May 2011 – Page 2 – monoblogue

Shorebird of the Week – May 19, 2011

Ty Kelly in a familiar position this month - leading off base.

Before he hit his hot streak, Ty Kelly was looking for answers in this April game.

Ty Kelly has accomplished a rare feat; picking up an already solid .267 average 100 points in the second month of the season.

At the end of April he was 12-for-45, but so far in May he has hit in every game (28-for-64, a .438 clip) to place his .367 mark among the league leaders. Included in that string was a 5-for-5 mark on Tuesday against Lakewood; a game where Ty cracked his first home run of the season.

Aside from changing his uniform number, Ty has been the same steady performer as he was here in 2010 – just at a higher level. You may recall his decent Shorebird numbers from last year – a .259 average with 4 homers, 58 runs batted in, and a .721 OPS mark – and the fact he played in all but 11 of the team’s 140 games last year.

This year Ty sat out a few April games as the Shorebirds’ infield is loaded with prospects, but since getting regular playing time in the absence of megaprospect Manny Machado Kelly has taken advantage of the situation and it will be hard to keep him out of the lineup when Manny returns. This despite the fact Ty was only a 13th round pick in 2009 out of Cal-Davis.

Since Ty doesn’t turn 23 until later this season, he may find himself making a run at piling up some of the numbers he compiled last season, a campaign where he paced the team in a number of offensive categories. Obviously the competition in that regard has improved this season, so it appears Kelly has stepped up his game to match.

The PSA

It started with the Troopathon ad I put up a couple days ago, and now I’ve added a link to a charity show put on by the Chad Clifton Foundation, the 6th Annual Concert for a Random Soldier.

I know other blogs both locally and around the globe sometimes devote a little space to charitable events, so I’m not doing anything groundbreaking here. But the advantage of having an ad is that the event gets continual promotion – just like a business does – except I’m giving the space for free. (Naturally it’s a somewhat less advantageous space than paying ads, but the server has to be paid for somehow.)

Truly I don’t mind putting in a little effort for the cause, since the extent of adding these is manipulating a widget. It’s not hard to put pretty pictures and links on my sidebar anymore as opposed to my old template, which needed to have the html added to a long file. Truthfully, it makes the site look “fuller” anyway.

Since local music is on my mind anyway with the addition of this widget, though, I think the time has come to make a subtraction as well.

With the rapid evolution of marketing for bands, it’s become harder and harder to make sure their websites are up to date. Instead of relying on just the now-dying Myspace, bands have moved on to a number of different venues like Facebook, Reverbnation, or restored the old-fashioned domain name and website (or all of the above.) Simply put, it’s difficult to verify that I’m placing the latest info onsite, not to mention how quickly bands change and break up. For example, I found out on Sunday that one of my favorite local groups (Order 6D-6) is no more.

So I think the time has come to dissolve the “local music” area of my website and delete those links. Normally I prune blogs which are inactive for three months, but given this moving target and the limited amount of free time I seem to have anymore, there are better uses of my time then to try and keep up with band links. Truth be told, I’d rather have nothing than have something that’s wrong.

Now if local bands want to advertise on my site, well, that’s negotiable. I just might cut you a deal. It’s not like I don’t give them promotion after the fact or place up their videos, but why not be here all the time instead of for just one post?

It’s food for thought, right?

So support these charitable causes I place in the PSA box, whether they’re musically related or not – they’re worth your time and effort.

The ‘war on the Shore’ – another shot fired across the bow

I’m not sure that our Congressman needs to be involved in this; then again I’m sure he’s going to be affected when his EZPass becomes more expensive.

But Andy Harris will be holding a press conference tomorrow afternoon in Stevensville to talk about “the proposed 320% Bay Bridge toll hike and other toll increases that will hurt Maryland families, Maryland businesses and job creators.” Included in that gabfest will be a number of Maryland legislators and local business owners who will be affected by the fee increases. I won’t be there, but it’s relatively predictable that Harris would come out against toll increases which may hit just about the same time the General Assembly is debating a gas tax hike.

Of course, the Maryland Transportation Authority defends the increases, citing an increased need for maintenance on aging infrastructure. But the problem is that we’ve been paying the tolls for years, yet Annapolis continues to raid the transportation funds to balance the overall budget – who says that trend won’t continue?

And this increase will affect three sets of people disproportionately:

Commuters in Baltimore will have to pay more to drive through the Harbor Tunnel or over the Key Bridge.
Tourists and north-south travelers along I-95 will be hit once they cross the Delaware line (or Susquehanna River.)
The Eastern Shore, as both main arteries crossing the Bay in Maryland will see a toll increase.

Obviously the third one concerns us, especially those who chose to live on the Eastern Shore yet commute to work in Annapolis, Baltimore, or Washington, D.C. While the increase will be blunted for those who have EZPass it will still be a much larger monthly outlay. On the other hand, the drive between Baltimore and D.C. will remain as it is – even the new Inter-County Connector will be spared a toll increase. If you want to stay in the center of the state, well, these toll increases aren’t hurting you a bit (but you may reap the benefits.)

And as for the one reason I would support a modest toll increase (as opposed to 320%) – a third Chesapeake Bay span, but one closer to Salisbury? Well, apparently that’s not on the table as MTA is just trying to hold serve with fixing the stuff it has.

This will also serve to isolate the Eastern Shore further from the rest of the state, because who really wants to pay $8 to get across the bridge when almost everything else is readily available on the other side of the Bay? While it may not make or break a trip to Ocean City, it will adversely affect businesses in Queen Anne’s County, and a sampling of those business people will be stating their case at tomorrow’s presser.

Before the tolls take effect, though, there will be a series of public hearings beginning next month. Expect an earful from Eastern Shore residents who are tired of being considered the state’s outhouse when it comes to public policy decisions.

Atlas shrugs on the Shore

Sort of a public service announcement as I close in on the 2,500 post mark…

Just in from local political activist Greg Belcher: he’s attempting to put together a carpool to see a showing of Atlas Shrugged on Thursday night (7 p.m.) at the Premier Theatre in Easton. The movie costs $8 and the group would leave Salisbury at 5:30 p.m.

Although the Atlas Shrugged website shows the movie is playing in Easton, it appears that Thursday is the only day it will be shown. So it’s important to show support for the film so Part 2 next year will be more widely viewed.

The other event he clued me in on will be next Tuesday, as the Maryland Society of Patriots meets to discuss a strategy for combatting the Maryland DREAM Act.

At that point there will be one week to go before the first hurdle so time will be of the essence.

A symptom or a disease?

Most of the readers around these parts know I follow the Delmarva Shorebirds closely, and I go to a lot of games over the course of a season. But something I’ve noticed this season came out when I was cleaning out the office over the weekend.

I found a stat sheet from about this point last season, and what it revealed was surprising: through 19 openings in 2010 the Shorebirds had drawn 65,290 fans. This year opening number 19 came yesterday; however, only 49,612 had attended the games to date. That’s about a 24% drop from season to season, and if the trend continues the club will fall well short of its previous low attendance figure.

Of course there are caveats to these stats; for one thing the preponderance of games for the Shorebirds thus far have been at home and they hit the 19 opening mark a week or so earlier than they did in 2010. Attendance seems to pick up once school is out and the weather gets warmer.

Yet the team is more competitive than last year’s model, sporting a 22-15 record thus far compared to 17-20 at the same point in 2010. They also have one of the best prospects in baseball (Manny Machado) and are far more offensively gifted then the 2010 team, hitting .276 as a squad and averaging over 5 1/2 runs a game. If chicks dig the longball, they should be happy as Delmarva’s hit 25 as a team so far in about 1/4 of the season (compared to 63 for a full season last year.)

So why aren’t people showing up?

It’s not ticket prices, because they haven’t appreciably increased, and the parking fee remains the same as last year, when it was instituted for the first time. Food isn’t much more expensive, either. Perdue Stadium is sporting a new line scoreboard which replaces most of the functions previously placed on the videoboard in right-center field (which is also working much better this year.) Promotions are reasonably comparable to last season’s lineup, and obviously the team has pushed ticket deals which include admission to the South Atlantic League All-Star Game in June.

In truth, the biggest difference seems to be that the sluggish economy and high gas prices are keeping people home. People who are having trouble making ends meet don’t have a lot of money to go to a ballgame, even if they’re spotted two free tickets for having a child who reads a certain number of books. The fireworks shows that used to draw 5,000 to 6,000 now bring in about 1,000 less, and over a season that will add up.

I don’t think we are at a critical point yet because there’s the financial backing from the Orioles – they pay the players. While there wasn’t a direct competitor to the Shorebirds in the immediate region, some of the financial struggles being encountered by independent baseball leagues across the country (a number of teams folded and leagues merged after the 2010 season) indicate the entertainment industry is hitting a rough patch in many places. (Maryland only has one independent team, the Southern Maryland Blue Crabs of the Atlantic League. Along with the Frontier League, these two leagues are perhaps the most financially solvent of the independent leagues out there.)

I bring this up because there’s always a number of cities which would love to acquire an affiliated minor league baseball team, as Delmarva did from Albany, Georgia after the 1995 season. While the SAL has been relatively stable over the last few years, there was one franchise move where Columbus, Georgia lost a team that moved to Bowling Green, Kentucky. (That team, along with the Lake County Captains, shifted to the Midwest League after the 2009 season for travel reasons.)

We are truly blessed to be a city of 30,000 in a county of under 100,000 people yet have a minor league baseball team which is relatively successful. And it may just be an anomaly that attendance so far is dragging well behind last year’s pace – a good homestand or two will get it caught up.

But the economic doldrums we’ve experienced here for the last half-decade or so (essentially since the real-estate bubble burst and the growth slowed to a crawl) may be finally taking its toll on this particular institution. It’s hard to imagine a summer on Delmarva without baseball, but if this trend continues for a few more years that may well happen. Seventh Inning Stretch is out to make a profit, and they may not be all that loyal to the area if attendance continues to wane.

In-state tuition for illegals to become law – or will it?

On Thursday, Governor Martin O’Malley signed SB167 into law. Of course, that bill may be sent to referendum if enough signatures are applied to a petition seeking the vote of the people, and Delegate Neil Parrott is leading that effort.

Here’s what he had to say about the signing.

(On Thursday) Governor O’Malley signed into law SB 167, known as the Maryland Dream Act, that will provide in-state tuition benefits to illegal aliens.

MDPetitions.com, under the leadership of Delegates Neil Parrott and Pat McDonough, has launched a petition drive to bring the bill to referendum in the November 2012 elections.

Delegate Parrott, Chairman, indicated that “It’s no surprise that Gov. O’Malley signed this legislation. The people of Maryland anticipated this and that is why people across the state are going to www.mdpetitions.com to sign the petition so we can bring this bill to referendum.”

Delegate Pat McDonough, Honorary Chairperson of the Petition Drive stated, “Taxpayers are wasting millions educating someone who cannot and will not be hired legally. Politicians like Governor O’Malley have transformed Maryland into a ‘sanctuary state’ by becoming a Disneyland for illegal immigrants, attracting hundreds of thousands of them, and costing taxpayers about 2 billion dollars. This law will only make things worse.”

Delegate Parrott noted that “this bill barely passed during the night on the last day of the session despite Bi-partisan opposition to the bill. Given the choice, I believe Marylanders will reject this legislation outright.”

The outpouring of support for our petition drive should serve as notice to Governor O’Malley and the legislators in Annapolis that Marylanders are fed up with the rampant abuse of our hard earned tax dollars.

Certainly I’m as fed up with “rampant abuse of our hard earned tax dollars” and I was happy to place my John Hancock on the petition. And I also think Alex Mooney was right when he commented at the state GOP convention that “we need to use that petition to referendum more often.” Just wait until the Special Session, and the tax increases we’re sure to see.

Of course, much of that momentum will depend on how this particular petition drive goes – if it’s a success, then people will be emboldened to use the referendum route to overrule O’Malley and the Democrats in the General Assembly more often. But the last attempt to petition a bad bill into referendum (the speed camera law) failed when the organizers came up short at the 1/3 barrier in May 2009.

Obviously there will be a lot on the ballot next November, as the general election in Maryland only comes once every two years and there’s a long list of items which the General Assembly sends to the voters for final ratification. Three items were placed before voters in 2010, two in 2008, and four in 2006.

But according to this piece by Ann Marimow in the Washington Post, the last petition drive to succeed in making it to the ballot came two decades ago, and it lost at the polls. Insofar as this drive is concerned, the effect on the 2012 election will be interesting should it succeed – with Barack Obama a prohibitive favorite in the state, will downballot turnout determine the fate of the referendum? Also, since the ballot question could pit one minority against another, how will that shake out?

Perhaps one reason these drives tend to fizzle out is the lengthy timeframe between the referendum and the election. If the petition effort succeeds we’ll have 17 months before voters will decide. In many cases where the ballot question is determined by the General Assembly this doesn’t seem to matter, as most Constitutional amendments placed before voters pass handily. But this will be different and there’s a potential of legal wrangling before the voters get to decide whether to rescind the law.

Passing the bill in its fourth try (2007, 2008, and 2009 – notice they didn’t go for this in the election year of 2010 knowing it would be a hot-button issue) was ill-advised, so Maryland voters should get a crack at this. Some may argue that the referendum shouldn’t go through because it would bring more Latinos to the polls and they’ll both vote against the referendum and punish Republican candidates. But I believe this will help GOP turnout in a state that’s generally written off by the national GOP and maybe give the Republican nominee an outside chance of winning.

So if you get the chance, sign the petition. Let’s show the General Assembly and Martin O’Malley who’s in control of this state.

RSC: advocates for solutions

The Republican Study Committee (of which our Congressman, Andy Harris, is a member) has a new website:

Government red tape costs small businesses on average $10,585 for every single employee. Complying with our incredibly complex federal tax code? That cost Americans $160 billion in 2009, according to one estimate. And every penny increase in gas prices costs consumers – many of them small businesses – a total of $4 million per day. This is money that can’t be used to build a business, hire new workers, or develop new products.

House Republicans are working on all three of these problems. To tackle onerous regulations, we built AmericanJobCreators.com, a website where small business owners can tell Congress about the red tape that stands in the way of job creation. On taxes, our 2012 budget proposed to simplify the tax code and reduce tax rates without sacrificing revenue. A simplified tax structure will strengthen the private sector’s ability to create jobs and put our economy on more stable ground. And last week RSC members introduced the Consumer Relief for Pain at the Pump Act, a broad plan to increase our supply of North American energy, reduce regulatory burdens, and repeal government policies that artificially inflate the price of gasoline.

The government can take away wealth and prosperity, but it can’t create them. Only the private sector can do that.

Now you know they’re correct in a philosophical sense, and the Congressional remedy for high gasoline prices they prescribe is, on balance, a good piece of legislation. (Many things with the term ‘repeal’ in them are things I tend to favor.)

I suppose the only thing I take issue with is the idea that that reducing tax rates “sacrifices” revenue, considering the government should be paid for by the pleasure of the people, not the other way around. I think the government could run just fine on half of what it takes in, largely by phasing out entitlement programs. (I didn’t say mine was a quick fix.) I think people should plan their lives as if they would retire strictly through their own devices and plan accordingly for those ailments sure to crop up as they age. Obviously those who are above a certain age would need to have the system stay pretty close to status quo, but for those around my age or younger, well, I think we can suck it up a bit.

But the RSC addresses this in part as well. In a letter to House leadership they write:

Dear Mr. Speaker and Mr. Leader,

The fast-approaching debt ceiling vote gives us an opportunity to make a bold statement to the American people about what direction we want our country to go. Further, given the condition of the country’s finances, it is imperative to the future of the country that we fight for an immediate shift toward fiscal responsibility. Consider these staggering facts:

The debt held by the public has more than doubled in the past 5 years.

The interest paid on the debt is currently projected to more than triple over the next 10 years and may alone consume all of our tax revenues by the middle of this century.

Several weeks ago, PIMCO, a management company handling $1.2 trillion in assets, dumped all of its U.S. government debt holdings; its cofounder William Gross saying that regardless of borrowing authority, unless spending is curtailed, the government will in essence default on its debt by ‘picking the pocket of savers.’

In April, for the first time since 1941, Standard & Poor’s (S&P) revised its outlook on the United States credit rating from stable to negative, citing the fear that Congress will fail to address the nation’s medium- and long-term budgetary challenges.

As China considers ceasing its purchase of U.S. debt securities, the International Monetary Fund has forecasted that the size of China’s economy will surpass that of the United States in 2016, effectively ending the ‘Age of America.’

Put in the context of the above facts, we believe the willingness of our conference to pursue bold solutions to Washington’s spending problems can breathe new life into the ‘Age of America’.

We must state unequivocally that we will not vote for a ‘clean’ debt ceiling increase. We share your belief, as articulated in your speech in New York on May 9th, Mr. Speaker, that if we do not reverse the out-of-control spending that has led us here, it would be grossly irresponsible for us to extend the limit on the national credit card.

We look forward to working together with you and our entire Republican team on developing bold solutions for reducing spending and reforming the way Washington budgets and spends taxpayer dollars. Following are some solutions that we know will achieve this goal.

Americans deserve immediate spending cuts that demonstrate that we are charting a swift path toward a balanced budget. We must implement discretionary and mandatory spending reductions that would cut the deficit in half next year.

To ensure that spending cuts continue, we need statutory, enforceable total-spending caps to reduce federal spending to 18% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), with automatic spending reductions if the caps are breached. Reps. Mack, Kingston, Flake, and Graves, for example, are developing spending-cap legislation to this effect.

To fundamentally and permanently reform the way that Washington budgets and spends, we must send to the states a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) with strong protections against federal tax increases and including a Spending Limitation Amendment (SLA) like the statutory spending caps described above. Rep. Joe Walsh has introduced a BBA with a spending limit provision (H.J.Res. 56) that has already earned the support of 47 Republican senators.

We believe it is prudent to limit the extension of borrowing authority as much as possible, in order to demand accountability from Senate Democrats and the Obama Administration.

With each passing day our nation’s fiscal health gets worse, leaving our children and grandchildren falling farther into debt. The Democrats have given up, saying that the only answer to excessive borrowing is more borrowing. Therefore, it is imperative that we move quickly and unite behind a plan to restore fiscal responsibility to Washington and renew the Age of America.

Since I was born an American and happen to believe, based on the simple historical fact that we’ve created perhaps the most prosperous society imaginable through our systems of economics and government, I really don’t want to watch the Democrats screw it up anymore.

When he was running in 2008, I asked Andy if he would be part of the Republican Study Group and he said yes. Given these solutions to the big government which ails us, can you see why I’d ask?

Here’s what Harris had to say on the House floor the other day:

Looks like Andy fits right in.

The glove picked up

We didn’t want a war, but I guess we’re going to get one anyway:

The Maryland State Republican Party on May 7th, 2011 adopted a new voting formula for party business under which counties with a combined population of 200,000 people can outvote counties with 2.5 million people.

Under this new voting formula adopted by the state party at its Spring Convention in Ocean City:

Anne Arundel, with 28 times the Republicans as Kent County now only has only 4.5 times the vote for party business as Kent.

Baltimore County, with 30 times Republicans as Kent County, now only has only 4 times the vote for party business of Kent.

Prince George’s, with 12 times the Republicans as Kent County, now has only has only 1.6 times the vote for party business of Kent.

The change continues the state party’s retreat toward focusing only on the state’s few majority Republican areas.

This is only the latest example of a continuing phenomenon. Last year the state party leadership declined to run a candidate for Attorney General. Before that, a prior State Party Chair undermined our Republican legislative leaders with his feud over legislative policy and strategy.

Montgomery Republicans reject this strategy of retreat. We believe that marginalizing Maryland Republicans only to more rural areas just makes Martin O’Malley’s, Mike Busch’s and Mike Miller’s fondest dreams come true.

Out of necessity the Montgomery County Republican party will follow its own distinct, separate course. We can do this because of the long standing strong support of our Republican donors and activists, which we appreciate.

Montgomery Republicans are committed to presenting voters with a conservative governing alternative based on a belief in personal responsibility, faith in free markets and support for limited government. We will continue to build the organizational infrastructure to support candidates who advance these views.

Montgomery Republicans will also continue to work with other Maryland Republicans who share our commitment to a competitive statewide Maryland Republican Party. These include the Republican House Caucus Slate Committee and many in jurisdictions such as Baltimore City, Carroll and Prince Georges.

Mark Uncapher,
Chairman, Montgomery County Republican Party

So Mark still hasn’t gotten over his defeat, which tends to pick on Kent County as they are the smallest county in Maryland. Personally, I was happy to see the Kent County Republican Party reborn and fully represented at the convention for the first time in my memory (never mind the additional kudos for their thinking outside the box and having Brian Murphy speak at their Lincoln Day Dinner.) And I can say that even though Kent County voted completely against my motion to have the change in the threshold required to bring up and pass bylaw changes become its own separate discussion – despite my best efforts to argue the point since they were sitting directly behind us. On that front, Montgomery County was a key ally on my side, as were Prince George’s, Carroll, Dorchester, Garrett, and Howard counties.

But Mark is still in the wrong, particularly when not everyone in his own county has an equal vote on the Central Committee.

It’s worthy of note that he didn’t cite his own county’s case. Consider he had a resolution passed a couple conventions ago, back when the voting controvery started, expanding his county’s delegation to the maximum 48 members allowed. While the extra bodies and help may have been useful during the 2010 election, the sad truth is that MoCo was happy with 19 Central Committee members and its huge voting share until it was discovered that the former LCD voting system that gave them their massive advantage (because votes were distributed proportionally based solely on the number of registered voters) was only being used because no one had thought to challenge the rule allowing it. Thanks to Jim Pelura and his selections to the Rules Committee for that fateful convention a couple years back, the LCD voting system – which was loathed by the small counties because of the insignificant role they were allotted in party affairs – was scrapped because we challenged the old way of doing business. Of course, MoCo was fine with doing things as they’d always been done, even as it risked a mutiny by the smallest dozen or so counties.

Speaking strictly in terms of our county’s self-interest, the idea of one person, one vote in party affairs works out as pretty much of a wash as far as we are concerned – we end up with 9 of what potentially could be an even 300 total members in attendance this fall once Caroline County expands to a nine-member Central Committee later this year. (For all intents and purposes, we end up with 3% of the vote from either calculation.) Looking at this at a regional level, the Eastern Shore counties could conceivably vote as a bloc and control exactly 1/4 of the vote; a total of 75.

By the way, with respect to the complaint Mark Uncapher cites, that ‘1 person, 1 vote’ formula would be similarly disproportionate in terms of population in our case since we on the Shore are less than 1/10 of the state’s total population – but MoCo was fine with that particular disparity because they would hold the largest share as a single county.

The biggest advantage to the formula voted on at the convention, and more importantly inscribed into our bylaws, is that the largest county has no more than 4.5 times the pull of the smallest. It forces counties to work together for common goals and makes it possible that those seeking office outside the center of the state have a chance. (I think the best indication of this will come when we vote for the 10 at-large delegates to the Republican National Convention in Tampa. The Eastern Shore could well vote as a bloc and send several of those ten – hint, hint.)

When there’s such a target-rich environment of Democratic foibles out there and a significant array of good choices running for both the Oval Office and against the seven dwarfs Maryland has up for re-election next year – they’re better known as Ben Cardin and Maryland’s six Democratic members of Congress – I fail to understand why some continue to fight this battle. We on this side of the Bay were kicked around for several years on the regional chairs concept and voting reform, but when the rubber met the road we did our share for the Maryland Republican Party. Ask Andy Harris and Mike McDermott how they like their new seats (and ask Jim Mathias if he liked pretending to be to the right of Ronald Reagan during campaign season. It wasn’t the devil that made him do it.)

I can guarantee one thing, though. There’s a very good reason that most of the state voted against Montgomery County – even when it wasn’t in their interest in doing so. Frankly, we are tired of arguing about voting.

We gave the old set of bylaws three years before attempting to tinker with it, so why not leave the voting system go for awhile and see how things shake out? There was some serious business left on the table after our powwow because we took much of the time arguing about voting, so why not free that time up in the next go-round?

Perhaps the next shakeup should come in the Montgomery County Republican Party. I daresay it’s fortunate that the so-called ‘star chamber’ didn’t pass muster in this convention because we may have seen its first use once Mark Uncapher went public with his complaints.

Shorebird of the Week – May 12, 2011

Tossing around the horsehide before an April game, Kipp Schutz has solidified the Shorebirds' outfield.

Despite the fact there’s a more publicized prospect on the Shorebirds’ roster, the offensive leader which has emerged this far is outfielder Kipp Schutz. One can’t argue with a .381/3/28 batting line nor a 1.002 OPS.

Over the last few seasons the Shorebirds have featured speedy outfielders like Xavier Avery and Matt Angle, both of whom have progressed up the system after playing well with Delmarva. Kipp, however, is more the prototypical hard-hitting corner outfielder. And runners in scoring position? So far Kipp has been money, hitting .462 in that situation. No wonder he’s leading the team in runs batted in, besides being fourth in the league in that category (and second in average – he trails only megaprospect Bryce Harper of Hagerstown in both categories.)

For Schutz, an Indiana native who just turned 23 during spring training, this is his first shot at full-season ball. After being drafted out of Indiana University by the Orioles as a 19th round pick two years ago, Kipp spent a summer apiece in Bluefield and Aberdeen. After a mediocre .252/1/15 line in 40 games at Bluefield two seasons ago, Schutz blossomed last season in Aberdeen with a .313/4/42 line in 68 games for the IronBirds, meriting his selection as a New York-Penn League All-Star.

With a limited number of good corner outfielders in the Orioles’ system, there’s a good chance that we won’t see Kipp around after the All-Star break, so enjoy his sweet left-handed stroke and solid outfield play while you can.

The silent majority

While it isn’t unprecedented, it is rare that I open up monoblogue to guest opinion. This is the case today, though, as Marc Kilmer of the Maryland Public Policy Institute counters the argument made by Wicomico County PIO Jim Fineran in a recent Daily Times opinion.

As Mr. Pollitt’s public spokesman, Jim Fineran is paid to put a positive spin on his boss’s proposal to raise our property tax rate. However, I’d caution anyone from mistaking the apathetic public response to Pollitt’s tax hike proposal for approval.

Yes, the people who showed up at the budget meetings generally spoke in favor of a tax hike. Government programs have concentrated benefits and diffused costs. Those who use programs are few and focused; those who pay for them are many and inattentive. Of course people who are benefiting from taxpayer largesse are going to rally when their favored programs are threatened.

During last year’s election, however, a large number of people spoke when they cast their ballots. They elected six very strong fiscal conservatives to the county council. Mr. Pollitt barely won a second term. Mr. Pollitt’s re-election was no doubt aided by the fact that last year he didn’t propose raising the tax rate even though the revenue cap would have allowed it. Now that it’s not an election year, Mr. Pollitt is certainly singing a different tune.

The results of the 2010 elections indicate a majority in Wicomico County supports low taxes. They may be silent at budget meetings but they speak loudly at election time. If our county council members stay true to the fiscally conservative message they advocated during the election, they should know that the people of Wicomico County support them.

Marc Kilmer is a Maryland Public Policy Institute senior fellow specializing in health care issues. He and his family reside in Wicomico County.

The 2012 decision

If you’ve been reading monoblogue a long time – I know a lot of you haven’t, although a surprising number are longtime fans – you may recall that I determined who I’d support as my 2008 nominee in the summer of 2007 after a series of posts which covered candidate positions issue-by-issue on items important to me. They, in turn, were one extension of an early project of monoblogue called the 50 year plan. There I discussed my ideas on a whole range of issues which face our nation, and a second extension of these has been a book project I’ve worked with off and on over the last three years. (So maybe now I should call it a 47 year plan.)

Anyway, having been again exhorted to figure out which candidate I would like to see secure our Presidential bid, this post will serve as the announcement that the process will begin again later this summer. While I put my sidebar on the candidates up yesterday, I’m going to wait for a month or two to start the scoring process again in order to devote enough time to research positions and determine how I’ll grade each candidate. (And this includes Democrats, too – I can’t vote for them but I can compare their stances for my TEA Party friends who haven’t abandoned the Democratic Party yet.)

To give you an idea how the point system worked, these were the criteria I used in 2008:

Property rights (5 points)
Second Amendment (7 points)
Election/Campaign Finance Reform (9 points)
Trade/job creation (11 points)
Education (13 points)
Veterans affairs (15 points)
Energy independence (17 points)
Health care/Social Security (19 points)
Taxation (21 points)
Fiscal conservatism (23 points)
Immigration (25 points)
The Long War (27 points)

The total also included single-point intangibles on various issues, with my 2008 winner being former Rep. Duncan Hunter and his 82 points. By comparison, eventual nominee John McCain was last among Republicans with 18 points.

Undoubtedly, as a nation, our priorities have changed – and so will my list. I’m going to combine a couple areas and streamline this process to 10 different subjects. Also, the point totals will change so that the perfect candidate will have 100 points, with a maximum of three given for intangibles.

So the 2012 monoblogue endorsement will be based on the following formula:

Election/campaign finance reform (3 points)
Property Rights (5 points)
Second Amendment (7 points)
Education (8 points)
Long War/veterans affairs (9 points)
Immigration (11 points)
Energy independence (12 points)
Entitlements (13 points)
Trade/job creation (14 points)
Fiscal conservatism/taxation (15 points)

Add in the possible three points for intangibles, and a ‘perfect’ score is 100. On the other hand, deducting points is also possible so the ultimate in bad candidates would rank at minus-100.

Since I already have a project to do over the next few weeks (the monoblogue Accountability Project) I’ll likely get started on this after Memorial Day – this will also give the campaigns some chance to put out their issue positions. (Thus far, Herman Cain and Gary Johnson seem to have the most comprehensive positions listed on their respective sites.) But today serves as a good heads-up for summer reading.

And, by the way, I’m going to make a little time over the summer for updating my maunuscript too. Anyone know a good publisher out there looking for a surefire best seller? Okay, how about a tome from a first-time author?

Maybe someday you’ll see it on Amazon.com or at your local bookstore, but in the meantime it’s a diamond in the rough which needs polishing. That’s what I’ll devote some time to doing.

Elected officials discussion a highlight of convention

On Saturday morning some of us who attended the MDGOP Spring Convention got to hear a quartet of our state’s elected GOP officials review some of the maelstrom that is Maryland politics; in order of appearance it was Anne Arundel County Executive John Leopold (pictured at podium,) Harford County Executive David Craig (right at table,) Senate Minority Leader Nancy Jacobs (center at table,) and Minority Leader in the House of Delegates, Tony O’Donnell (left at table.)

John Leopold began his remarks by commending President Obama for his role in Osama bin Laden’s untimely demise, but noted President Bush had a “key role” as well. And, even though Obama’s fortunes will be buoyed by the killing of bin Laden, the “lingering flu” of the economy will be the number one issue in 2012. “The Republcan nomination is worth having,” contended Leopold.

John is well-known for his hardline stance against illegal immigration in Anne Arundel County, and he believed the fight over in-state tuition for illegals could be “an enormously helpful issue” for the party. “Democrats don’t understand illegal means illegal,” Leopold stated.

But, in looking at another issue near and dear to Marylanders’ hearts, Leopold stated his belief that the economy and environment “are not mutually exclusive” as issues. There was a balance to be found.

In the case of David Craig, his remarks looked at items on the county level, as they dealt heavily with the Maryland Association of Counties (MACO for short.) While MACO is “supposed to be a nonpartisan organization,” the reality is it will be run by Democrats for the foreseeable future and will be a cheerleader for Martin O’Malley and his bigspending ways.

David saw the struggle as one of daring Republicans to make tough choices at the county level. “They want to make local Republicans raise your taxes” by shifting the cost of items previously paid for by the state to the local level. And even state revenue proposals stack the deck in favor of certain parts of the state – for example, Craig told us the proposed 10 cent per gallon gasoline tax would be distributed 7 cents to the state, 1.5 cents to Baltimore City, and 1.5 cents to the 23 counties.

Nor is it just monetary, as David described the new PlanMaryland initiative as a “takeover of local planning issues.”

Senator Nancy Jacobs is part of what she kiddingly termed “the dirty dozen” – one of just 12 Republican Senators in Maryland. Still, she commended the close relationship between the Senate and House caucuses in fighting Democratic initiatives. “We voted together this year,” said Nancy. Even Mike Miller “has been extremely nice to me.”

One key fight will be redistricting, which is a “major concern.” We need to attend the public meetings on the issue and attempt to rectify a situation where 31% of the legislators are Republican but represent about 46 to 48 percent of the electorate which votes Republican at the top of the ticket. It will be part of a Special Session which will likely see bids to raise the gas tax and expand the sales tax to services.

As for the recent session, Jacobs assessed it as “a pretty good year,” although they spent “too much time on social issues.” Instead, “we need to get much more involved to attract business” to the state.

Finally, Tony O’Donnell assessed his political career in Latin. I’m no Latin scholar, so I’ll give the English translation: “I came, I saw…time flies.”

O’Donnell had one key message to party leaders: stop conceding 30 to 40 seats to the Democrats each election by not contesting them. He was already recruiting for 2014; we should “engage (potential candidates) now.” Tony vowed, “we’re no longer going to concede seats to the Democrats.” And although he was a bit confounded by the party’s convention infighting, saying we needed to minimize wasting energy, O’Donnell was optimistic. “We have great opportunities,” considering we gained 6 House seats in a year where the top of the ticket lost by 14 points.

His final thought: “we have to govern effectively at the local level.” If the state’s Republican House leaders can construct a budget plan with $621 million in cuts, it can be done at the appropriate local level as well.

Overall, I thought it was a great discussion. Afterward I handed Senator Jacobs back her camera (she recruited me to take pictures for her) and asked whether only Congressional seats would be handled in this redistricting session, or if all seats were up. (All seats are under discussion, she advised me.)

But there was one thing missing from this discussion, and I noticed it Friday night as well. Even though the House Republican delegation sponsored a hospitality suite (obviously I saw many from the state delegation there, including local Delegates Jeannie Haddaway-Riccio, Addie Eckardt, and Charles Otto) there was one key delegate absent from the weekend’s events: the host delegate, Mike McDermott. Obviously he may have had work or family business to attend to, but I think it was a clear missed opportunity to introduce a powerful voice (literally) for conservatism to state rank-and-file Republicans.

Another missed chance was that of introducing order to the bylaws. Because a time limit was insisted upon, we definitely tried to bite off more than we could chew by attempting to revamp something years in the making. Sure, the voting method debate was messy and acrimonious, but we can move beyond that fight now. (More on that below.)

The trouble now is that we left the process only partly done, and installed no easy fix to patch the holes. (Luckily, the existing bylaws allow the Chair to create ad hoc committees. Guess what? We need one!) Had I been more on my game Saturday, I would have realized that as I stood at the microphone waiting on all the motion business that I thought had been previously taken care off to be resolved before I introduced mine. Oh well, opportunity lost.

But as I flip through my handy-dandy steno pad to see the pages of notes I took (much of which will be shared privately with the remainder of my Central Committee as they deal with the contents of the seminars I attended) I have some other observations worth noting.

We spoke a lot about volunteers. Well, we have a ready-made cadre – it’s called the TEA Party! I was glad to see a number of MDCAN participants but we could always use more.
It wasn’t as gray as previous conventions; lots of young folks were there. Maybe someday I’ll be the old man of my own delegation, but that’s up to how things shake out in 2014.
I was glad to see Kent County well-represented; they’ve often missed out entirely on previous conventions. Maybe it’s because their votes count now?
Speaking of our upper Eastern Shore friends, Kent County had a very successful Lincoln Day dinner. Their speaker? Brian Murphy. Sometimes going ‘off the board’ and taking a chance pays off. They also seemed to be a delegation full of ‘new blood.’
One final quote from Nancy Jacobs: “If you are a business, you are the cash cow for Maryland.”
Ahead of the curve: one of the training seminars used the same video I highlighted last week. It is a useful training tool, and proves political strategy isn’t exactly secret. The hard part is execution and winning the battle of ideas.
You know, I thought I was at least a little hip to new technology but the New Media seminar I attended scared me because I had never heard of half the tools they discussed!

Finally, let’s talk about what we accomplished.

I am quite aware that there is a small group among Maryland Republicans who aren’t pleased with the results of this convention. Obviously I had a vested interest in something of mine coming to fruitition as well, but once the party was over and my quest had failed (since it never came up for discussion) my life went on because I still have a lot of dragons to slay whether we reform the Rule 11 procedures or not.

Maybe I was a little harsh in making the “big boy pants” statement, but let’s face this fact: Montgomery County is still a key player in the state party. Coming from a smaller county I’m well aware that we need to make a decent showing in MoCo to win statewide – or win about 70-75% of the vote in the rural areas; it’s an either/or proposition. For example, Bob Ehrlich got 38% of the MoCo tally in 2002 when he won – but he got a shade under 37% in 2006 before falling to 31% last year. While it’s a valuable area, MoCo wasn’t the be-all and end-all of GOP success. It was the rest of the state where Ehrlich won and lost.

So let’s put the voting method behind us for awhile, as we on the Eastern Shore were encouraged to place the regional chair concept a few conventions back after we’d worked hard for it. Unfortunately, those changes we managed to make to the bylaws will mean we have a lot more work to do on them – it’s a hole we dug for ourselves regardless of the voting results.

As Republicans, we have a lot of work to do. Yes, once I figure out how the procedure will be to submit it I’ll bring back the Rule 11 issue for a vote because I think we need the discussion and I don’t want to waste all the effort on attracting TEA Party interest by making decisions like these up to a powerful few. Those who advocate other bylaw changes are encouraged to do the same if there’s demand. (As far as I’m concerned you can skip the “star chamber,” though.)

In fact, as far as goals for the convention went, all I got was this lovely tote bag.

But I won’t go sulk in a corner or threaten to take my ball and go home. Rest assured I will continue to fight for what I believe in, and revel in the fact that any coalition of like-minded counties now have the opportunity to enact needed changes.