Maryland GOP: ‘Told you so!’
Unfortunately, sometime awhile back I already used “in the category of ‘duh’” and I didn’t wish to use it again. But, surprisingly, the best-laid plans of Martin O’Malley and Free State Democrats didn’t work, and Maryland Senate Republicans didn’t hesitate to point this fact out:
Final tax data from 2008 now proves what many predicted but had been strenuously denied by Democrats in Annapolis: Maryland’s high income earners are voting with their feet.
In calling a special session for the purpose of passing an historic tax increase less than a year after his election, Governor Martin O’Malley changed Maryland’s personal income tax from a flat rate to a graduated system with a surcharge on high income earners. During this 2007 special session, Republican Senators opposed these tax increases and forewarned that the net result would be revenue losses as this mobile segment of the population relocated their primary residences.
Wall Street Journal editorial writers agreed in a May 2009 opinion entitled “Soak the Rich – Lose the Rich” that described how the misguided budget policy of the O’Malley Administration would lead to outward migration of the very segment of the population that a state wants to keep for a healthy, progressive economy. In response, Democrats in Annapolis produced their own analysis attributing the loss of high income tax filers to the normal slack-off of annual returns.
Now the late filers have completed their returns and final numbers have been tallied. Instead of $106 million of new revenues predicted by O’Malley’s budget office, Maryland saw a decline of $257 million – for a total gap of $363 million. This is just part of the problem created by O’Malley that results in continuing out-year deficits over $2 billion each year.
It’s bad enough business is down for society’s producers, but then they get slammed with a tax increase and figure out that Maryland may not be such a green pasture after all. Why do you think that hundreds of professional athletes, entertainers, and the like live in Florida and Texas? (Hint: yes, the weather is nicer but there are places with even better climates.) Could it be the fact those two are among a handful of states which don’t have a state income tax? (The others are Alaska, Nevada, South Dakota, Washington, and Wyoming.)
I don’t know if they tried this again this session, but last year some Democrat geniuses tried to introduce a bill that would consider 3 months per year as enough time to qualify for Maryland residency for purposes of taxation. It didn’t go far, but this is how many Democrats think – they can’t bear to have anyone here making more that what they deem as a “fair share.” Playing the class envy card has gotten them this far so they aim for continued success.
In the last three years, we’ve all endured an economy which can best be described as a difficult one. Yet those who were affected by the “millionaire’s tax” are those who most likely still have the means to uproot themselves and move to more tax-friendly states like Florida and Texas. And guess who’s the loser? State government.
The state did just fine without a so-called “millionaire’s tax” as well as their other tax increases until Governor O’Malley came in and wanted to prime the state spending pump. (Governor Ehrlich did so as well with his final budget; until then his increases were relatively sustainable.) Throw in a larger share of federal dollars being required to maintain the state’s appetite for services and you have the situation we are in now. Imagine how Democrats must feel to be forced into the box of having to make cuts in an election year – think they’re not inwardly seething?
We have a choice in November. One choice is to take a hard look at what are priorities are and tailor a leaner, smarter budget to match. The other will be a repeat of 2007, where no tax increase will be taken off the table – we could see increases in the gas tax, income tax, sin taxes, sales tax (and services subject to it), and a whole multitude of other fees and levies.
Being a fiscal conservative, I prefer the former. But part of getting that will be looking past the class envy, a favorite divisive tactic of Democrats everywhere, and deciding it’s time to make a stand for maximizing our freedom.
The final march for ruination
I have so much fun with the e-mails from Organizing For Against America. Now they’ve undertaken a week-long “Final March for Reform” with steps their minions are supposed to take in order to achieved their desired result of Obamacare.
Step 1 was yesterday, where participants were supposed to “get the facts out.” So here are some of their so-called “facts”:
As the President has made clear, Americans deserve a final up-or-down vote on health reform. And the House is now expected to hold its final vote as soon as one week from today.
Yet House Democrats are scheming to avoid this. From CongressDaily yesterday:
House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter is prepping to help usher the healthcare overhaul through the House and potentially avoid a direct vote on the Senate overhaul bill, the chairwoman said Tuesday.
Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version.
Undaunted, Obama’s flunkie David Plouffe pressed on:
As we speak, insurance-industry lobbyists are gathering at the D.C. Ritz-Carlton to stage a last-minute blitz to block reform — even as they jack up premiums by as much as 60% for small businesses and families across the country.
You know, I doubt you can get the Ritz-Carlton or any other major venue at a moment’s notice. This meeting was set up months in advance and besides, I thought we were supposed to have this last summer anyway.
Plouffe wraps up on this class-envy, “us-versus-them” note:
We’ve put together a simple summary of the President’s proposal, a fact sheet to show friends and co-workers how the plan will specifically help them, posters to display, Facebook notes to post, and much more.
(snip)
Today, it’s time to show the insurance lobbyists that no smear campaign cooked up at a posh hotel can match the power of millions of regular citizens who are ready for change and committed to the truth.
Yep, that’s grassroots all right. You have your talking points, we have this: Nancy Pelosi wants the bill to pass so we can find out what’s in it. Seems like it’s too late then, unless they want things to be hidden.
Here’s the real truth. This bill was of the special interests, by the special interests, and for the special interests. They don’t have the votes and they know it – hence the “Slaughter solution.” OAA has presented its case and lost in the court of public opinion.
By the way, here’s the Day 2 instruction, with OAA’s Mitch Stewart the flunkie of the day:
President Obama has called for the House to vote to move health reform forward as early as next week. Your representative, Rep. Frank Kratovil, stood with the President to create as many as 3.9 million jobs with the Recovery Act, and deserves our thanks. Now, it’s important to make it clear that the voters back home stand with President Obama and want health reform.
Yes, he pointed out Kratovil’s most glaring failure to date, voting for the porkulus bill, If Frank doesn’t hew to his word and vote against Obamacare, he may as well pack now. Kratovil can run to the right all he wants with his budget proposals and crackdown on illegal immigration, but a vote for Obamacare is his political funeral. And I’m sure he knows that.
So the battle lines have been drawn, activist vs. activist. I suspect there’s more of us than there are of them, and right is on our side. If they need to resort to trickery and deceit to pass their bill, well, there may not be much we can do about that now but certainly we can defeat this in other venues too. Just ask the commonwealth of Virginia.
Wargotz wins beauty contest
Much as a straw poll is somewhat helpful in determining grassroots support – but isn’t necessarily an indication of how an election will turn out – U.S. Senate Dr. Eric Wargotz may have proven he has the best supporters for stacking a straw poll.
My U.S. Senate poll came to a close early this morning (by prearrangement) and the final results out of over 5,000 votes are as follows:
- Eric Wargotz 2,864 (56%)
- Corrogan Vaughn 1,436 (28%)
- Jim Rutledge 519 (10%)
- John Kimble 144 (3%)
- Carmen Amedori 138 (3%)
- John Curran 5 (<1%)
- Daniel McAndrew 5 (<1%)
Conclusions:
- Eric’s campaign never stopped responding to the poll once it got underway. He led pretty much the entire way and kept increasing his percentage as other candidates and their supporters lost interest. The last time I did this (with just four candidates – Amedori hadn’t entered the race yet and I didn’t know Curran and Kimble had entered) Jim Rutledge picked up support toward the end but not this time.
- I think Corrogan Vaughn’s camp exhibited the same phenomenon, as he and his supporters were probably the best at plugging the poll. But I’m hesitant to consider him as a real force in the race yet based on prior results. Even if you forget that the 2006 campaign had an all-but-annointed candidate in Michael Steele, Vaughn only drew 3.7% of the vote in 2004. Why is the support coming out now when the message didn’t sell before? Something doesn’t add up here.
- Jim Rutledge has good supporters based on comments, but they didn’t stay for the whole poll. It makes me wonder if his backing is all that strong as I’ve found his campaign stays on message well but has spotty execution at times. Hopefully those videos are helping Jim with campaign financing too.
- As for John Kimble, see Corrogan Vaughn. Most of his support came in the last day or two because prior to that he was a cypher. So my guess is that he or one of his backers caught wind of the poll and tried to make it sound like he had a little bit of backing. On the bright side, he did beat Vaughn in 2006 with 2.9% of the vote, finishing a very distant second in the primary.
- I see Carmen Amedori as the “establishment” candidate based on her prior service in state government, and it sounds to me like she ignored the poll. I got a note from her that she was doing door-to-door instead, which makes sense. She’ll get far more than 3% in September, I’m certain of that.
- On the other hand, McAndrew and Curran performed as expected.
At some point I’m going to do this again, perhaps later on this spring. But the next time I’m going to shorten the poll’s duration and see if I can dampen the repeat voting aspect to some extent. I had it set to one hour on my site but then again I don’t know if Polldaddy works that restriction through its site-based voting. (Now I know why I had 5,111 votes but not 5,111 readers! But readership did have a nice increase, thank you!)
I promised to put up some of the best comments for each candidate. There is no doubt that this poll was by far my best as participation goes, and I think I finally harnessed the power I envisioned when I started doing polling a few months back. These will be in order of finish, but most of the comments spoke about my top finishers and were cleaned up as needed for spelling errors and such.
“Sam” said about Dr. Eric Wargotz:
I don’t know. All are good people but very few really qualified to take a 6 year legislative hitch IMHO. I was quite taken with Dr. Eric Wargotz at the debate. Warm, comfortable, approachable style. Not stuffy and boring. Seemed to be right on with his responses. Came across very sincere and caring along with very knowledgeable. I have trouble supporting candidates for a 6 year legislative hitch if they have no elected legislative or constituent experience. I am also not a fan of politicians who are elected and then quit to take an appointed position. I feel that is a derilection of duty to the constituents who elected them. Just my view.
Jim Duncan pointed out the Facebook aspect – analytical like me:
Before you go too far in questioning the fairness of this poll, as the creator (of the poll) points out, it does appear to be consistent with each candidate’s level of support. At least with respect to the current order of finish, when you look at each campaign’s number of fans/friends on Facebook, where the candidates have pushed this poll. As best as I could tell, Eric Wargotz has by far the most support on Facebook with exactly 5000 friends. He has additional sites ranging from 126 to 1853 friends, but I will assume that most are duplicates. A distant second appears to be Corrogan Vaughn with 562, Vaughn has two other sites with 197 and 373 friends, Jim Rutledge with 514 and Carmen Amedori with 292, neither appeared to have other sites. I’ll bet there are some cross overs here as well…
Corrogan Vaughn had a number of passionate defenders for his cause. “JPS” liked his stand on the issues:
I agree with some of the above posters that we need someone who can take Baltimore city, and to add to that Vaughn can not only win Baltimore city, but he can win on solid principles. He has called for (abolishing) the IRS in place of sensible fair and simple taxation, abolishing the Department of Education because the education of our children comes from the states, and he’s serious about reining in spending. I know many have called Corrogan Vaughn the most Conservative candidate because he is deeply committed first and foremost to fiscal responsibility while maintaining social conservative values that will win over black conservative Democrats, a large voting bloc in Maryland fyi.
“Maryland Patriot” also chimed in for Vaughn:
I have worked in Maryland politics for several years on both sides of the aisle and have yet to meet an individual more honest and sincere than Corrogan Vaughn. The others are nice people, but seem to share the same disregard for the needs of everyday Marylanders as our present senator. Mr. Vaughn offers genuine solutions and ideas to the problems faced by our state and nation. He seems to be in this race out of sincere concern for Marylanders and Americans. Go Vaughn!
“Jasmine” was quite succinct:
I’m not familiar with politics here in Maryland but I will say that as a lifelong Democrat I’m switching to Republican this election to vote for Vaughn!!! Go Corrogan!
As Rush Limbaugh would say, “welcome home.” Meanwhile, Jim Rutledge supporters were in force early on. Here’s some of what they had to say, beginning with “libertypatriot”:
If you want a conservative candidate then the best candidate is Jim Rutledge. The other candidates do not possess the Constitutional knowledge and understanding that Jim possesses. While I don’t have anything personal against anyone in the race, conservatives know that Ehrlich is considered a moderate and what I’m hearing from people is Carmen is a reflection of that. Again, not making any judgment, just passing that on. Lastly, Tea Party people are tired of people already in government. We want an outsider, not an insider.
I think we all agree though… whomever ends up winning the Republican primary… needs to take down Mikulski. That’s the real end game.
In looking at her record, Amedori isn’t particularly moderate compared to some of her peers, regardless Wayne Ehrensberger said:
I have talked with Jim Rutledge at length on a wide range of topics. I can assure everyone that he is a staunch constitutional conservative, of solid moral character, knows the issues and fully articulates well thought out responsive plans and ideas. These same traits cannot be applied to Dr. Wargotz. Jim is a successful, experienced businessman. He is well versed in the politics although admittedly not a “veteran” politician. And that is certainly a good thing. What we obviously don’t need are more long term politicians. We need to put in place those that are in tune with the private sector that most of us work in and who understand, appreciate and will honestly adhere to the Constitution.
I am closely associated with several of Jim’s support staff. We knew each other before any of us were even aware of Jim Rutledge. These individuals would never align themselves with someone who isn’t a pure Constitutionalist. That of course also goes for me. I don’t possess any great incite into the remaining candidates, but I don’t really need to. The simple fact is that they are not Jim Rutledge. He is the individual that must win the seat currently held by Mikulski. Then we will finally have someone that truly represents We the People.
If anyone is interested in learning more about the Constitutional Conservative/Tea Party movement, I offer you two “Groups” based here in Maryland that you should check out and consider joining – allianceofamericanpatriots.org and restoreamericasmission.org. You will find yourself in company with many Maryland Patriots as well as the same from across the Nation.
Even the few Amedori supporters got their points across, with the best being “NRAD”:
I was at the debate in MoCo and by no fault of the YR’s the venue was pretty lousy for all the candidates. There was no PA system and there were barriers in the middle of the room. So by all standards ALL the candidates did a pretty decent job considering they had to shout at the top of thier voices so the people in the back and behind the walls could hear. By no means, should that be a gauge of anything. I will note that in all my days in politics it is always the front runner who takes the worst beating. May I suggest, however, that we not beat up on the GOP candidates. I bet Ronald Reagan would be turning in his grave by such antics.
Now, my candidate is Amedori for many reasons. And her experience is in the private and public sector – such a fabric upon which sound and wise decisions can be made. It is going to take that fortitude to take on the corruption in D.C. She has never shied away from a good fight. I remember her when she confronted then Lt. Gov Townsend and the way she always took on Joe Curran in Judiciary Committee. This woman is relentless. And, in my opinion, it is going to take a strong woman to take the fight to Babs. Amedori will surely do that. She has a conservative voting record to reflect her positions. Seems to me that anyone can say what they will do but we really need to look at what has been done. She is 100% pro life, 100% small business having been a recipient of The Shaw Award with MD Business for Responsive Government. And she is a fiscal conservative. All of that is reflected in her voting record. That is why Amedori has my vote.
The poll and comments are available here. While I’m changing my poll today, I must say this version was a memorable one!
Pollitt warms up the local campaign
You wouldn’t expect Wicomico County Executive Rick Pollitt to be a “one-and-done” termer if he could help it, so this news is not unexpected. From Progressive Delmarva:
Rick Pollitt will kick off his re-election effort to return as Wicomico County Executive with a fundraising dinner this Saturday.
The beef and dumplings dinner will cost $30 a ticket at the Pittsville Fire Hall from 5 p.m.- 8 p.m. Entertainment will be provided by Mat Creamer. Tickets are available at the door.
Rick has started a Facebook page, a Twitter profile, and a website with donations accepted by PayPal.
That scant description by “Duck Around” (who I presume is one of Pollitt’s 80 or so Facebook fans, since two have the surname “Duck”) is pretty much the whole post, and there’s little to Pollitt’s website yet either. It’s a shame, because I’d love to see what Rick thinks are the issues facing Wicomico County and what he’s done to recommend a second term.
However, if any Republicans are seeking the seat they are keeping their cards close to the vest. (Then again, Pollitt was first to file in 2006 and it was right about this time on the calendar.) Conventional wisdom holds that the leading contenders to make such an announcement would be County Councilmen John Cannon or Joe Holloway, but as I recall none of the three main GOP contenders last time came from an elected background (nor did Pollitt, as it turns out.) We could see a local business leader step into the ring once again, on either side.
Depending on your perspective, it’s either fortunate or unfortunate that I’ve been through this rodeo once before and my archives go back beyond the 2006 election. Here’s some golden oldies where Pollitt spoke during that campaign, like the NAACP forum, the Pittsville forum, and his response to my analysis. As an added bonus, I have an overview of the 2006 CE race and its key issues, and how he did his initial budget. Maybe if he’d said “no” a little more during the fat times the lean times would have been easier to deal with – in other words, a little “proven leadership” would have gone a long way.
But we can change the leader, and perhaps this November is a good time to do so. (Or even September - wonder if Tom Taylor will run again?)
Wicomico County can do better. Being first to hold the County Executive’s seat is certainly an honor but it’s not a license to remain there for life.
Thinking about tea
It’s a beautiful morning outside, and the snow pile that lay across the street from the driveway here has finally disappeared, so it must be spring! It’s not the type of morning which makes one think about doing taxes – as it happens, I haven’t done mine yet either – but it is the kind of morning which makes me think about the Tax Day TEA Party coming up in just over a month.
Certainly I hope the weather is more like what we’re enjoying today than the miserable damp and rainy day we endured last year, but the event promises to be bigger and better in many other ways. I know organizers are looking for musical entertainment to help fill a four-hour or so program, and that’s fine.
Yet I don’t necessarily want the event to lose its impact or its message by being bogged down in entertainment. It becomes less of a protest and more of an event like the annual picnic or fireman’s carnival if the pendulum swings too far in that direction.
The thing which appealed to me as I stood on the steps of the Government Office Building last year and said my brief piece was that the people I surveyed weren’t comprised of the same old political crowd I saw at any other party meeting or candidate forum. Instead, I was looking at a crowd of real-life Howard Beales – mad as hell, and they couldn’t take it anymore. Rather than stew about it or yell at the televison news, they came despite the weather to air their own grievances and make their voice heard.
No one knew if this would be a one-shot deal; after all, the naysayers always told us you can’t fight City Hall. But one protest sparked another and with several political battles being fought the anger and frustration were easily channeled into positive directions – in particular, the continuing fight against the takeover of one-sixth of our economy by the federal government. (If Medicare is broke, do we honestly believe putting more people on a similar program will enjoy success?)
So where do TEA Parties go from here? Well, they’ve spawned a copycat movement from their polar opposites, but the Astroturf known as the Coffee Party may not have the passion that it could have had it sprung up a year or two earlier. (Let me throw a question back at those guys – where were you when President Bush was enacting policies you didn’t like?)
But as the TEA Party movement matures there’s a risk that it ossifies into that which we protested against in the first place. While some say there’s room for a third political party, for years we’ve had a third, fourth, fifth, etc. and they’ve made little to no impact. The trick is figuring out how to infiltrate one (or, even better, both) of the major parties yet keep the movement fresh. After all, there’s always the possibility we get what we want, and like a team which wins the World Series after a long losing streak, we need to learn how to stay on top once we arrive there.
The biggest lesson, though, is that things will never again be as they once were. The TEA Party isn’t going to be the new cool thing forever but tyranny has been around as long as we’ve recorded history. In a time where fifteen minutes of fame is rapidly becoming fifteen seconds and yesterday’s hero is today’s zero (witness the souring of many on Sarah Palin), even protest has to change and grow.
But it can’t lose sight of the original message, for even when we have success the fight will be to maintain those victories.
Is it really a race, or hype?
As of today, we have a little under eight months before presumptive Democrat nominee (and incumbent governor) Martin O’Malley tangles with assumed Republican choice (and former governor) Bob Ehrlich. Both face primary challengers but it’s likely these two will be the guys come November.
I noted the other day that Ehrlich is closing the gap and this fact was not lost on the Rothenburg Political Report either. According to them, O’Malley is no longer “safe” but holds a “narrow advantage.”
Of course, the Maryland GOP is happy at the prospect, as party Chair Audrey Scott noted:
Governor O’Malley should be very concerned. Maryland voters are rejecting his agenda of high taxes, high spending and growing our state’s government… Marylanders are hurting under the failed leadership of Governor O’Malley, who has proven to be only accountable to party bosses and big wigs, not Maryland families. The primary responsibility of an elected official is to listen to their constituency. Governor O’Malley is deaf to the cries and concerns of Maryland citizens who are hurting from his out-of-control fiscal policies. Since Governor O’Malley has taken office nearly 100,000 Marylanders have lost their jobs and unemployment has reached a 26 year high, clearly he is not listening to what the people of Maryland need.”
In response, the Democrats are pooh-poohing Ehrlich’s chances. Noted Isaac Salazar on The OnLine State:
On page 19 of the (leaked to Politico) RNC document Steele and the RNC go through their targets in the 2010 gubernatorial elections. They seem confident about a lot of states – everything from Maine to New Mexico, Oregon to Tennessee, Michigan to Oklahoma, Wyoming to Ohio… OK, you get our point.
Noticeably absent… Maryland. In fact, Maryland was one of only three Democratic-held states the RNC is NOT targeting (New Hampshire and Arkansas being the other two).
With Bob Ehrlich an all but announced candidate for Governor, you would think he merits at least a mention? I mean, he is a former Governor, right?
It’s noteworthy this Salazar piece came out the day before Rothenburg’s analysis, and perhaps this could eventually change the RNC’s thinking. (It’s also funny the Democrats are worried about Michigan and Ohio – aren’t those incumbent Democrats doing a bang-up job on their state economies?)
The long-term horse race aspect is certainly more entertaining in a race that is pretty much cut-and-dried like Ehrlich vs. O’Malley than a divided one where several Republicans vie for a chance to become what conventional wisdom assumes will be cannon fodder for Barbara Mikulski. (Then again, conventional wisdom pretty much figured Scott Brown would never win the “Kennedy seat” either.)
So, newspapers need something to sell copies and bloggers need things to write about. While it’s good the experts feel we have a competitive race for governor, some of the undercards which are just as important (like a Jim Mathias trying to flip a longtime GOP seat to the D’s or the prospect his Delegate seat will go Republican) get all but ignored.
In those cases, less hype may make a better race. I’m looking forward to some big GOP wins come November.
Amedori launches online petition, calls on Mikulski to oppose reconciliation
Breaking news comes to me this morning from U.S. Senate candidate Carmen Amedori’s camp.
In an effort to contrast herself with longtime incumbent Barbara Mikulski and create pressure on the Democrat to forgo a vote for reconciliation (should it become necessary), Amedori has set up an online petition:
Today, Carmen Amedori, Republican candidate for United States Senate in Maryland, launched an online petition calling on United States Senator Barbara Mikulski to vote no on reconciliation for Obamacare.
“Reconciliation is not the method to pass health care reform. This parliamentary maneuver has never been used for such a sweeping piece of legislation,” said Amedori. “The President’s plan for health care reform is seriously flawed. That’s why no one elected Republican Senator will support the legislation.”
Reconciliation has been used 19 times since 1980. 12 of those times the procedure was used to pass omnibus budget bills that had an overwhelming support in the Senate. Only on 2 occasions were the budget bills controversial enough to lack bipartisan support.
“I am launching this online effort to send a message to our Senator that Marylanders don’t want Obamacare forced down our throats and that she should vote against reconciliation,” stated Amedori. “A national mandate is not a way to make health care more affordable.”
People can join Carmen’s effort by visiting her campaign website or by friending Amedori For U.S. Senate on Facebook.
Amedori believes that a health care reform package must include tort reform, associated health plans, rules that allow people to purchase health insurance across state lines, more emphasis on health savings accounts and a method for allowing people with pre-existing conditions to purchase insurance coverage.
Amedori is a former Maryland House Delegate where she served on the Judiciary Committee and quickly rose to the position of Assistant Minority Leader. She earned a distinguished reputation for being tough on crime, a strong advocate for property rights, and a champion for small business. In 2004, Governor Robert Ehrlich honored Amedori by appointing her to the Maryland Parole Commission where she served until last year.
(snip)
Amedori believes that as the next United States Senator she can do a better job for the people of Maryland. “It is time we had a Senator focused on results rather than political gamesmanship. As a former member of the House of Delegates, I know how to make a difference. Barbara has had 24 years and now is the time for new leadership,” added Amedori.
It should be noted I edited the original release slightly, but the point remains that if the Obamacare supporters choose the reconciliation route (which I doubt, since the House passage of the Senate bill gives us legislation which wouldn’t necessarily need to be reconciled anyway) Barbara would almost surely align with her fellow Democrats as being one of the 51 votes. Certainly Mikulski would feel safe enough in her seat to do so.
The other obvious reason for having the petition is gathering contacts for other communications from her campaign, which is fine – after all, I think voters should be well-informed about all of the candidates running. Carmen is unlike the others running in that she has a legislative record, and it’s one that’s been judged to be fairly conservative by the former Maryland Accountability Project (Amedori served in the House of Delegates 1999-2004.) But each voter should study all the candidates, judging their stated principles, goals, and experience inside and out of the political realm.
Since I got the release a little bit ahead of time, I can vouch the petition is up and running and I already signed it. You should too, even if you support one of the other six candidates currently in the race.
Poll update – day 3
It looks like two candidates’ supporters are taking this seriously.
As of about 3:00 this afternoon, it’s become a two-way race:
- Eric Wargotz 1,785 (49%)
- Corrogan Vaughn 1,156 (32%)
- Jim Rutledge 499 (14%)
- Carmen Amedori 128 (4%)
- John Kimble 43 (1%)
- Daniel McAndrew 5 (<1%)
- John Curran 4 (<1%)
Let’s look at what happened in the last 24 hours or so:
- Eric Wargotz 948 (54%)
- Corrogan Vaughn 783 (46%)
- Jim Rutledge 23 (1%)
- Carmen Amedori 2 (<1%)
No one else got a vote, so it’s obvious that this poll may have run its course as a useful exercise.
The percentage changes are as follows:
- Corrogan Vaughn +12 (20 to 32)
- Eric Wargotz +4 (45 to 49)
- Daniel McAndrew 0 (stays at <1)
- John Curran 0 (stays at <1)
- John Kimble -1 (2 to 1)
- Carmen Amedori -3 (7 to 4)
- Jim Rutledge -12 (26 to 14)
The poll will end on Tuesday, and I’ll have the final totals and the conclusions I draw from them that night.
By the way, the “Eric” you see on the Polldaddy.com comments is not the candidate Eric Wargotz. I figured you’d know that but he took the time today to point out it wasn’t the case. I can moderate these comments to some extent, but only after the fact.
I think when I wrap this exercise up I may post some of the better comments and cases for some of the candidates.
Poll tracking – day 2
Well, things haven’t slowed down with my U.S. Senate poll, as the total response closes in on the 2,000 mark.
Again, I stress this isn’t a strictly scientific poll as there is the opportunity for multiple responses from the same person – but there is a time-out period built in. Yes, the system can be gamed but my theory is that the gamesmanship will occur roughly in proportion with actual support.
Here are the results I had shortly before 4:00 this afternoon:
- Eric Wargotz 837 (45%)
- Jim Rutledge 476 (26%)
- Corrogan Vaughn 373 (20%)
- Carmen Amedori 126 (7%)
- John Kimble 43 (2%)
- Daniel McAndrew 5 (<1%)
- John Curran 4 (<1%)
The other key number is tracking the daily totals as opposed to the overall totals. It was just about 24 hours since my first update, and the change since then has been most meaningful for Wargotz and Amedori. The percentage is the share of the votes cast in the last day or so.
- Eric Wargotz 582 (54%)
- Jim Rutledge 247 (23%)
- Corrogan Vaughn 220 (20%)
- Carmen Amedori 31 (3%)
- John Kimble 3 (<1%)
- Daniel McAndrew 2 (<1%)
- John Curran 0 (0%)
I did some checking on my Facebook page among the universe of friends I have and those associated with the Corrogan Vaughn campaign (including the candidate) plugged the poll twice, while a Wargotz ally did it once. Now here is the precentage difference from yesterday to today – you can see who benefitted at whose expense.
- Eric Wargotz +12 (33 to 45)
- Corrogan Vaughn 0 (still at 20)
- Daniel McAndrew 0 (still at <1)
- John Curran -1 (1 to <1)
- Jim Rutledge -3 (29 to 26)
- John Kimble -3 (5 to 2)
- Carmen Amedori -5 (12 to 7)
This is what I mean by depth of support – Wargotz’s supporters continue to flood the poll and perhaps distort it somewhat. But the last time I did this Wargotz held a large early lead only to see Jim Rutledge supporters close the gap at the end, so perhaps this may play out again.
Tomorrow I’ll do another update – I expect the pace to slow down some during the weekend but a big share from someone could have a significant impact on the results. The poll continues for a few more days (I have an end date set for it but I won’t say when it is) so we’ll see whether the supporters can keep going – it determines depth of support and also helps me determine whether my theory is validated or not.
Poll tracking – day 1
With the huge interest in my poll regarding who should face Barbara Mikulski for the U.S. Senate seat she currently occupies, I thought it would be a good idea to keep a daily track of it for the duration.
Most of the major candidates have posted about it on their Facebook pages multiple times, so the sampling size is extraordinarily high. As of 3 p.m. this afternoon there were 779 total votes cast, and the interim results follow:
- Eric Wargotz 255 (33%)
- Jim Rutlegdge 229 (29%)
- Corrogan Vaughn 153 (20%)
- Carmen Amedori 95 (12%)
- John Kimble 40 (5%)
- John Curran 4 (1%)
- Daniel McAndrew 3 (<1%)
Obviously this is a very tight race and I encourage people to stay involved! I’ll try to keep this tracking going for the duration of the poll, which will continue for the next few days.
Staying and fighting
Running for governor of your state is a task which takes a full-time effort, particularly if you’re not well-known around your state. That’s the situation Rep. Nathan Deal finds himself in as he strives to become the next governor of Georgia.
To that end, Deal had planned on resigning his House seat next week in order to concentrate on his run for statewide office. Instead, GOP leaders persuaded him to stay and made the hurdle for passing Obamacare that much higher. With a death and two earlier resignations (all Democrats who had voted for the bill previously), the nominally 435 member body was down to 432, requiring 217 votes for passage. Had Deal left as planned Nancy Pelosi’s job would have been made easier by cutting the majority number down to 216 and eliminating a sure “no” vote.
While the conventional wisdom is that the Senate and their reconciliation process is where the bill’s fate will be decided, they conveniently ignore the fact that President Obama and Democratic leaders could double-cross the House by promising them fixes to the Senate bill they’d pass – but as soon as the House passes the Senate bill (with the pro-abortion language, “Cornhusker Kickback” and “Louisiana Purchase” included) you better believe President Obama is going to find the pens to sign it.*
This is why many observers feel the whole battle over reconciliation is a red herring, a feint to distract anti-Obamacare supporters from the real important vote in the House. No wonder Frank Kratovil is making the news a lot more these days.
If the House somehow gets the Senate bill through, the game is over and we are stuck with Obamacare. Well, more precisely we are stuck with the taxes and regulations included therein – the so-called benefits don’t kick in for several years. And what entitlement have we overturned in the last seventy-five years since Social Security?
The ballgame is in the top of the ninth, and the American people need to be the ace closer who gets the save. Let’s get out and win this one!
* I’ve read past practice is that, on ceremonial bill-signings like Obamacare would surely be, the President signs his name one letter at a time with a different pen so that each of those who helped get the legislation through have a memento of the significant event. Talk about your poison pens.
The Spending Limit Amendment
Earlier this morning I participated in a conference call with Rep. Jeb Hansarling (R-TX) and Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN). They are two of the three initial sponsors of a possible Constitutional amendment called the Spending Limit Amendment (H.J. Res. 79), a proposal to limit federal spending to 20% of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This number was arrived at because that’s a rough average of federal spending vs. GDP over an extended period.
Their argument falls in a number of categories ranging from dire economic straits to lost productivity to a national security threat. In the call, Hensarling noted “we believe we have to act now” and that he’s “not naive about the fact 5,000 amendments to the Constitution have been offered but only 27 ratified.” Instead, “what we hope to do is start a national debate on the size of government.”
Added Pence, “we have come to the conclusion that we need to introduce a new force,” that force being one of changing our “charter.” He also made the oft-noted point that “as government expands, freedom contracts.”
A number of different bloggers asked questions; I happened to be one of them. My question related to the fact that this seemed to me a weaker version of the balanced budget amendments proposed in the early 1990’s. Congressman Pence argued that this was “not a weaker version” but “a focused effort” on reining in the “runaway spending on steroids” going on today. In their estimate, running a small deficit but only spending 20% of GDP was preferable to having a balanced budget consuming 40% of GDP.
On an earlier question, the pair agreed that the BBA debate ”had an impact” on spending immediately after it was considered.
There’s a lot more to the roughly 40-minute call, but since I’ve been promised the recording later today I can let you be the judge. Suffice to say that this should be a great issue to use in the 2010 campaign and they hope the TEA Party movement embraces the proposal, but they agreed this will be “a multiyear effort” and warned that, left unchecked, in 20 years our spending will place us in the similar position Greece faces now.
It reinforced my belief that Pence and Hensarling are “keepers” when it comes to a “throw the bums out” mentality. You’ll enjoy hearing what they have to say.
Please note that the opinions expressed on monoblogue are not necessarily those of the Wicomico County Republican Party Central Committee, of which I'm a member. (But they probably should be.)
News from the loony left:
