February 2012 – Page 2

The McDermott notes: week 6

For Delegate Mike McDermott, week 6 of the General Assembly session was a study in contrasts: exciting peaks at both ends with a more humdrum routine in the middle.

In this edition Mike returned to a day-by-day format, with one highlight of his week being chosen by Republican leadership to deliver the Lincoln Day address Monday night – an address he posted here.

It’s intriguing to me that the speech served as a prelude to a week where certain “rights” took up most of the debate in the General Assembly. But look at a piece of what McDermott said:

Lincoln knew that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were unalienable rights given by God and not granted by a government, and for the government to impose itself on that which was granted by God could only produce sorrows and shame.

Those rights given by God don’t include the freedom to make choice without consequence. Yet by passing the same-sex marriage bill we took a step toward the government imposing itself on that which was granted, by saying that certain behavior which many of us feel is counterproductive to a righteous society is now acceptable because a small minority wishes it to be so. I can’t help but feel that other, perhaps even smaller minorities who believe that children should be exploited for the pleasures of adults or that – based on their faith – we should be able to marry more than one person will now feel they’re the ones being shortchanged and whine accordingly. No, it won’t happen tomorrow, this year, or even in the next half-decade or so. But mark my words, it will happen, and we’ll have one less leg to stand on in saying no to them.

Aside from the joint committee hearing and vote on the gay marriage bill which happened Tuesday, much of the midweek was spent by McDermott in hearing twenty other bills which are fairly non-controversial and generally involve small tweaks to existing law. One I found interesting is HB420, which extends a pilot program of GPS monitoring of those on probation already used in Washington County through September, 2015. Big Brother is watching.

And then there is Friday. Mike doesn’t spend a lot of time going over the “blur of activity” on Friday, as he will eventually supplement these notes with his account of “the machinations to bring this vote about, the creation of ‘magic’ Legislative Days which allowed this to occur, and the back room dealings.”

But I wanted to address some of these with my view.

In the last few years that I’ve noticed, it seems like more and more bills are being passed with the approach that the ends justify the means. One prime example is the Obamacare bill, where we had to pass it to know what was in it, according to Nancy Pelosi. Isn’t the idea supposed to be one of understanding its impact beforehand?

In both Maryland and on a national level, there are groups which take key bills and attempts to determine the impact they will have on various elements of the private sector. (As a Maryland example, read the fiscal note on HB438, the same-sex marriage bill.) But while these brief studies adequately define the fiscal impact and certain other parameters of proposed law, they cannot take into account how society is affected. On financial and tax issues, one can predict what impact a bill will have on the state’s treasury, but it’s left to a common sense analysis to determine that if a state makes it more difficult to profit from a business or keep that which is earned through the fruits of one’s labor it will detrimentally affect economic activity; for example a job which would have been created had conditions been maintained may not be because of the new law. It’s impossible to know the intentions of all 5.7 million Marylanders but there are causes and effects for their behavior.

This is even more difficult on social issues. One can debate the sort of impact 40 or 50 million aborted babies would have had if they’d been brought to term and lived – some argue that many would have been subjected to a life of neglect because they were unwanted from the start and deepened the social problems plaguing us today, but others feel the potential of a generation was wasted because some of its great scientists, scholars, and leaders were instead butchered in an abortion clinic. Obviously we will never know the truth, but it’s my contention that we deprived these unborn of their God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness they assumed upon conception. Yet it’s ironic to me that many who would grant the unearned, behaviorally-based choice of same-sex couples to marry as a right are also in favor of denying the unborn a right to life, also in the name of “choice.”

Because we’ve lived for less than a decade with same-sex marriage, it’s not entirely clear to us what we’ve stepped into. Indeed, there’s a chance that proponents could be right and it will strengthen marriage as a whole. But as two of Mike’s fellow Delegates noted, there’s an agenda to legitimize the gay lifestyle as just another choice (there’s that word again) which is no better or no worse than others.

Yet the fact it’s our current government stepping in to address the situation gives me pause, and reminds me that “absolute power corrupts absolutely.” When the ends justify the means and we have to pass the bill to know what’s in it, my inclination is that we’ve reached a point of complete corruption.

Delegates: Gay marriage “O’Malley’s path to the White House”

As badly as he has bungled our state, Lord help us if that happens.

Delegates Susan Aumann and Kathy Szeliga released a joint statement on gay marriage shortly after Friday evening’s vote which made several valid points. Here’s what they had to say.

The Governor is pushing his same sex marriage bill he knows that by passing it here in Maryland would look great on his political resume. In fact the Washington Post stated “Perhaps no other O’Malley effort is being watched as closely nationally as same-sex marriage.” I find it extremely appalling that O’Malley is using and abusing our State to advance his own national political agenda to the detriment of our Maryland families.

For those who are ambivalent, thinking that “this won’t affect me”, the consequences of passing gay marriage will permeate many aspects of our society. The definition of marriage does not need to be redefined. I support traditional marriage, one man and one woman, and here is why:

Traditional marriage builds families – mom, dad, and children – and gives hope that the next generations will carry that family into the future.

In states where marriage has been redefined, activists have implemented a homosexual agenda in the schools to children as young as kindergarten. I am opposed to promoting gay marriage in our public schools and once it is “legal” in this state the curriculum will follow the law.

The people of Maryland don’t need the legislature to tell them what marriage is. Marriage is an institution of the people, not politicians, and the legislature should know better than to try and take the definition of marriage away from them.

This legislation has taken a front seat this session and it is the biggest family issue we are facing but I know it is not the ONLY issue. I know that the taxes and fees, which the Governor is proposing, are an assault on your way of life and I am in Annapolis fighting for you.

There’s no doubt in my mind that gay marriage is strongly backed by a small minority who wants to rationalize their behavior by imposing it on the rest of us. I don’t really care who sleeps with who, but it bothers me when activists couch it as a question of civil rights when truly it’s a matter of choice.

I made the point a few days ago in a comment to this post that perhaps being gay is like coming from an alcoholic family in the sense that if you know booze is going to be a problem you can simply address it by being a teetotaler. In other words, you make the decision and there are consequences. In the case of an alcoholic family, there’s a larger possibility of health problems or accidents caused by excessive drinking, while in the case of choosing to be gay or lesbian you run afoul of most religions and can’t naturally have children – prior to a few years ago you couldn’t be “married” either. Of course, there is a tendency for alcoholism to run in families but I have a harder time seeing a genetic origin for homosexuality – thus, it must be behaviorally based. Remember, up until the middle part of the last century homosexuality was thought to be a mental disorder. Only in the last 40 years or so has political correctness removed that stigma.

But the push from Governor O’Malley only seemed to come once one of his chief rivals for the 2016 nomination, Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York, got his state to approve gay marriage. Critics on the far left have lambasted O’Malley’s record so he had to pander to the uber-liberal crowd which runs the national Democratic establishment and use gay marriage to establish his social issue bona fides. Raising taxes, falling for the global warming nonsense, spending on environmental boondoggles, sucking up to Big Labor, and playing guitar wasn’t enough; O’Malley had to up the ante.

So unless the citizens of Maryland restore common sense and defeat the bill in referendum this November – and certainly proponents are shrewd enough to know that the larger turnout of a presidential election helps their cause because the proportion of voters who can be seduced by their “fairness” argument will be larger in a presidential election than a gubernatorial one – come January 1 there will be a run on whatever locales will be open that day for gay and lesbian couples to be “married.”

Will it make a difference in the short term? Probably not, but this was never really about here and now. As Delegates Aumann and Szeliga point out, legitimizing the homosexual agenda in schools will only be the start, particularly in an era where children are vulnerable to that sort of exploitation. There’s a reason that support for gay marriage is much stronger among youth than it is among older people, and it has nothing to do with “tolerance” because true tolerance would welcome all views, and it’s clear not all views are appreciated in schools – Christians and others who believe in traditional values need not apply.

The next two years promise more of the same because it’s no longer about what’s best for Maryland. Instead, it’s going to be about what’s perceived to be best for Martin O’Malley’s future political plans. California may have some company as the loony liberal trendsetter.

Odds and ends number 44

Now this is starting to get confusing, since two of my long-running post series are up to the same number. But the way my inbox is presently filling up, I suspect “Odds and ends” will be well ahead of “Weekend of local rock” before too long.

As is always the case, this is the potpourri of items I find interesting, but not worthy enough of a full-blown post. Today I may even simply link to the items without much further comment because I have quite a bit to get to.

For example, Baltimore County Republican Examiner Ann Miller recently penned a post with timeless advice on how conservatives should treat media encounters. While it’s sad that media sometimes seems more interested in presenting a politically correct agenda than getting the truth, these are the rules we’re saddled with for now. It’s worth reading.

Another item worth reading that’s too long for me to excerpt is “A Day in the Life of O’Malley’s Maryland,” written by Senator J.B. Jennings. We can always talk about what tax and fee (but I repeat myself, for “a fee is a tax” according to MOM) increases do in the abstract, but the Jennings piece looks at how all these add up over the course of an average day.

Continue reading “Odds and ends number 44”

Activists ram gay marriage bill through House

Today was a dark day for those who believe marriage should be between a man and a woman, as the gay rights crowd – a definite squeaky wheel in the overall process of life – elbowed aside tradition and browbeat the House into passing HB438 by a vote of 72 for and 67 against. (Initial reports had it 71-67.)

After killing off several amendments earlier in the day, one of which would have been to substitute the phrase “civil union” for marriage and another to automatically send the bill to referendum first, the House this evening moved the bill on to the Senate, which is expected to pass it.

Last year the Senate passed the bill initially only to see the House effort fail when enough votes could not be found late in the session. Strangely enough, the House composition is essentially unchanged this year but several key Delegates have changed their votes in the interim. Delegate Heather Mizeur, a key proponent of gay marriage, tweeted that opponents of gay marriage have pursued “ugly charges of deal making and shady morals” but there are indeed allegations of jobs being promised to opponents who change their vote, among them Delegate Wade Kach, a Republican, and Democrat John Donoghue.

Obviously we will see what happens in the coming weeks with these Delegates and others who had their arm twisted. Meanwhile, it’ll be easy to spot ~~who flipped their votes from 2011 to this year~~* once the tally is placed online.

The Senate should take up the bill in the next couple weeks; in the meantime the referendum process will be getting underway as opponents organize for what is expected to be a bitter and caustic fight leading up to a vote this November. It’s likely the gay marriage referendum will share the ballot with a referendum on the Maryland DREAM Act, a bill passed last year to give in-state tuition to the children of illegal aliens.

As for HB438 proponents, I have seven words: where do I sign the referendum petition?

* I stand corrected. The House last year didn’t vote on SB116 (the 2011 version of the gay marriage bill) as Delegate Vallario made a motion to recommit to committee, which when passed killed the bill.

Update: The Washington Post has an AP tally of the votes. Eastern Shore delegates were 9-0 against the bill. The two Republicans who voted “yes” made a big part of the difference – think the Democrats will give them any credit for that two years hence? Not gonna happen.

Harris doesn’t fall into trap – too bad so many others did

Today is a bad day for those fighting the American decline, on two fronts. One is the prospect of gay marriage passing in the Maryland House of Delegates – if it gets past that hurdle, the Senate is likely to quickly follow suit.

But more germane to this post is the fact the House passed a payroll tax cut extension by a 293-132 vote, with Andy Harris voting in the minority. Why would he vote against a tax cut? Because there was no compromise by the other side:

I support the tax cut element of the proposal. However, the other parts of the bill increased spending in 2012 by $45 billion, while taking 10 years to pay it back. That’s the kind of bad fiscal policy which got us into the mess we’re in – Washington has to stop spending money we don’t have.

While I certainly support Andy in this stance – even though I know the Democrats will use this against him in the 2012 campaign – it also leads me to ask why couldn’t House leadership just have a “clean” bill? The payroll tax cut is one section out of 20. We have that little bit of power, why not use it?

On the other hand, Rep. Allen West of Florida has a more eloquent statement:

Americans are exhausted, out of work and many have simply lost hope in the political system. They have been struggling now with nearly five consecutive years of record job stagnation, increased foreclosure rates and an economy that continues to struggle.

All of these reasons are why I cannot in good faith vote for this payroll tax cut deal. It is not that I don’t believe Americans should have relief in their paychecks or be afforded a safety net of unemployment insurance, it is because, unlike some on Capitol Hill, I am looking beyond this election cycle.

I am looking at the ramifications of adding billions of American taxpayer’s dollars to a trillion dollar deficit with no answers as to how or when we will pay for this bill.

I am looking beyond immediate gratification and instead looking at an American political system willing to cave to political pressure to give Americans a temporary Band-Aid that in the long run only makes things worse for their future.

The facts are simple. This supposed payroll tax decrease is really a backdoor tax increase on homeowners and first time homebuyers. The deal is being paid for by added fees on FHA-backed loans. Homeowners with FHA-backed mortgages represent more than one-third of mortgages in the United States. Those Middle Class Americans will be footing the bill for this political gimmick.

Homebuyers with a $200,000 standard 30- year loan will have to pay an extra $10,000 over the course of their loan. It would take roughly 250 paychecks with $40 extra from the payroll tax holiday to pay for the added increase to the life of an FHA-backed mortgage loan. That represents ten years of consecutive employment.

In addition, some may argue the payroll tax deal will not affect Social Security. This could not be further from the truth. The federal government’s general operating account will be used to compensate for the lost revenue in the Social Security Trust Fund, which will increase the deficit and add to the nation’s debt.

My position on the Payroll Tax Extension has not changed. In December of 2011, I supported a responsible one- year extension that was fully paid for, and would have put money back in the pockets of American workers while protecting homeowners, Social Security, and not adding to the deficit and our ever-increasing national debt.

This current deal is not good policy – but it is political posturing.

The payroll tax cut deal is a result of politicians telling Americans what they want to hear, while seriously harming them and our nation in the long run. Americans sent a new wave of leaders to Capitol Hill in 2010 to stand up for conservative principles and turn this country around. I will continue to be a voice for those Americans. (Emphasis in original.)

And people wonder why West is a TEA Party favorite and mentioned as a dream pick for Vice-President? He seems to be one of the few who calls out Barack Obama for what he is. (Maybe it’s because the Left can’t use the race card on him, aside from calling him an “Uncle Tom”, “Oreo”, or any other similar derogatory name.)

But I believe he and Andy Harris made the right choice today. All we are doing is “giving” (read: taking less from) people on the one hand but punishing them with the other. Unfortunately, until Washington has more bold leadership like Harris and West, it’s not going to matter how much or little we’re taxed because the spending will far outpace whatever is taken in.

It’s not about money, it’s about control. Learn that lesson well.

Maryland marriage safe for another day

In breaking news… (and updating an earlier post, in case you’re here from PJM)

After delaying the scheduled 5:30 start to tonight’s session to consider the gay marriage bill by about 45 minutes, the show got underway and lasted for about 10 minutes.

Because of a deluge of amendments being offered to the bill, Delegate Kathleen Dumais, who was leading the floor this evening, opted to allow more time for the amendments to be digested – the bill is special ordered to tomorrow afternoon. One amendment by Delegate Wade Kach was accepted by Dumais as a friendly amendment and passed by the House – the effective date of the legislation was moved back from October 1 to January 1, 2013.

Yet the fact that we had a nearly-hour delay in getting the vote started and a further night for consideration and arm-twisting may mean that opponents are carrying the day. Trust me, if the votes were there this bill would have been ramrodded through posthaste, so perhaps the numbers aren’t adding up to 71. In addition, Delegate Veronica Turner, who supports the bill, is out with a medical condition, according to Justin Snow of Maryland Reporter, who Tweeted this news earlier this evening. So they will need an extra body to switch sides.

The session is now slated to begin at 12:30 tomorrow.

Update 1: As sort of related news, the Worcester County TEA Party meeting tomorrow where Delegate Mike McDermott was slated to speak will now host Worcester County Commissioner Jim Bunting, who will be discussing the budget. McDermott may be tied up in Annapolis tomorrow, for obvious reasons.

In the same vein, Delegate Kathy Afzali had to cancel her appearance at a fundraiser on her behalf because of the prospect for a vote, according to her Facebook page.

Update 2: As evidence of the arm-twisting going on, Streiff at Red Maryland presents several alleged examples. Looks like O’Malley and Democrats are throwing everything but the kitchen sink at this – too bad they didn’t exert the same amount of effort into real job creation.

A twist in the Sixth

There are two reasons I like the Maryland Juice website: one, because I like to keep tabs on what the opposition is doing, and two, I like the way it is written. Unlike certain recent commentators on this site, the author is willing to stand up for what he believes using his real name. I rarely agree with him, but I can respect his opinion.

David Moon related an interesting development on the Democratic side in the Sixth Congressional District race yesterday: it seems that Democratic candidate John Delaney is being raked over the coals for making a $2,400 contribution in 2010 to Congressman Andy Harris. (Yes, you read that right.)

But before you begin thinking, “hey, a Democrat with a little common sense,” there are a few caveats in play here.

Continue reading “A twist in the Sixth”

Supporting the ‘insurance’ of voter photo ID (HB113)

This is testimony I penned, presented today on behalf of the Wicomico County Republican Central Committee.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the House:

We, the undersigned members of the Wicomico County Republican Central Committee, rise in support of safeguarding the electoral process by adopting this common-sense bill.

There are situations in our everyday lives where we are compelled by law or by custom to present a photo identification in order to prove our identity. Surprisingly, though, in performing one of the most important duties we have as a citizen, under current Maryland law we are simply asked to recite our date of birth and our address. No other steps are taken to prove a voter’s identity.

Opponents of photo voter ID base their argument on the assertion that photo ID depresses turnout, particularly in minority communities, because those voters are less likely to have a valid photo identification. They also claim that the fraud argument given by proponents is invalid because fraud has not been demonstrably proven to occur on a large scale in Maryland.

However, turnout figures from Georgia and Indiana, states which adopted photo identification laws before the 2008 election, disprove the contention of lower minority turnout. In fact, Indiana had the largest increase in Democratic turnout in the country from 2004 to 2008, presumably with the minority population (which tends to vote Democratic) leading the way. If people are motivated to vote, they will secure the means to comply with the law and non-driving photo identification is already available from the state for a modest cost. Moreover, this bill preserves the right to present an existing voter identification card if the voter has it in his or her possession.

We are pleased by the fact Maryland hasn’t been the home of large-scale allegations of voter fraud as have been the case elsewhere. But just as one doesn’t purchase insurance for an immediate need but rather for protection against unknown future hazards, we consider photo voter identification an inexpensive insurance policy against the potential for polling place fraud. We believe this is especially important because our state has adopted early voting, with Election Day now turned into a process which lasts several days. It’s easier to track who comes and goes to vote in a one-day period than to coordinate these efforts over several days, particularly as polling place personnel can change daily.

Finally, it’s important to consider that one who cannot present acceptable identification is not turned away at the ballot box. Instead, state law provides that they receive a provisional ballot, the counting of which is contingent upon a more thorough investigation of the situation. According to the Pew Center on the States, in Maryland about 2/3 of the provisional ballots cast in 2008 were deemed valid and counted, but the total not counted was around 17,000 out of over 2.6 million ballots cast. On a nationwide basis, the study found that about half of the uncounted provisional votes were cast by people who weren’t registered – a factor photo identification wouldn’t be able to rectify anyhow.

There’s no question that HB113 won’t make our voting system absolutely fraud-proof; unfortunately there are those who willingly break the rules in order to gain electoral office for themselves or assist someone they support in doing so. But if someone is motivated enough about their franchise to use it, which we saw in the minority community for the 2008 election, they’re not going to let the minor detail of getting photo identification stop them. Those who say presenting a photo identification is a hindrance to voting are simply misinformed, and we encourage the passage of HB113 in order to help safeguard our electoral process.

Respectfully submitted,

Members of the Wicomico County Republican Central Committee:

Dave Parker, Chair
Joe Collins, Vice-Chair
Bob Laun, Treasurer
Michael Swartz, Secretary
Dave Goslee, Sr.
W. Blan Harcum, Sr.
Mark McIver
John Palmer
Ann Suthowski

Gay marriage one step closer to referendum

Update: The vote on HB438 is available here. As it turned out, one Republican (Delegate Robert Costa) voted in favor of the bill while five Democrats (Donoghue, Vallario, Alston, Kelly, and Valentino-Smith) voted against.

And now I see the strategy in going to two committees. Had the bill simply gone to the Judiciary Committee it would have been defeated on an 11-10 vote. It’s sort of a crock that it only passed one of the two committees yet still advances but that’s the way the rules go. Hopefully someday we can use them to our advantage.

By the way, Mike McDermott indeed voted no.

**********

Giving gay couples their own version of a Valentine’s Day gift, published reports indicate the same-sex marriage bill (HB438) passed a joint session of the House Judiciary and Health and Government Operations committees by a 25-18 vote. This move was a little unusual, as a similar bill only went through the Judiciary Committee last year and passed that committee by a 12-10 vote. Last year was the first time that a gay marriage bill, which has been introduced five sessions in a row, proceeded past the hearing stage.

There’s no question that if this bill passes we will see it placed to referendum – if the courts allow it – but there’s no guarantee it would be upheld by the voters. While a January Gonzales Poll found the electorate slightly favored gay marriage by a 49-47 margin, the ones who strongly oppose the measure outnumber the strong supporters by a 38-34 margin. The intent of this piece is to consider the effects on this year’s election.

Continue reading “Gay marriage one step closer to referendum”

Tubman National Historical Park closer to reality. But is it something we want?

Last week Andy Harris and Rep. Richard Hanna of New York introduced federal legislation (H.R. 4007) to create the Harriet Tubman National Historic Park on the Eastern Shore and in Auburn, New York. While it’s the “companion” legislation of a bill introduced last year by Senator Cardin (S.247), there is a key difference: the House bill specifically excludes federal funds from being expended on the creation of the park.

Personally I could live without there being a National Historical Park in my backyard, but there are many in the area who would like to preserve the heritage of Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad. And having said that, it’s interesting to note that Ben Cardin and Barbara Mikulski (along with the two Senators from New York) believe the federal government has $7.5 million lying around just to help make this park a reality. I don’t see it.

Continue reading “Tubman National Historical Park closer to reality. But is it something we want?”

The McDermott notes: week 5

Because I posted last night, welcome to a Monday morning version of the McDermott notes.

Most of what Mike discussed from last week had to do with his spot on the Judiciary Committee, including a handful of committee votes on items which passed on their way through to the floor. These bills dealt with a number of items, and McDermott voted with the majority in sending them along. Interestingly enough, Delegate Michael Smigiel voted against HB111 and HB115, while Delegate Don Dwyer also voted against HB115. Delegates Michael Hough and John Cluster voted no on HB187. Out of that group, I can most see the civil libertarian vs. law-and-order argument on HB115 in particular. McDermott is a co-sponsor of two of these bills, so it follows he would support them. It’s not likely that any of these votes will rise to the level of the monoblogue Accountability Project, but you never know.

They also heard testimony on a number of bills, with the most prominent being various versions of “Caylee’s Law” being introduced. Because there are three versions of the bill out there, my guess is that there won’t be much problem passing one of them with the winner likely being the one sponsored by the “right” people. If I were a betting man I would wager they take HB20, slap the “Caylee’s Law” moniker on it, add the extra provisions of the bill in the GOP version (HB122) and call it a day. Makes it look like the Democrats had everything to do with it.

Another area of interest during testimony last week were animal laws. One bill the Judiciary Committee heard established a class of “at-risk” owners who have “dangerous” dogs. If little Johnny next door teases your dog mercilessly and is bitten in return, the way I read this law is that your dog could be considered “dangerous” and you would be subject to this law. I love unintended consequences. The other bill established that owners who are convicted of animal cruelty will also be liable for the cost of taking care of their seized animals. I can see the point of this, but I think it should be left at the court’s discretion rather than be mandatory.

They also dealt with a number of child support bills which would affect thousands of families in Maryland.

McDermott also mentioned some of the bills he introduced in the last few days before bills would be need to go through the Rules Committee for late introduction: HB984 would stiffen penalties for driving under the influence of controlled dangerous substances, and HB999 would make it a crime to not report child abuse.

But HB1032 sort of takes the cake for me, and makes me shake my head about the litigious society we have. I really don’t want to go to Plow Days or have little Johnny take his class farm tour and have to see this sign when common sense should dictate. It would be better to have judges who would simply laugh those fools who litigate such actions out of court.

There wasn’t much to tell about the Eastern Shore delegation meeting, according to Mike. They heard from Senator Mikulski’s office and discussed the budget with the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, which Mike contends is being cut too much in the area of prevention.

Finally, Mike devoted a paragraph to the lengthy (10+ hour) joint committee hearing on the subject of gay marriage. It appears McDermott will be a steadfast vote against these bills – in other words, for upholding the state law that marriage is only between one man and one woman. I would tend to think his district agrees with him on this for the most part, and I concur with that assessment as well. McDermott also stated:

I did ask (Governor O’Malley, who led off the testimony) why we simply did not put this issue before all of the voters as a referendum on the ballot…particularly when we thought enough about gambling to put that on the ballot for the people to decide.

I notice O’Malley testified first, so he didn’t have to wait until late in the evening to say his piece. Not knowing how the hearing shook out, it would be interesting to find out if those who are in favor of the change stuck around when those who oppose the bill testified (and the inverse as well.) My guess is that the “tolerant” side wasn’t so much when bill opponents testified, but I would have to have eyewitnesses to know for sure.

As the session nears its halfway point, we’ll begin to see more floor votes and fewer hearings. Bills are now getting through committee, so the impetus will be getting those which are slam-dunks through first and leaving the controversial ones for next month.

Romney wins Maine – another blow for Ron Paul

Let me guess – he was cheated out of that one, too. Sure enough…

Although there is one small county (Washington County, population 33,000 or so out of a state of about 1.3 million) which did not conduct its caucus yesterday due to snow, the Maine Republican Party announced last evening that Mitt Romney was the winner of their primary. He collected 39% of the vote, Ron Paul was second with 36%, Rick Santorum third with 18%, and Newt Gingrich 6% for last. The results broken down by county and caucus site are here, and they show both Romney and Paul battled it out in a number of small precincts. Eight counties were carried by Mitt Romney, six by Ron Paul.

Yet the Paul campaign is claiming foul once again. This is from campaign manager John Tate:

Tonight you saw dueling examples of how much the establishment is scared of Ron Paul and his message of liberty.

Ron Paul will win the most delegates out of Maine tonight.

In fact, he will probably even win the “beauty contest” Straw Poll the media has already called for Mitt Romney – even before all the votes have been tallied.

“HOW CAN THAT BE?” you might be asking yourself.

Simple. The national political establishment and their pals in the national media will do ANYTHING to silence our message of liberty.

(snip blatant fundraising appeal)

You see, in Maine today, you and I saw a perfect example of just how much the establishment fears Ron Paul.

In Washington County – where Ron Paul was incredibly strong – the caucus was delayed until next week just so the votes wouldn’t be reported by the national media today.

Of course, their excuse for the delay was “snow.”

That’s right. A prediction of 3-4 inches – that turned into nothing more than a dusting – was enough for a local GOP official to postpone the caucuses just so the results wouldn’t be reported tonight.

Michael, this is MAINE we’re talking about.

The GIRL SCOUTS had an event today in Washington County that wasn’t cancelled!

And just the votes of Washington County would have been enough to put us over the top.

This is an outrage. Perhaps you heard about it on the mainstream news tonight?

Probably not. In fact, if you were watching one major network, they cut off their telecast of Ron Paul’s speech right when he began mentioning this fact.

The truth is, there is no length to which the GOP establishment won’t go. There is nothing the mainstream media won’t do.

But they can’t stifle our message. And with your help, they will have to listen to it all the way to the GOP nominating convention in August.

Ron Paul told me this weekend — he is in it to stay and to WIN.

And we are bringing delegates with us to the fight. Lots of them.

In fact, while the national media continues to focus on Straw Polls, we’re racking up delegate after delegate . . .

. . . the folks who will ultimately decide who goes to Tampa, Florida to select our Republican nominee for President. (All emphasis in original.)

Now I will concede that the people who run the Washington County GOP may be related to those who close the public schools around here if seven flakes of snow fall out of an overabundance of caution, but if you read this carefully here is the CAMPAIGN accusing a local county GOP and the national media of fraudulent behavior just to hold back the “true” winner. It’s not just the “supporters” as several of those who commented claimed here. (Be sure to read the postscript and link, which purportedly showed Maine was willing to cheat.)

Yet, once again, the Paul campaign is claiming they will emerge with the most delegates out of Maine despite finishing second. (And it will be second, unless there are more than 200 caucus participants in Washington County and other sites which haven’t participated yet and all of them vote for Ron Paul.) We will see on that one, but we are being set up for a contentious convention in ~~September~~ August.

There’s no question that a political consultant’s key job is to spin the results of an election to make his or her candidate look the best he or she can, but when they believe that everything is a conspiracy stacked against them, that’s a problem. I wouldn’t mind a brokered convention myself and Paul may have enough delegates along with the other two in the race to force this. But he’s not going to win, nor is he winning the hearts and minds of thoughtful conservatives by his campaign and supporters claiming foul every time Ron Paul loses.