October 2009 – Page 2

Fragmentation grenades

On Wednesday I received a message in my e-mail from Jake Brewer at the Sunlight Foundation, breathlessly telling me:

Exciting news.

At 11:30 this morning, we’re going to march up to Capitol Hill and hand over the signatures of more than 21,000 of you who have signed our Read the Bill petition.

For the last several months, you’ve been making sure that your representatives know you want legislation to be online for at least 72 hours before it’s debated – so that citizens and our representatives alike have time to actually read it.

Today, we’re making sure they hear that it’s time to Read the Bill.

Trust me, I’m not writing this to pick on the Sunlight Foundation because I happen to agree with their stance on the issue.

However, I probably get a couple dozen e-mails a day from various groups, all pushing one issue or another in Congress. Many also ask for donations (in this case the Sunlight Foundation did not), and the question which naturally occurs to me is just who has the money or time to do everything for all these groups? Honestly, in many of these cases I recieve the e-mail for my personal writing ideas and news tips, so I guess to quote the Bob Seger song “Night Moves”, “I used her, she used me, neither one cared.”

Certainly citizen activism has its place – last month gave us over a million reasons to remind ourselves of this fact. (Although to the partisan media it was only “tens of thousands” of reasons. Yep, I get e-mail from the Media Research Center too.)

But sometimes I wonder if our overall movement remains too fragmented to have the laserlike focus it needs (a metaphor inspired by a recent e-mail from the local Americans for Prosperity chapter). In a way, it’s the flip side of the government we all detest: thousands of lobbyists who produce nothing but e-mails and requests for donations; each totally convinced of their self-importance because theirs is the singular issue every thinking American should be thinking about.

Obviously I have a self-interest in writing this too, well, besides the obvious of bringing as many eyes as I can to this website and any others where I may publish this. So in a way I’m my own one-man lobbying operation who wouldn’t mind making a decent living at this kind of stuff. (Some people have a talent for this, so why not believe my supporters who say I do too?) Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! But at least I’ll admit it.

As events continue and perhaps the conservative resurgence promised for 2010 and 2012 bears fruit (why not a President Palin?) it would be interesting to see if some of these groups go by the wayside because their work is completed and successful. Unfortunately, restoring government to a modern-day version of what our Founding Fathers intended will be such a long-term project that we’re likely stuck with groups like these for awhile.

On the whole, though, it would be nice to have a prosperity which would allow people like Jake Brewer to have honest work instead of lobbying government. Getting there will be the hard part.

*****

Just as a closing note, you may also have noticed an increased operational tempo this week. Hey, I had lots of ideas! Anyway, I’m doing FNV tonight, but taking a day off tomorrow. Consider it fair warning.

The time has come for this idea

I’ve said this for a long time, but Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina wants to make it a reality. From today’s edition of his “Freedomcast” (h/t NetRightNation):

Hello again. I’m Senator Jim DeMint, and this is Freedomcast for October 22, 2009.

You know, the longer I stay in Washington, the more I have come to realize that the problem in the federal government isn’t just the people… it’s the process.

The system itself is so much more powerful than either party or interest group, let alone one president or congressional leader.

In Washington, the rules of the game are rigged — in favor of bigger government, higher taxes, more debt, and the time-honored system of political back-scratching of “go along to get along.”

Fifteen years ago, Republicans — who had been out of power in Congress for forty years – made term limits a centerpiece of their “Contract with America” agenda.

The term limits constitutional amendment ultimately failed, in part because so many new reform-minded congressmen imposed term limits on themselves. After six or eight years, these members voluntarily went home, leaving behind those Republicans and Democrats who fully intended to make a career inside the beltway.

The fact is, party doesn’t matter when it comes to reform. If you want to change the policies, you have to change the process.

That’s why in the next few weeks I will introduce a new constitutional amendment to limit members of the House of Representatives to three terms (which is six years), and members of the Senate to two terms (which is twelve years).

As long as members have the chance to spend their lives in Washington, their interests will always skew toward fundraising, relationship building among lobbyists, and trading favors for pork – in short, amassing their own power.

Since all that power is going to disappear in a few years, anyway, term-limited legislators will be far less likely to make compromises with the system.

Opponents of term limits say that the nation needs wise and seasoned leaders to lead the nation through crises and find consensus on difficult issues.

Well, that’s exactly what we’ve got now… How do you think it’s working out for us?

It wasn’t the “people” who gave us a 12-trillion dollar debt, trillion-dollar deficits, 100-trillion-dollar long term shortfall in Social Security and Medicare, the Wall Street and auto bailouts, and the health care takeover.

It was those wise and seasoned leaders, who enjoy lives of privilege almost wholly immune from the consequences of their policy failures.

Term limits are not enough, of course. I hope my amendment will eventually be ratified, and then followed by other structural reforms to make our public institutions more transparent and accountable.

But term limits are a good start. Because if we really want reform, we all know it’s not enough just to change the congressmen – we have to change Congress itself.

Thanks for checking in. This is Freedomcast, and I’m Jim DeMint.

Obviously the question will be asked about DeMint’s electoral situation, and he will be up for re-election in 2010. If he follows his own example he would not run again in 2016 but it’s worth pointing out he indeed served three terms in the House before stepping up to the Senate. (DeMint did not hold elective office in South Carolina prior to his running for the House according to his Wikipedia bio.)

In my study of history, the Founding Fathers expected people who wished to represent us in the House would come out of the private sector, serve a short time in Washington, and return home to resume their life. The Senate was thought to be somewhat more of a long-term proposition (as Senators were selected by state legislatures until the 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913), but in either case it’s highly doubtful those who created our form of government were expecting lifelong politicians on the order of Senator Robert Byrd or Rep. John Dingell, both of whom have served since the 1950’s.

Moreover, the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1951, limits Presidential tenure to 10 years or two full terms (if a sitting Vice-President takes over in the latter half of an unexpired term, he or she may run for two full terms after taking office.) So there is now a precedent for limiting terms.

The obvious argument against DeMint is that limiting terms limits the choices available at the ballot box and strips Congress of experienced politicians who know the ropes. I’m not going to deny that some good politicians may get term-limited out assuming the DeMint amendment passes, but there are just so many bad apples who continually fool their electorate into sending them back time after time that this abuse of the privilege makes punishment worthwhile. Truly, no one who is worth sending to Washington would want to spend decades there anyway.

Unsurprisingly, the biggest hurdle to DeMint’s proposal is getting the 2/3 majority of each house of Congress to agree with DeMint. While a reasonable number of Republicans would support the bill – the Senator points out this was a provision of the GOP’s “Contract With America” in 1994 – the slim chance majority Democrats would have anything to do with this makes the chance this will be sent to the states from this Congress practically nil.

But, should DeMint be re-elected in 2010 and should thoughtful voters do their job and put term limits of their own on those who would be obstacles to the passage of the DeMint proposal, there’s an outside chance we could see such an amendment be sent to states for ratification in the next two years. Then the fight will be taken to each of the 50 state capitals, with 38 states needing to ratify the DeMint amendment for eventual inclusion in the Constitution.

Unlike a lot of amendments already enacted (such as the Tenth), this one wouldn’t be so easily ignored.

Hope we don’t need matching funds!

Got this the other day from the fine folks who run my county government.

County Executive Richard M. Pollitt, Jr. announced (Tuesday) that the county has received $407,928 in grant monies from the Neighborhood Conservation Initiative. The funds are for buyers of foreclosed properties to make down payments, cover closing costs and perform necessary repairs.

(snip)

Mr. Pollitt also announced that the county has received $256,775 in grant funds from the Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development (DCHD). Mr. Pollitt explained that, “These funds will assist in rehabilitating housing for low and moderate income families and to also make renovations to the building owned and operated by the Maryland Food Bank.”

Obviously the state is swimming in money to grant Wicomico County this kind of funding, right? Well, it’s not all the state’s doing.

I looked up the “Neighborhood Conservation Initiative” and found that the grant money is going to come with just a few strings attached. One just can’t walk in and be eligible for the grant which, by the way, is also passed through the same Department of Housing and Community Development that’s handling the second grant.

The biggest concern I have with the program is that perhaps it’s placing recipients into the same situation which ran the foreclosure rate up in the first place, convincing them they can afford a larger house than is prudent. If you’re making just above poverty level wages at a job the chances are pretty good that you’re not skilled labor and aren’t going to have a lot of job security. Personally I don’t see this as the wisest use of tax dollars because I don’t agree with such targeting to a population segment that needs the incentive to depend less on government handouts, not depend more on them.

I’m also curious to know why the Maryland Food Bank needs taxpayers to fund their building renovation when there are a long list of private-sector entities which fund its parent organization, Feeding America. No doubt the Maryland Food Bank needs to upgrade its facilities because of these dire economic straits (if you ask me, brought about by poor government decisions on economic policy over the last three years or so) but once again, placing them on the hook of the taxpayer sets (or continues) a poor precedent.

It’s my belief that government can do some things well, but charity is not one of them. Obviously Wicomico County is under the illusion that if they didn’t grab the grant money someone else would, but just because the money is there doesn’t mean it needs to be spent – particularly when government at all levels struggles to live within some sort of means without bankrupting the producers of our nation. It’s a battle that isn’t being fought well and few have suggested starving the beast.

I think it’s time to listen to those who do, though.

So what will cap-and-trade cost?

Reading my online update of the Washington Times this morning, they had a story by Amanda DeBard about a new group using the new media to get their word out. Happy to oblige.

The piece details the Cost of Energy Information Project, whose website features a calculator which will predict how much your energy costs will rise should the cap-and-tax bill pass. (Hint: it’s probably more than the cost of a postage stamp per day. Mine was $853 a year!)

Much of the effort goes to posting updates on Twitter, the social networking site which boasts millions of users. For example, my Tweet this afternoon went to my 76 followers – if 10% follow through and have the math done they could reach hundreds or thousands of followers themselves, perpetuating the cycle.

If you’re curious how CEIP comes up with the numbers, so was I:

The energy cost calculator uses results from a study commissioned by the American Council for Capital Formation and the National Association of Manufacturers. The ACCF/NAM study of the House-passed cap and trade bill was performed by the non-partisan Science Applications International Corporation, using the same economic modeling system used by the Department of Energy’s highly respected statistical branch, the Energy Information Administration. The study was further refined to include results on a state-by-state level. The state-by-state data is applied to your specific current energy costs to calculate your projected future energy costs under a cap and trade system.

The trick with this, though, is to continually prime the pump and give people a reason to come back. Sure, a calculator is a nice initial draw but the 24/7 news cycle demands additional content for both the old and new media (like me.)

Besides, most people have probably figured out that cap-and-tax is going to cost more money – well, perhaps that’s an incorrect statement because 8 of the 9 Congressmen from Maryland and Delaware voted for this monstrosity in the House. The lone holdout was Rep. Roscoe Bartlett from the 6th District over in western Maryland. Frank Kratovil was in the tank, of course, but Mike Castle of Delaware was one of the GOP’s disappointing “cap-and-tax 8” which provided the margin of victory. Just thought I’d remind you. It’s also all but certain the four Senators who misrepresent our states will favor this legislation because they’re good liberals too.

Since this is a time of year utility bills are at their lowest, take a few moments to pull out your electric and gas bills and take a guess on your gasoline tab for the month ($100 is a pretty good guess since the average driver uses about 40 gallons a month to drive 1,000 miles) and see just how much more you’ll be paying to “combat” so-called manmade climate change.

Oh, by the way, this is just the monetary cost. As I described yesterday, the cost in freedom from this measure can’t be as easily calculated but it will be a cost just the same.

Ignorance, arrogance, or control? Or all three?

Thanks to an alert Facebook user, I found out that Eastern Shore Delegate Michael Smigiel blasted Delmarva Power for scheduling three public hearings without letting the public know the hearings were for a proposed rate increase. He noted his surprise that the TEA Partiers and other groups clamoring for accountability weren’t out in force due to the deception, and he also stated:

I meet with folks from the eastern shore on a daily basis who are unemployed, over taxed by the local, county, state and federal governments and hit with fees for various activities which used to be free or relatively cheap. People are having to make decisions on whether to pay the mortgage, buy groceries or pay their insurance bills.

We can not afford to continue to be nickle and dimed to death by government or monopolistic utility companies. The families I represent are dieing a death of a thousand cuts.

Obviously I applaud Delegate Smigiel on his diligence and hope Delmarva Power indeed rectifies its error. But a rate increase is nothing compared to the offer of intrusion from the nanny state I received in my last electric bill from the company.

Dangling a “FREE Energy Wise Rewards programmable thermostat” in front of customers, the utility promises a total bill credit of up to $160 a year for participation. But that comes with a cost, which Delmarva Power explains this way:

Your air conditioner compressor does not operate for the duration of the conservation period…Expect a (4 to 7 degree) rise in temperature during a conservation period.

(snip)

Energy Wise Rewards is only activated during times of critical electricity demand. Energy Wise Rewards conservation periods occur on selected summer days, June through October. Total conservation periods over the season typically amount to less than 1% of the year! (Emphasis in original.)

So imagine you come home from work on a hot summer day only to find your house is 85 degrees inside and you can’t turn on the air because the “conservation period” may not be over for several hours. This may seem to be paranoia at work, but it can happen if you fall for Delmarva Power’s siren song.

All this is part of the EmPOWER Maryland Energy Efficiency Act of 2008, which “requir(ed) specified municipal electric utilities and specified rural electric cooperatives to include energy efficiency and conservation measures as part of their service” as part of a 15% reduction in peak demand by 2015. Smigiel was one of 33 Delegates and 13 Senators – mostly Republican – who properly voted against a mandate to reduce the state’s economy. Unfortunately, the local Republican Delegate Page Elmore voted for the bill. On the other hand I expected the local Democrats to vote for this sort of garbage; needless to say they didn’t surprise me.

But letting the long arm of Delmarva Power onto your property to adjust the air conditioning makes me wonder if they’ll do the same for heating somewhere along the line. It’s along the lines of one version of the Obamacare legislation which allows the federal government to access your bank account or the sure-to-be-upcoming debate over speed cameras here in Wicomico County – more ways for Big Brother to peer into your personal affairs.

It’s a trend we need to stop.

Making a better point

While I’m often critical of U.S. Senate candidate Dr. Eric Wargotz this time he makes a great point.

Dr. Eric Wargotz, candidate for the U. S. Senate, criticized Senator Barbara Mikulski for derailing a proposal to require that the substance and cost of Democratic healthcare reform legislation be posted on the Internet prior to a vote.

The proposal, offered by Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY), would have required that the legislative language and a final, complete cost analysis of the Democratic bill be made publicly available on the Senate Finance Committee’s website at least 72 hours prior to any Committee vote.

Senator Mikulski used an arcane parliamentary tactic to block consideration of the proposal on the Senate floor. This can be viewed here.

“Millions of Americans have concerns about how this legislation will impact their access to quality healthcare,” stated Dr. Wargotz. “Greater transparency promotes better government. It gives citizens additional tools to educate themselves.”

As President and Countywide member of the Queen Anne’s County Board of Commissioners, Dr. Wargotz spearheaded measures to promote greater transparency in county government. “This is a responsibility of elected officials across all levels of government. I cannot understand why Senator Mikulski would want to take her constituents in the opposite direction.”

“Senator Mikulski has made healthcare reform one of her signature issues during her three decade political career,” Dr. Wargotz continued. “Now that the debate is here, she has been largely missing. I find it ironic that she would only break her silence to block a proposal to empower her constituents to make informed decisions. She is beholden to the shadowy Washington politics of the past at a time when people want change.”

This criticism works well for a press release at this stage in the campaign because this is a fairly black-and-white issue – you’re either in favor of transparency or you’re not. Wargotz is and Mikulski is not, and that puts Barb on the wrong side of the issue as far as the majority of Americans (including the President, supposedly) feel.

It also points out the “politics-as-usual” aspect of Congress, which is another item rubbing Americans the wrong way. So Wargotz makes plenty of political points with this salvo against Mikulski; the hard part will be getting her to explain her side. I’d also like to know how she was the one selected to object – perhaps they think she has the safest seat on the committee? (Granted, she could’ve come up with that herself but that makes it even more questionable as to why she would object.)

Like forgotten leftovers in the back of the refrigerator, Mikulski’s a Senator who’s hung around long past her expiration date. It’s time to restock the shelf next November.

2009 Autumn Wine Festival in pictures and text

It was fairly cold and raw but the show must go on and indeed it did.

Over the weekend I had the opportunity to spend a lot of time amongst the wine connoisseurs and spectators doing my political duties at the Autumn Wine Festival. Needless to say, with the weather the crowd wasn’t all that large. Here’s a shot I took yesterday afternoon:

I was standing at the north end of the aisle between the winery tents for this shot, looking toward the large tent which housed several more wineries.

Just as a comparison, I took this shot on Sunday afternoon at last year’s AWF.

This shot was taken at the 2008 AWF. I'm looking in the opposite direction toward the stage, with another difference being that each winery represented had its own tent.

So business was a little slow. You may recall last year had a chilly and cloudy Saturday but it didn’t rain, either. At least there was a little autumn color at the entrance.

Grist Mill Gardens provided a nice bit of fall color as visitors entered the Pemberton Manor grounds.

Obviously having the still life scenes around makes for the opportunity to get in some nice photography, like these examples.

The Running Hare Winery festooned its wares with a number of ribbons they've received from various wine festivals around the region. Honestly, I don't know if our version of the AWF does this but if they don't maybe they should - after all, we do that for Pork in the Park.

Orchid Cellars had their selections in this nice box. Not as many ribbons for their group but it made for a nice picture.

Moving to the wineries who set up outside the main tent, I thought Far Eastern Shore Winery had the nicest setup.

This may be my favorite picture of the whole event as far as composition because of the nice colors expressed in the wine bottles and the potted flower. Bonus points for the bottles being wet from the rain to provide texture.

But the reason I was there was to coordinate the GOP booth at the festival. Business was pretty slow, but that’s to be expected during an off-year in the election cycle. Unlike last year, I didn’t have a lot to give away or decorate with.

My partner at the time, Tom Hughes, looked a little chilled. On the table, the literature and buttons are from statewide and local candidates Jim Rutledge, Mike McDermott, and Michael James. And we had chocolate!

To their credit, the local Democrats were there too. It’s the first time I recall them showing at a non-election year AWF.

She looks cold too. All they had were voter registration cards and the yard signs under their tent.

It’s worth pointing out that neither side had a ton of volunteers but the Democrats’ tent was only staffed for a few hours on Saturday and they pulled up stakes before Sunday began. I had helpers most of the time both days so thanks to Gail, Woody, Leonard, Tom, Blan, Bob, and George for their assistance. Both parties had a conflicting event Saturday so it’s no surprise volunteers (and candidates) were hard to come by.

The music played as well. One of the Saturday acts was local saxophonist Everett Spells, who played in the rain – as the video shows.

Sunday started with local musician and former Bad Company bassist Paul Cullen.

Paul Cullen opened the show on Sunday, just him and his guitar.

Last year I highlighted the lingerie company that showed up, and they were there this year too. But this year I’ll focus on another vice.

Forget Hangovers was there on Saturday but forgot to come back Sunday. There were a few booths who didn't reopen but most vendors stuck it out for both days.

You would think they’d be there on Sunday but they weren’t. It leads me to believe that either business was slow or they were figuring on dissatisfied customers. Maybe a hangover is to blame for the next picture – look closely.

This belongs in the 'd'oh!' category. Wonder who's in charge of spellcheck?

I did find out one thing during my time at the AWF. The date for the event is not set by Wicomico County but by the group promoting Maryland wine. So we already have the same weekend set for 2010, which will be October 16th and 17th. Let’s all hope for much better weather and turnout.

Going Rogue in the media business

Just moments after publisher HarperCollins announced Sarah Palin’s upcoming book would have its release moved up from next spring to November 17, the book’s presale numbers rocketed Going Rogue to number 1 on Amazon’s bestseller list.

The overnight success of Palin’s upcoming tome continued a trend where books by conservative authors like Glenn Beck, Mark Levin, Ann Coulter, and Michelle Malkin have more than held their own in the marketplace. Unlike Palin, though, these four are conservative figures who dabble in other areas of media – Beck does a daily television and radio show, Levin hosts his own nightly radio show, and Coulter and Malkin toil as syndicated columnists. Thus, it can be argued they have more of a built-in audience for their books whereas Palin does not. Yet this conservative dominance of bestseller lists simply echoes the overwhelming ratings lead Fox News has over its competitors in the news network business, competitors which are perceived to be more left-leaning than Fox.

On the other hand, traditional newspapers and the so-called “alphabet” networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC have seen their readership and ratings decline steadily over the last several years. True, part of this comes from the faster methods of information dissemination we have today – decades ago radio and television supplanted the newspaper as a device for breaking news because they were readily available and could be updated at any particular moment as opposed to a newspaper, and this evolution continues with the internet.

Certainly reporting on the internet shares the on-the-spot news gathering ability with television and radio, and many news outlets now supplant their broadcast or printed content with gaudy websites of their own. However, consumers have a larger multitude of choices through the World Wide Web than either television or radio can provide and it appears news consumers are voting with their patronage by choosing sources which don’t appear to slant their coverage toward a liberal worldview.

As the oldest technology among news sources (and generally considered the most left-leaning), the newspaper is also among the media’s most endangered species. There are even those in Congress clamoring for a federal bailout of the newspaper industry in return for those newspapers dropping overt political endorsements – a bailout President Obama is receptive to.

Ironically, the initial success of Sarah Palin’s upcoming book might be because she’s been heavily scrutinized and vilified by many of those same media outlets in the wake of her selection as part of the 2008 GOP ticket. Prior to last September Palin was barely known outside Alaska, but the incessant media coverage tended either to try to find as much dirt on her as possible or paint her as an unqualified back-country hick – never mind she was the lone major party candidate with any sort of political executive experience from being a mayor and governor. It’s most telling that the quote most famously attributed to Palin was actually uttered by an actress doing an impersonation of her on a late-night comedy show.

Given the negative perception with which many painted Sarah Palin, the fact that her upcoming book – which was completed months ahead of schedule – is going to be such a blockbuster may come across as a head-scratcher to observers in the business. But those in flyover country who saw the treatment Pain received from the media for having the courage to speak to issues dear to those on the conservative end of the political spectrum are getting the one piece of revenge they can by purchasing the Palin book and going rogue on their own.

Michael Swartz is a Liberty Features Syndicated writer.

Editor’s note: Since the syndication network who puts out my opinion pieces is growing I’m only clearing one per week now. This is the latest release from October 8th.

Where in the world is Michael, part one

Today (and tomorrow too) you can find me for part of the day at our Autumn Wine Festival, coordinating the Republican cause and probably freezing my you-know-whats off. It’s going to be like being at an early-season Shorebirds game so when you come out dress in that manner.

Still, I hope to have some interesting pictures and text from the event early next week – particularly of any political element involved. There may even be an addition to the monoblogue YouTube page. However, I won’t have my laptop out there so comment moderation will be slow today. You can amuse yourself by participating in the poll instead.

Friday night videos episode 10

The series has reached double-digits, so I suppose one could call it established. Of course I delve into the political, but my opening video from filmmaker Evan Coyne Maloney lends a new meaning (if you hail from the Midwest as I do) to asking about “pop” culture.

You see, the joke I made doesn’t work if you call it “soda”. This country’s not as united as we’d like it to be, and that’s not just in dialect. We obviously have a disagreement over health care reform too.

But as fellow blogger Bob McCarty shows in this video, the battle isn’t necessarily person vs. person but may be the power vs. the people.

I must say that these TEA Partiers are putting the rest of us to shame because they gather every weekend at the same Missouri intersection. Unfortunately, they won’t be along the route of TEA Party Express part 2, which is noted in a quick-paced commercial plugging the effort.

Not only is there a battle between sides on health care, but there’s a battle within the Republican Party. I didn’t believe Michael Steele said this either – frankly I was disappointed in the nod to political correctness.

Meanwhile, there are real issues out there we need to be united against, one being taxes. This is from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation (who could be against either?) and talks about the bid for a value added tax.

Another issue is education. This upcoming film is called ‘The Cartel’ and looks at the influence of teachers’ unions in our schools.

Money is not the solution, and when you look at a local budget like our county’s you can see that they represent a large portion of expenditures but don’t always share in the sacrifice.

To wrap things up this week, I’m focusing on a local political race. We border on the 100th District in Virginia, a legislative district for the House of Delegates which includes all of the Virginia Eastern Shore and a small part of the Norfolk area. Melody Scalley is a friend of monoblogue and common-sense conservative candidate who’s trying to unseat a three-term incumbent. She got a pleasant surprise in the first debate between contenders in this three-way race.

Nice to make it a two-way race and add the support of the opposition. But having good representation in Richmond from the ESV will help us on the Maryland side of the border too because their prosperity wouldn’t necessarily come at our expense. I’ve donated to Melody’s cause and perhaps you should too.

That wraps another chock-full version of FNV.

Conference call 10-14-2009

Yesterday I was invited to participate in a blogger conference call with at least four other bloggers who asked questions and two members of Congress: Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington state and John Shadegg of Arizona.

You can find the call here. I come in about the 17-minute mark.

There were a number of points made during the half-hour long conference call, which was about 1/4 statements from the Congressmen and 3/4 answering a total of five questions. But, aside from my question I got a lot of useful points and quotes, particularly from Shadegg. (Honestly, by reputation he was the reason I wanted to participate, meaning no disrepect to Mrs. Rodgers.)

Shadegg most notably conceded that “this bill will pass, unless…and you’re the unless” bloggers like us spread the word on just how bad the Democrats’ proposals were. Simply put, bloggers are the “mechanism” for education, otherwise we would have “health care, Soviet gulag style.”

To that end, Congressman Shadegg pointed out a number of examples in the Senate bill. For example, did you know that Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada carved out an exception for Nevada and three other states from having to pay a share of the increased Medicaid costs? Their share will be borne by the other 46 states (which I presume include Maryland and Delaware.) Not to be outdone, the tax on “gold-plated” policies that the Baucus bill includes as a payment mechanism has a sliding scale – certain states have a higher threshold (thanks to Sen. Charles Shumer of New York) and union plans are protected due to the stellar efforts of Senators John Kerry and Debbie Stabenow.

Even better, the CBO score Democrats raved about has what I consider a fatal flaw. Remember, the actual health care bill does not kick in until 2013 – after Obama is presumably re-elected – but the taxes start now. So we have 10 years’ worth of revenue paying for 7 years’ worth of expenses. No wonder it works so well!

Shadegg also brought out the point that, if Harry Reid decides to go the route of using a shell bill to bring this to fruition, their argument has to concede that this is a tax bill (to originate in the House). Of course, Nancy Pelosi’s manuevers there have been “shocking” so whatever she does would not be a surprise. Overall, Shadegg said, the bill “will destroy” health care as we know it and the claim that you can keep your policy is patently “false.”

Bloggers “should be scaring people”, concluded Shadegg.

Also, thanks to fellow bloggers Clyde Middleton of the Patriot Room, Mike Proto of Conservatives with Attitude, Andrew Ian Dodge, and Gary Groth from parts unknown.

MDGOP Chair Pelura pays visit to Salisbury University College Republicans

Tonight the Salisbury University College Republicans played host to a special guest, state Republican Party Chair Dr. Jim Pelura. I was pleased to have attended and to bring you this report on the proceedings.

Jim was introduced and welcomed by local county GOP head Dr. John Bartkovich.

Dr. John Bartkovich, chairman of the Wicomico County Republican Party, made brief remarks and introduced Dr. Pelura upon his arrival.

To get things underway, Dr. Bartkovich offered his opinion on the past, present, and future of the the GOP.

But he opened by asking those students in attendance their opinion on “why did we lose (in 2008)?” Some blamed President Bush, while others thought John McCain ran an “uninspired” campaign against a candidate who appealed to younger voters. (No one in the audience admitted voting for Obama, however.)

When Bartkovich asked about Obama’s accomplishments, most answered “nothing” but a couple volunteered that he had continued the pullout from Iraq and burnished America’s image in the world.

John concluded in an abrupt manner since the guest of honor had arrived, but one point of agreement for the future of the GOP was that the party needed to reinvent its presentation and change its image in order to convey that it was the best vehicle for providing the American dream of a better life for succeeding generations.

After the introduction, Pelura spoke to an audience of about two dozen College Republicans and local GOP leaders who came to offer support to the newly revamped CR group.

It wasn't a packed house, but those who attended the CR meeting received an education on state and national GOP politics from the outgoing state chair.

Pelura’s speech was very similar to the one he gave at our county’s Lincoln Day dinner, ironically held just across campus from where he spoke tonight.

Dr. Jim Pelura, Maryland Republican Party head, makes a point during his speech to the Salisbury University College Republicans, October 14, 2009.

It is worth repeating Pelura’s assertion that the “path of moderation” the party took after Ellen Sauerbrey’s initial 1994 defeat in the governor’s race was the wrong path and that it created a wedge between the party’s establishment and its grassroots. (Welcome to 2009.) But in addressing prospective candidates Jim cautioned that “too many get distracted by the 2:1 ratio” of Democrats to Republicans registration-wise in Maryland. If voters are given a clear choice between Democrat and Republican, they respond favorably (as is generally the case here on the Eastern Shore.)

While citing three issues he thought the GOP could win on (immigration, educational choice, and environmental solutions “beyond just throwing money at the Chesapeake Bay Foundation”) he also spelled out his three goals he had when elected party Chair: energizing and empowering the local party organizations, including the grassroots, and defining the GOP by its philosphy of limited government and fiscal conservatism. Needless to say, he stepped on not a few toes by doing so but apparently leaves with no regrets.

Dr. Pelura talked about a few successes in local elections, including a rare win for a Republican in Prince George’s County as Brentwood elected a Republican mayor. (In some ways that’s a more important win than a General Assembly seat, he noted to a questioner.) But in governance he warned we “can’t just be the party of ‘no'” but “we don’t have to be irrelevant” either. We “need to regain our credibility”.

Jim also was kind enough to take questions from the audience and that proved to be the most interesting part of the evening.

One student asked where we could make additional budget cuts. Pelura replied that we can’t cut government and decimate the private sector simultaneously because there would be no jobs available for the state workers cut. A better solution may be to combine departments and agencies; as an example Jim cited the duplicate programs between the departments of agriculture, natural resources, and environment.

Another questioner asked two questions: if the shift in Virginia toward electing a GOP governor was a reflection of national trends and if John McCain was a good candidate.

In answering the McCain portion, Pelura opined that McCain was “not a Republican candidate” and was picked as a result of several open primaries among the early-voting states. Jim also claimed Virginia was “basically a red state” but went Democrat because Republicans became complacent.

Queried about how we get to majority status in Maryland, Jim simply stated we need to show that Republicans do things when put in charge. He cited the “mixed message” of General Assembly Republicans holding firm against tax increases in the 2007 Special Session but voting for the bloated budget in 2008 as an example of how not to do things.

Jim also expressed his thoughts on Sarah Palin (a good candidate, but perhaps a little “impulsive”) and the TEA parties (generally good people with a couple bad apples getting too much into the Obama=Hitler angle).

He also revealed that Bob Ehrlich may not make a decision on whether to run again for governor until next spring. Obviously this left candidates out to dry, but Jim was no more successful at convincing the former governor to commit than anyone else, including this observer. (As for me, Bobby’s lost my primary support.) Aside from the top chair, though, we have candidates “coming out of the woodwork” and none of them were “lukewarm” candidates.

If they do win, though, they need to “govern like a Republican.” Got that right!

Finally, the College Republicans immortalized themselves by getting photographed with a party chair who has hopefully set the stage for their generation’s success.

Members of the Salisbury University College Republicans pose with State Chair Dr. Jim Pelura at their meeting, October 14, 2009.

Speaking as one who was not politically active until several years after college I must say that if the CR meetings at my alma mater were this interesting I regret missing out on them. It’s good to see that not every college student blindly follows BHO and some have been taught about freedom and values.