above all, the state has an “obligation to protect you.” (I wonder who would make the suggestion that the state was trying to impose its will? By the way, Rudy, I’d rather assume the obligation to protect myself than allow the state to do it for me.)
Two other officials looked at the perspective of costs. Former Worcester County Commissioner Sonny Bloxom decried a lack of staffing for his county as a hindrance and suggested the state possibly assist by assigning planners to individual counties. And a young lady who works for the town of Hurlock in their planning and zoning department gave several examples of their assistance to a particular developer and then asked who would pay and share the cost of placing growth in growth areas, and who pays to subsidize projects? Russ Brinsfield added that “you can’t assume growth pays its own way.”
As you probably figured by now, I did say my piece. I was the thirteenth of 17 speakers so as promised I let a bunch have their say first. The main points I wanted to stress were echoing John Cannon’s concern for private property rights (which drew commentary afterward from Mike Pretl, the speaker accusing the county of a “lack of will” – we generally have some disagreement when he and I meet), the idea of local control over planning rather than the topdown approach (which is what Delegate Cane took offense to), and not forgetting about economic development. I had to mention that the jobs line grew the slowest of all three, and we could not let the local economy stagnate in the quest for perfection in growth. (Hey, no one argued with that one!)
On the whole it’s going to be interesting to see what the task force comes up with, but if you look at the “12 Visions” that the MDP has drafted up, I can see a lot to object to already. That will be the topic on my second part tomorrow evening. I also saw G.A. Harrison there so I suspect Delmarva Dealings may be on this subject too.
If you have the chance to make it to Wicomico High School this evening, you can share your opinions on growth in Maryland. (I’m all for it; however, we could use friendlier policies in order to make it happen.) This is how the Maryland Department of Planning put it:
The Maryland Department of Planning (MDP) and the Task Force on the Future for Growth and Development in Maryland are hosting a series of public forums across the State for residents to share their thoughts and ideas on future growth in the state.
Six Smart Growth Listening Sessions, planned for September, will take place in Maryland’s regions (Baltimore Metropolitan, Washington Suburban, Southern Maryland, Lower Eastern Shore, Upper Eastern Shore and Western Maryland) and are open to all citizens.
The Listening Sessions will begin at 6:30 p.m. to accommodate diverse public input on a variety of growth-related topics including, smart sustainable growth; growth and a healthy environment; regional development; historic preservation; transportation and growth; and growth and schools. Moderated by community leaders, these sessions are designed like town hall meetings with open discussion on these important matters.
It just so happens that we on the Lower Shore bat leadoff in the lineup, so we can set the tone for future events. (Or be the guinea pig, as is sometimes the case.) What wasn’t revealed in the notice that I received was who our local host(s) would be, but I have a sneaking hunch it may be many of the same people who are on the Wicomico Neighborhood Congress and/or Wicomico Environmental Trust. Seeing that it’s a town hall meeting on “Smart Growth” sort of clues me in on the agenda, so naturally I’m going to be there to represent sanity. I have my own agenda for “smart growth”:
We’ll see if the fur goes flying tonight. I’ll allow them to say their piece, but I’m going to attempt to get my two cents in as well. It should be fun.
I had two intriguing items drop into my e-mail box today and I thought I’d share them. The first one boggles the mind when I think of the sheer numbers they’re attempting to achieve. It’s from a group called Watch Obsession.
Homes in over 100 major American cities are receiving DVD copies of the film Obsession – Radical Islam’s War Against the West starting today.
The Clarion Fund will deliver millions of copies of the DVD during the next month to homes across America.
This is the second phase of a nationwide initiative to inform the American people about the threat of Radical Islam to America, including its efforts to incorporate Islamic fundamentalist Shariah law which would negate a wide range of Constitutional laws and rights.
At the beginning of August tens of thousands of copies were distributed at both the Democratic and Republican conventions. Additional tens of thousands were nationally distributed in publications including National Review, Chronicle of Higher Education, the New York Times and others.
The Obsession initiative is one of the largest distributions ever undertaken of a film to individual households because officials at the Clarion Fund believe the issues addressed in the film are critically important.
“Obsession demonstrates in graphic detail what can happen in a nation when it ignores the troubling symptoms of the influences of Radical Islam and its efforts to sneak Shariah principles into local and state laws,” said Watch Obsession.Org national chairman Tom Trento.
“Obsession offers details and documentation of story after story about secretive and often violent efforts to spread Islam throughout Europe and here in America. Every American should know the lessons taught by this important film.
This film is not a blanket condemnation of all Muslims. Many moderate Muslims have been intimidated into silence by lawless and violent cells of extreme jihadists who are now operating in America and throughout the world.”
Perhaps the bid is on the heavy-handed side, but if anyone who is reading this has seen the movie I’d love to get your take on it. There were people locally who were at either the Democratic or Republican conventions so perhaps they have the DVD and have scoped it out. You don’t have to read the news too deeply to know that there are some radical Islamists who behave just as Trento notes. Who knows, if the movie’s not overly long perhaps it would be good to show at our Republican Club meeting in lieu of a speaker. I doubt that The Clarion Fund would mind.
It is worthy of note though that Watchobsession.org and The Clarion Fund are separate entities, as the Watchobsession people make clear here. A little more background on the newly-formed Watch Obsession group is in this Bradenton (FL) Herald story by Maura Possley.
And then I have the story of another woman who wants to tell hers. Deborah Johns is sort of the anti-Cindy Sheehan with the exception that her son is still living and serving. But she’s a little bit perturbed that Barack Obama is picking on her fellow Blue Star Mom, Sarah Palin:
I’m Deborah Johns, proud mother of a U.S. Marine who has already served three tours of duty in Iraq. I’m fighting mad about the repeated acts of disrespect by Barack Obama towards our troops, and now I’m madder than a wet hornet that Obama is disrespecting our nation’s FIRST Blue Star Mom candidate for Vice President, Gov. Sarah Palin.
I’m now working with the Our Country Deserves Better committee on two projects to defeat Barack Obama: television ad campaigns in key swing states, and plans for a national “Stop Obama” tour across the country.
I’m willing to give up 2 weeks of my life to go on the road to speak to the local news media in key cities across America, if you all will be willing to help us fund this trip.
(I snipped the financial appeal. You can donate to her sponsoring PAC here if you like.)
Please work with us in our efforts to DEFEAT Barack Obama. I will never forgive Obama for how he has repeatedly undercut our troops. I’ve even appeared in a television ad that outlines just some of Obama’s betrayals:
While I don’t think Salisbury is one of those key cities on her 2 week tour, she would be an interesting interview for our local media. (If they don’t do it, I will. I could come up with Ten Questions, that’s what I do sometimes.) So I think I’ll ask, the worst she can do is say no.
Tomorrow I’m going to shift gears to a more local issue that doesn’t involve a political action committee insofar as I know.
