Maryland Politics – Page 176

Odds and ends no. 5

Yes, it’s that time again. Just little stuff that won’t fill up a post by itself but I think is important.

First of all, it seems like our little area is getting some play politically from national figures, for whatever reason. Yesterday, Chief Justice John Roberts was in Cambridge to speak to a group of Maryland lawyers at their convention.

Then, according to the “Evans-Novak Political Report” from Wednesday:

The commencement speech at Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is obviously seen as McCain reaching out the right for his ’08 presidential effort, but the truth is that he is reaching out everywhere. McCain, who likes to keep his weekends sacred at his Arizona retreat, will be at Dewey Beach, Del., Saturday for a fund-raiser by Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.), leader of the House Republican moderates. (emphasis mine) McCain is unquestionably the early front-runner for the nomination.

What that doesn’t tell me (nor does Mike Castle’s website, it’s linked under the “Let the people decide” column) is just how much this little shindig would cost to attend, although chances are it’s way too rich for my blood. And besides, Castle is way too moderate for my liking.

And then we have this. Recently Marine Cpl. Cory Palmer was killed in action fighting the War on Terror in Iraq. This Seaford native is supposed to be laid to rest on Sunday.

But the funeral will not be without controversy as the fringe religious zealots of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas have been granted a permit by the city of Seaford to picket for 45 minutes during the funeral. It’s one of many such protests the group and its leader, the Rev. Fred Phelps, have mounted throughout the nation as part of an anti-homosexual crusade. Because of the military’s “don’t ask don’t tell” policy, funerals of our fallen have become targets for Phelps and his cult-like church family.

Actually, the suggestion given in the linked story was a good one – simply overwhelm the protests by a sheer number of people in attendance. I was thinking more along the lines of anyone who happens to drive a tractor trailer and would be willing to risk a parking ticket just park right in front of the protesting group.

The sad thing about it is that, in a family’s time of grieving, their son’s funeral is turned into a circus. Almost as bad will be the dutiful media coverage, which I’m sure is 90% of the reason the Westboro clan continues these activities.

It’s sort of odd to me that we don’t see a lot of “celebrity” starpower despite being relatively close to the nation’s capital. But sometimes I think we’re (by chance or perhaps by choice) the “flyover country” of the east coast. It’s an area where agriculture and aquaculture rub elbows, and because of that we have sort of a Midwest sensitivity with a touch of Southern redneck influence and a dash of New England maritime – an interesting mix of folks. Eventually the “come-heres” will gain a little bit of influence, but there’s probably still a generation or two left of that old-line Eastern Shore mentality remaining.

However, if I were an “old school” denizen of the Eastern Shore, I’d worry much less about the folks who come from the I-95 corridor and much more about the folks streaming in from below the Rio Grande corridor. Those who refuse to assimilate to our American way of life are by far the bigger threat.

You know, we should have thought of the overwhelming use of people a little earlier, perhaps during the “May Day” fiasco. Perhaps this is why we don’t see as much of the hoi-polloi here on the Eastern Shore. Could it be that the wealth of common sense exhibited by the common folk here is a turnoff to them?

Maryland Spring GOP convention: a report

The 2006 Spring Convention of the Maryland Republican party.

Jack Lord saw me here today and figured he’d be seeing the report in monoblogue…he was right!

This was the scene today just up the road in Cambridge at the Hyatt resort. While it was a beautiful morning along the Choptank River, almost 200 members of the various local Central Committees, candidates, and interested observers (like myself) sat in the convention hall to listen to the Party go about the nuts and bolts of its business.

Much as a meeting of the Wicomico County Republican Club (you can look in the archives for my reports on those), state chairman John Kane began the meeting by leading us all in the Pledge of Allegiance, along with observing a moment of silence for prominent Republicans who had passed away since the previous fall’s convention.

He then introduced the Republican candidate for Maryland Attorney General, Frederick County State’s Attorney Scott Rolle. After 12 years in that post, he decided to make the run for statewide office and was a beneficiary of current Attorney General Joe Curran’s decision not to seek re-election. At stake in this election is a streak of Democrat Attornies General that dates back to 1919.

Rolle emphasized the main points of his campaign would be dealing with kids and gangs; more specifically, a focus on crimes against children and working to combat the increasing gang influence in Maryland – a law and order Attorney General moreso than the incumbent. Captain Rolle also talked of his Army Reservist stint, which included defending Sgt. Michael J. Smith, who was convicted of using his dog to intimidate prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

Instead of going to prison, Rolle said, Smith should be getting a medal pinned to his chest. This line brought an ovation from the gathering, including myself.

The keys to his campaign, Scott noted, would be name recognition and money. Not being from the main populated area of Maryland puts him at some early disadvantage on that, but initial signs were positive that the campaign would be successful.

After Rolle spoke, the meeting again turned to business, with various committees informing the meeting of their particular facets of the Party’s workings. Once complete, Kane gave his chair’s report.

His report stressed discipline – the Democrats would try to promote infighting among the Republicans, who would work best if they stayed focused on the overall goal. He also gave the assemblage word that, for the first time in many years, Maryland wouldn’t be written off by the national GOP. We’ll actually get some help from the national party because of the two high-profile races we have with Governor Ehrlich seeking reelection and Lieutenant Governor Steele looking to advance to the U.S. Senate.

Kane also took a few moments to question the wisdom of two pieces of legislation passed by the General Assembly, vetoed by Gov. Ehrlich, and overrode by the heavy Democrat majority. One was the “early voting” bill, where Democrats picked out the polling places that would open five days prior to the election. Claiming the bill was “fraught with fraud”, the chair also informed us that, of all the states that permitted early voting, Maryland was the sole state NOT requiring identification.

The other law is interesting. It was written by the Democrats to target one person, a gentleman by the name of Dick Hug. The legislation prohibits political fundraising by members of a college board of regents. As it so happens, Governor Ehrlich’s chief fundraiser was on the University of Maryland’s board, but had to resign last week due to this law. Even the regents who worked with Hug objected to forcing him from the board – but the law is the law.

The way I see it, legislation to punish success is terrible anyway. But had the law been passed to apply solely to any future appointees rather than those already in office, I wouldn’t be objecting to it so much nor would most people. But the Democrats in Annapolis have a problem with spite. They seem to have the attitude that they are entitled to rule the Free State as a personal fiefdom, and though the state elected a Republican governor it’s viewed as a fluke.

Back to the business at hand. After Chairman Kane finished, the national committeewoman, Joyce Terhes, gave her rendition of the state committee report. She was quite fired up, exhorting the attendees to leave “furious.” She was adamant about the media diminishing the accomplishments of the Ehrlich administration, and accused the Democrats, stating that they “can’t beat the governor legally” as she ripped into the early voting law.

After her remarks, Kane came back to introduce the next speaker but did comment on Terhes’ speech, adding that the early voting laws were “nothing but a screw job.” And he’s right, since the law as written has many flaws in it. It went back to another thing Terhes stated in her remarks where states with early voting are finding that turnout is not increasing as much as expected anyway. Add in the lack of an ID requirement and it’s no wonder that many, even the partisan media (in our case, the Baltimore Sun and Washington Post, neither friends of Governor Ehrlich) question the wisdom of our state’s early voting law.

Lewis Pope was the last of the committee speakers, he is the national committeeman. He devoted his time to the national scene. His message: turnout is important. (Duh!) Seriously, the party does need to get out the base. He also criticized the Democrats as a “party without strategy.”

Pope quoted the famous James Carville statement from 1992, “it’s the economy stupid.” But his twist on it was that no one is reporting on the good economic news. The accomplishments of the last five years economically aren’t being echoed as much as the boom in the nineties was.

Additionally, Pope cited the rise of black Republicans like Ken Blackwell in Ohio and Lynn Swann in Pennsylvania, not to mention our Michael Steele. Here I sort of depart from the party line in a way, because to me they are conservative Republicans, not African-American conservative Republicans. I’m not one who prides myself on seeking an artificial diversity, I just accept people as people. I liked Ken Blackwell in Ohio because he was a fiscal conservative and I couldn’t have cared less how much pigment he had.

But Pope also noted that he was the guy who was filler for the main speaker.

Governor Ehrlich addresses the GOP Spring Convention, May 13, 2006.

It was at this point that Governor Ehrlich arrived to a sign-waving, thundering standing ovation from the crowd, much as an annointed Presidential candidate would at the national convention. First of all, Ehrlich talked about some of the large and enthusiastic crowds he had seen at the party’s Lincoln Day dinners at various locations around the state. As part of his remarks later, he cited two key accomplishments: turning a $4 billion deficit he inherited into a $2 billion surplus while shrinking the size of government by 7%; and educational spending that assisted in improving the test scores for schools in 23 of 24 Maryland jurisdictions (more on that other one in a moment.) Included in his successes was the establishment of 30 charter schools in Maryland, despite objections from the teachers’ unions.

But his most passionate words were for what he called targeting empowerment. One program he was most proud of was an initiative to rehabilitate criminals, saying that the term “throw away the key is not a period, it’s a semicolon.” At some point, he continued, criminals do get out. So while they are incarcerated, it’s best in his eyes to assist them by treating their mental health and drug issues. It’s a program he wanted to expand, but Democrats in Annapolis stood in his way.

And while it might peg me as a squishy moderate, I can understand his point. There’s a vast number of people in jail who are there for making one stupid decision – maybe they consumed too much alcohol and caused a fatality while driving drunk; or they just happened to be in the car with others who robbed the gas station. If this is so, it is probably best to work to rehabilitate them, knowing the older and wiser people likely won’t make another mistake to land them in the state prison system. Obviously a hardcore murderer with a long record of criminal activity is a different story, they’ve been proven as a danger to civilized society.

Ehrlich also made the claim that the Democrats have tried to raise taxes by $7.5 billion while he was in office, but he managed to fend off those tolls on the hardworking citizens of Maryland. Further, he touched on the issue of minority business enterprises and his efforts to help those entrepreneurs out. But he cautioned that his administration is “not in the business of guaranteeing results, but guaranteeing opportunity.” This is all well and good, but it is one part of the Ehrlich administration I disagree with, again because I try to stay colorblind in that area. I don’t believe in discrimination for or against a certain race, religion, gender, or preference. To me, MBE’s are discrimination for the minority who simply got additional pigment.

The governor also issued four challenges that he and his administration try to address.

The first challenge is to “convince voters to operate outside their ‘comfort zone.’ ” Issues aren’t necessarily “Republican” or “Democrat” issues, they’re just issues that need to be addressed for the betterment of all the state’s citizens.

Second, understand the target audience. There’s a great number of moderate to conservative Democrats (yes, we still have a few “blue dogs” in Maryland) who pulled the lever in 2002 because he spoke to them on enough issues to convince them to vote for Ehrlich – I still occasionally see a “Democrat for Ehrlich” bumper sticker from four years ago. (This is particularly true of Eastern Shore voters, who heavily went for Ehrlich across party lines in 2002.) But the far left Democrats will not vote for any Republican and that has to be accounted for too.

Thirdly, compare and contrast the Maryland of 2002 against the Maryland of 2006. I heard that and immediately thought of President Reagan asking, “are you better off than you were four years ago?” In my case, yes. But I didn’t live in Maryland in 2002.

And finally, a challenge that seemed strange on first hearing but made sense after some thought. It’s engaging the problem, and if a mistake is made, let it be an aggressive mistake. Don’t make a “status quo” mistake. I look at it as saying to try different ideas and think outside the box – sometimes your failure is spectacular, but it did prove the point that the solution would not work, and the experience is a teacher. Don’t keep doing the same old thing that’s not working just because it’s all you know. I would cite the twin examples of Thomas Edison (how many screwups do you think he had before he found tungsten wire works for a light bulb?) and Henry Ford (who I believe named his earliest prototype vehicles in alphabetical order, thus the Model T had a lot of flawed predecessors.)

Another passionate portion of the address was Ehrlich’s thoughts on the Baltimore City Schools. This district is the one district that did not improve, so state law allowed a takeover of the district. This takeover was thwarted by the Annapolis Democrats, who didn’t want that slap at the teachers’ union in an election year. In fact, Ehrlich quoted some (unnamed) Democrats and the excuses they gave as to why they would vote to override his veto. Most pathetic to him was the one who told the governor he couldn’t support the veto because, “the AFL-CIO told me not to.” While Ehrlich waxed eloquent about how the unions helped to build Maryland while he was growing up, and union jobs enabled those who had them to acquire the means for their children to have a better life, he felt betrayed that the same unions wanted to condemn the schoolchildren of Baltimore simply to regain political power.

He concluded that, “(his administration is) about empowerment”, and said that the 10,000 dropouts from the 11 takeover target schools in Baltimore City over the last nine years were “a state failure.” One effort his administration was making was attempting to track what happened to these dropouts as far as criminal activity, employment, etc. Again, I have to disagree with the governor on the dropouts, because the state can only set the rules regarding truancy and help pay to provide the buildings and equipment where there’s an opportunity to learn – it is up to each individual student whether they want to take advantage of that chance or not. Some beat the odds stacked against them and prosper due to sheer will.

After Ehrlich left to another standing ovation, Howard County committeeman Anthony Wisniewski raised his hand. Upon being recognized by the chair, he made some remarks about being fired up by the proceedings. Thinking back to his Jesuit education, he advised the gathered GOP faithful that they need to “justify and defend your decision” to support the party. The impromptu remarks were an interesting prelude to what came next.

The agenda was suspended for debate on a change to the party by-laws that was deemed necessary to be enacted now, rather than wait for the fall convention. This change involved replacing the three vice chairs with regional vice chairs selected from each of five districts: northern, southern, central, western, and Eastern Shore. Some controversy erupted over the placement of some counties in odd districts (an example is the mostly rural southern region also including suburban Anne Arundel County), but the main gist of the debate centered on an issue that creates tension in any legislative body.

There were some who favored the change because it needed to be expedited, but others cautioned that they really had no idea what was being voted on, as the context was missing. This measure was rather quickly written up, and many’s the bad law written in haste, they said. It was sausage grinding at its finest as an amendment to table was defeated after a fashion, then other friendly amendments debated and voted on. Finally, after nearly an hour of discussion and wrangling back and forth, the proposal as amended received the blessing of the state convention.

As it turned out, I was situated between a couple of interesting people. Sitting in the back, I happened to have the aforementioned Dick Hug to my left (strange to have him recognized during the chair’s remarks – hey everyone was looking at me too then!) and to my right was the graceful and gracious candidate for District 38B, Bonnie Luna (with her husband Louis.) As mentioned at the start, Jack Lord was also in attendance, he’s seeking one of those seats also.

I had a fleeting thought about being recognized as more than Dick Hug’s seating neighbor but thought better of it. At one point, Chairman Kane was asking if there were any media. I briefly considered raising my hand and asking, “does pajamas media count?” But I figured, better not. You never know, I might be more than an observer sometime.

I’m no stranger to political gatherings, one of my duties as president of the Toledo Metro Young Republicans was to represent our group at state functions. So I traveled to Columbus for our state convention (along with other Ohio cities for seasonal meetings.) As part of our state convention, we had a few vendors selling their wares. It’s the reason I snapped this picture – seems there’s always a button seller someplace at a state political function, and Maryland is no exception to the rule.

Overall, I enjoyed my morning there. I think the people in the GOP were genuinely excited about this fall – I know, I was in amongst the hardcore believers, but these are also the folks who are leaders in their home counties. It’s my thought that they are the backbone of America, most of them just plain folks who don’t get their names in the papers but do their best to contribute to American society.

Among those attending were some folks who had spent time with the Democrat side as part of their political jobs. To a person, they said that the Democrats seemed to be a gloomy bunch, only concerned with the negatives of what they feel is wrong with the Bush presidency instead of trying to come up with a positive alternative vision for what they wanted America to be.

Tonight I was chatting online with a friend of mine who is a Democrat. But there were a lot of issues where it appeared we have at least some common ground…both pro-America and tired of political games being played rather than results achieved. While I’m sure we differ over our vision of what government should do, we both agreed that there are political scoundrels who inhabit both major parties.

But what I saw today was a lot of honest and caring emotion. Yes, we as Republicans can be pretty mean-spirited toward our political opponents (Lord knows I am at times) but it’s because we do give a rat’s ass about our country and we consider it still the shining city on the hill. What today’s gathering attempted to do is get us working toward electing the people we feel would bring us closer to the Reaganesque vision of America and try to return our government to one of, for, and by the people, not the special interests.

Ten questions…the trailer (a coming attraction)

A goal I set for year number two of my blogging was an effort to become a “one-stop shop” for political news and issues. At that time, I’d already began compiling a list of candidate websites (with their blogs if they have any) and I’m still adding to the list as they become available and I become aware of them. This is from both major parties, along with some from other parties (I have a couple Green Party candidates linked, for example.)

If there’s one thing I like to see, it’s campaigns and elections based on the issues, not on whatever mud they can sling in 30 seconds or less. Yes, negative campaigning works on a lot of people but I’m making an attempt to go deeper than that.

This year the U.S. Senate seat in Maryland has attracted a huge amount of interest. No fewer than 19 candidates have either already filed for the primary (or general in one case) election; in fact, we’ve already had one dropout. So there is no way that a debate to air their views on important issues facing our state and nation could happen between all these competing candidates. Or could it?

A beautiful thing about the internet is that it occurs on my schedule. If I want to post something, on goes the computer, bam! I connect to my server and some time later, what I think goes out over the World Wide Web. (Well, maybe not to Communist China and other such restrictive places.) Knowing that, I had an idea that I thought deserved a try.

That’s how I came up with what I call the Ten Questions. Once I came up with them, I decided to send a copy via either e-mail or snail mail to each declared candidate for the Senate seat in Maryland. But wait, there’s more! While writing them, I observed that these questions all touch on areas of national concern – so why not also involve our close-by neighbors in Delaware and Virginia? And why not House candidates too? Thus, the list was completed. The Ten Questions have gone to a total of 33 hopefuls who are running for the following:

U.S. Senate seats in Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia.
U.S. House seats in Delaware (at-large), Maryland’s 1st District, and Virginia’s 2nd District.

It’s the same area I attempt to link to on my sidebar. As of tonight, I already have one respondent who has answered these questions. But I gave all responders a deadline of May 31st to return these questions.

The reason for that cutoff is beginning on June 2nd, and commencing on each Tuesday and Friday throughout the summer, I will post one or two hopefuls’ answers to the Ten Questions. The idea is to give anyone who has placed his or her name into the mix for these seats an equal opportunity to answer the same questions. For my friends who read this in Virginia, on June 9th (the Friday before the primary) I will post all the Virginia responses in a debate-style format – the question posted along with each candidate’s response (or lack thereof). The same will hold true for Maryland and Delaware on Friday, September 8th – I’ll repost the various answers I put up over the summer in a similar format so one can easily compare and contrast each of the hopefuls.

So on June 2nd people will see the actual questions I’ve sent. But to whet the appetite, the topics covered include immigration/border security, gasoline prices, ethics, campaign finance reform, the War on Terror, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Social Security, the budget with regard to “pork”, the question of free vs. fair trade, and their thoughts on who should run in 2008 to succeed President Bush.

This will be something for all my readers to look forward to I hope. By the way, once the questions are posted I welcome links so long as you credit monoblogue. And if you don’t happen to live in the area but want to quiz your federal officeseekers, all I ask is that if you use the questions you either provide a link to my site or credit www.monoblogue.us if you don’t provide a link (or in the print media.) Most bloggers are pretty cool that way.

So the campaign will begin in earnest June 2nd as we begin this forum. I think it’s going to be a good one. I don’t think I’ll replace those 30 second negative ads, but I’m going to try and score one for the clean campaign folks anyway.

Burying the competition

On an occasional basis I get the Liberty & Law newsletter from the Institute for Justice, which is a parent orgnization to a group called the Castle Coalition. I became interested in them last summer during the fallout from the Kelo decision.

The Institute for Justice generally takes the side of individual interests vs. government interference in free markets. In addition to their fight against eminent domain benefitting private interests at the expense of other private interests who create less government revenue, they advocated for school choice in Milwaukee, and in several states have fought against onerous campaign finance laws.

The latest issue has an article that hits close to home. The title, “Burying the Competition“, is a statement aimed at the Maryland funeral home cartel. It’s claimed that a funeral in the so-called Free State costs an average of $800 more than a funeral in another state (and funeral homes make 30% more income than the average US funeral home) because of laws restricting funeral home ownership to those who are licensed funeral directors (or those who acquire a state license to the tune of $250,000.) The court case that the IJ took up involves a man who owns a cemetery and built a funeral home intending to have his son, who is a licensed director, operate it. However, state laws prevented him from actually owning the funeral home, which would make him (in the state’s eyes) an unlicensed funeral director.

IJ points out that several attempts to overturn this oppressive legislation have been attempted in the General Assembly, but cannot make it out of committee because of the chair, Del. Hattie Harrison. Harrison is a longtime Democrat delegate (since 1973) representing District 45 in the Baltimore area.

I went to the campaign site Follow The Money (operated by a group called The Institute on Money in State Politics) and found out that in the last two election cycles that Maryland has records for (2002 and 2004) Delegate Harrison collected a total of $48,470. A good share of that did come from the funeral industry, just under $5,000. In the 2004 cycle (non-election) over half the money donated from the Maryland Funeral Directors PAC went to her, as well as the largest donation made by the Maryland State Funeral Directors Association. The 2002 money enabled her to be second out of the 10 candidates who ran for the District 45 seats in terms of money raised and easily win reelection.

It will be interesting to see how this goes. On the one hand, the funeral directors are expressing their free speech rights by donating to Delegate Harrison, who in turn, just so happens to scratch their back too. But on the other hand, the regulations are allowing a powerful group to block any efforts at competition.

The other interesting article in Liberty & Law was the first of a three part series on “Thinkers of Freedom.” The first part salutes economist Milton Friedman. I found it insightful as they focused on a little-discussed area of Friedman’s work, occupational licensing. Because I work in a occupation that is a licensed profession, that hit me close to home. Here’s why.

I graduated from college in 1986 with a four year bachelors’ degree in environmental design. Now that degree is what would be considered a “non-professional” architecture degree. The biggest difference between the degree I have and a five year Bachelor of Architecture degree comes down to 12 fewer credit hours of Studio time (two semesters’ worth) and maybe taking a handful of other electives. At my college, the BED degree actually took 8 more credit hours (136 vs. 128) to attain than a bachelors’ degree in any other field. But under the rules in force at the time, I was allowed to substitute an extra year of work experience for the year in academia to be eligible to sit for the architectural exam. Frankly, while I think Miami University is among the best of academic institutions and I learned a lot there, that year in the “real world” was a LOT more valuable.

So after a time of working and deciding that I did want to pursue professional registration, I did take and pass the Architectural Registration Examination in Ohio back in 1993 and finished the process in 1994. This test is given nationally (I believe California may be the lone exception, at least it was at one time), there is no “state” test. An architect in Hawaii has passed the same test that I did in Ohio.

But what kills me is that, even though I did pass the test, it’s a big hoop to jump through to be registered in another state. For this I blame an organization (or cartel if you will) called NCARB, the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards. What they have been able to get the various state legislatures to do is make an NCARB certificate mandatory to apply for reciprocal registration. One NCARB regulation is having the five-year B. Arch. degree.

Now I’m 41 years old and I’ve had a job in the architectural field for almost 20 years. Currently I’m a project manager for several active projects in various states of design and construction. As far as I’m concerned, all that year of “education” would do is line the pockets of some graduate school. Of course, NCARB will allow you to apply to get the equilvalent of the education standard as a BEA, or “broadly experienced architect.” The BEA process involves establishing an NCARB record (for a fee); paying another fee to NCARB to evaluate the degree you have; and finally, at my expense, submitting to a personal interview. All this is to get a certificate so I can simply apply for reciprocal registration in another state. Never mind that I passed the same exam the other architects in the state did.

I used to work for a man who got his architectural registration fairly late in life, in his 40’s. While he did take some college, the reason he was able to take the registration exam and pass it was through the many years of experience he had gained by working in the field. But in the 1990’s NCARB practically shut down that avenue of sitting for the exam and implemented what they call the Intern Development Program. Now an intern architect has to go through NCARB to sit for the exam, and those fees just keep adding up.

In my view, while it’s obvious that the practice of architecture does need a set of guidelines and qualifications, the regulations put in place by NCARB limit the opportunity for qualified people to enter the field. A prospective architect may well say to heck with all these fees and choose another profession.

Friedman shared many of my same views, noting that, “The overthrow of the medieval guild system was an indispensible step to the rise of freedom in the Western world…men could pursue whatever trade or occupation they wished without the by-your-leave of any governmental or quasi-governmental authority.” At one time, architects were granted the freedom to practice in their state and generally what was good for one state was just fine for another. It’s only through the interference of NCARB in this free market that competition has been curtailed.

I’m looking forward to the next two issues of Liberty & Law as they’ll profile their other two “thinkers of freedom”, Friedrich Hayek and Ayn Rand. They should be good reading.

Shopping day tomorrow

Normally my Sunday is used to do those mundane household chores like laundry and shopping, plus get in a little “road work” (I walk 1-2 miles several days a week.) But today is different. Today I’ve foregone my normal shopping and chosen to do it tomorrow after my workday ends. The reason?

Tomorrow is May 1st – in and of itself, not a real significant date. But tomorrow is supposedly the day that millions of Latinos and “immigrant rights” supporters will take to the streets in Salisbury and elsewhere, plus boycott various merchants. So that’s why I’m going shopping.

You see, I believe in the American Dream, but I believe in going about it the RIGHT way as millions of our forefathers did. That means coming into the country legally unless persecuted, getting a job, learning English, and assimilating into the American culture. Unfortunately, most of our immigration problems stem from a large group of people who only manage to get one of the previous four items correct (getting a job) – the rest they choose to ignore. A .250 average will likely get a ballplayer sent down to the minors, and in this case it should get these illegals a one-way ticket back to where they came and sent to the back of the citizenship line.

It’s understandable that all of us want a better way of life. However, I don’t think that doing things the wrong way should be rewarded. Tomorrow millions will take to the streets and say that despite the fact they came to this country illegally, they deserve all the perks of those who play by the rules. And I’m sure that many of these people are law-abiding (except for the illegal entry) and productive. But if we who were born and raised in America have to follow all the laws, so should they.

And I encourage those who agree with me that, while most illegal immigrants are here to get a better life for themselves, they need to go about doing things the correct way – if you agree with me, you’ll be packing the stores tomorrow to send a message to the forces who would only follow the laws that suit them and to hell with the rest. Join me in sending that message.

What happens next in District 38B

Tonight there’s word about the untimely passing of Delegate K. Bennett Bozman of District 38B. The Virginia native was a graduate of Washington HS in Princess Anne and the University of Maryland. He’s survived by his wife, two children, and three grandchildren – my sympathies go to them with their loss.

Despite the fact I never met the man nor did I agree with most of his votes, I’d really rather have seen him be defeated by the voters this November and get to enjoy his post-Assembly years than leave this world as he has.

But life must go on for the rest of us, and I had an interest in finding out the procedures for replacing him. From the Maryland Code:

Section 13. Vacancy in office of Senator or Delegate.

(a) (1) In case of death, disqualification, resignation, refusal to act, expulsion, or removal from the county or city for which he shall have been elected, of any person who shall have been chosen as a Delegate or Senator, or in case of a tie between two or more such qualified persons, the Governor shall appoint a person to fill such vacancy from a person whose name shall be submitted to him in writing, within thirty days after the occurrence of the vacancy, by the Central Committee of the political party, if any, with which the Delegate or Senator, so vacating, had been affiliated, at the time of the last election or appointment of the vacating Senator or Delegate, in the County or District from which he or she was appointed or elected, provided that the appointee shall be of the same political party, if any, as was that of the Delegate or Senator, whose office is to be filled, at the time of the last election or appointment of the vacating Delegate or Senator, and it shall be the duty of the Governor to make said appointment within fifteen days after the submission thereof to him.

(2) If a name is not submitted by the Central Committee within thirty days after the occurrence of the vacancy, the Governor within another period of fifteen days shall appoint a person, who shall be affiliated with the same political party, if any as was that of the Delegate or Senator, whose office is to be filled, at the time of the last election or appointment of the vacating Delegate or Senator, and who is otherwise properly qualified to hold the office of Delegate or Senator in the District or County.

(3) In the event there is no Central Committee in the County or District from which said vacancy is to be filled, the Governor shall within fifteen days after the occurrence of such vacancy appoint a person, from the same political party, if any, as that of the vacating Delegate or Senator, at the time of the last election or appointment of the vacating Senator or Delegate, who is otherwise properly qualified to hold the office of Delegate or Senator in such District or County.

(4) In every case when any person is so appointed by the Governor, his appointment shall be deemed to be for the unexpired term of the person whose office has become vacant.

(b) In addition, and in submitting a name to the Governor to fill a vacancy in a Legislative or Delegate district, as the case may be, in any of the twenty-three counties of Maryland, the Central Committee or committees shall follow these provisions:

(1) If the vacancy occurs in a district having the same boundaries as a county, the Central Committee of the county shall submit the name of a resident of the district.

(2) If the vacancy occurs in a district which has boundaries comprising a portion of one county, the Central Committee of that county shall submit the name of a resident of the district.

(3) If the vacancy occurs in a district which has boundaries comprising a portion or all of two or more counties, the Central Committee of each county involved shall have one vote for submitting the name of a resident of the district; and if there is a tie vote between or among the Central Committees, the list of names there proposed shall be submitted to the Governor, and he shall make the appointment from the list.

In a nutshell, the Democrat Central Committees of Wicomico and Worcester counties will have to get their heads together within the next month and pick a successor to Delegate Bozman who will have to be approved by the Governor. He or she will have the advantage of incumbency only if there’s a special session since the General Assembly isn’t slated to meet otherwise until after the 2006 election.

After the proper period of mourning, it’s going to be interesting to see the jockeying for position that occurs among lower shore Democrats trying to get on the list submitted to the state. They’ll have to suck up to both parties in this instance, as the Republican Gov. Ehrlich gets the final say.

It also may bring up the question of age in some of the the local races. While they may be in fine health, Democrat Rudy Cane turns 72 next month and his party cohort Norm Conway is now 64 years old. Republicans Page Elmore (67) and Addie Eckhardt (62) are also among the grayer set of Delegates.

Regardless of affiliation, it’s a sad day in Delmarva as a distingished citizen and public servant has passed away in an untimely manner.

ACU ratings (part 1)…a milestone post!

As many organizations do from all across the political spectrum, the American Conservative Union recently came out with their ratings for members of Congress, 2005 being the 35th edition of the ratings system. What they do is grade out each member of Congress regarding their position on issues near and dear to the ACU’s heart. Ratings shown this year indicate the 2005 rating and the House or Senate member’s lifetime rating.

There’s two groups that rank among the Republican party extremes, as it were. One is a band of conservatives called the Republican Study Committee, best known for proposing necessary budget cuts.The other is a group of so-called moderates, the Republican Main Street Partnership. Numbered among them is our own Congressman Wayne Gilchrest and Congressman Mike Castle of Delaware, as well as Maryland Governor Bob Ehrlich.

Taking a look at the ACU numbers, there’s a mile-wide disparity between the two groups. If you look at the lifetime ratings of all the House members, you’ll find the following is true:

Of the Republicans who have an ACU lifetime rating of 96 or higher, 45 of the 48 belong to the Republican Study Committee, including all of those with a 100 lifetime rating. Rep. Mike Pence (IN-6), who heads the Study Committee, is also considered the “leader” of the pack with a 100 rating, he’s been perfect for five years.

Of the lowest 50 Republicans in ACU lifetime ratings, 34 of them belong to the Main Street Partnership. That may be explained by the fact that 33 of the 49 House members of the MSP come from “blue” states in 2004, plus there are several others from the electorally close state of Ohio. Some of these members even fall behind the highest-ranking Democrats in the ACU ratings.

Here’s an illustration of what I think is wrong with the Main Street Partnership.

Top 10 Democrats, ACU lifetime ratings

1. Taylor (MS-4) 68
2. Boren (OK-2) 64
3. Davis (TN-4) 62
4. Melancon (LA-3) 61
5. McIntyre (NC-7) 53
6. Cuellar (TX-28) 52
7. Cramer (AL-5) 49
8. Herseth (SD) 49
9. Skelton (MO-4) 49
10. Peterson (MN-7) 46

And dead last in the listings…Rep. Timothy Bishop (D-NY1) has a 1 lifetime rating.

As you can see, there are still a few of the old-line conservative Democrats left, mostly from the South, and all but one from a “red” state. They’ll certainly vote the party line on their leadership and such, but often side with the conservatives on issues. And it’s a good thing, because the conservative leadership needs these votes to supplant the likely “no” votes from:

Bottom 10 Republicans, ACU lifetime ratings

10. (tie) Smith (NJ-4) 62
10. (tie) Gilchrest (MD-1) 62
9. Kirk (IL-10) 61
8. Fitzpatrick (PA-8) 60
7. Schwarz (MI-7) 58
6. Castle (DE) 57
5. Simmons (CT-2) 54
3. (tie) Johnson (CT-5) 47
3. (tie) Shays (CT-4) 47
2. Leach (IA-2) 43
1. Boehlert (NY-24) 40

And you wonder why I’ve ragged on Congressman Gilchrest so much? Now you might have an idea. By the way, for my friends down on the Eastern Shore of Virginia, your Congresswoman Theresa Drake (VA-2) has a solid lifetime score of 92. You should be proud of her.

Oh, just for funsies, I looked up our six local Delmarva Senators as well. In order of ACU ranking:

Sen. George Allen (R-VA) 92
Sen. John Warner (R-VA) 81
Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE) 16
Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) 14
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) 7
Sen. Paul Sarbanes (D-MD) 5

Top ACU Senator is Jeff Sessions of Alabama with a 98 rating, the bottom of the (whiskey?) barrel is Ted Kennedy with his measly rating of 3.

Now you may just say that I’m in lockstep with the conservative movement and you are probably right. But for part two of this post (probably over the weekend) I’m going to take the time and state my positions on the very votes the ACU used for their ratings…in other words, my own ACU rating which you can compare and contrast to your favorite Congressman. In glancing at the issues, I don’t think I’m going to end up as a perfect 100 – you might be surprised.

By the way, this is a milestone post for monoblogue. This one puts me at the century mark, post number 100. Since today is (barely) April 26th, it took me 147 days to get to 100 posts. That’s a lot of writing, because unlike other sites I write quite a bit on a subject. I’d have to guess that at least one week in real time has been devoted to writing these entries.

Since I just celebrated my one-year blogging anniversary at the start of the month, I’ll not pat myself on the back too much. But I do have several good posts that are in the pipeline and some may shake up the local blogging scene. Or maybe not, but they should be interesting to local readers.

WCRC meeting – April 2006

Once again, the local Chamber of Commerce building was the setting for our Wicomico County Republican Club’s monthly meeting. This time around we had almost standing room only though as about 45 people were in attendance to hear two of our local candidates for the sheriff’s office being vacated by the current man in charge, R. Hunter Nelms. He decided last year not to seek another term.

But first things were first, the usual club business was discussed. The treasury continues to grow, as does membership. The club now has 185 paid members. Our tri-county (Wicomico, Worcester, Somerset) Lincoln Day dinner is June 9th at the Salisbury University Commons, the theme of the dinner will be a discussion of the anti-business climate that the party in charge in Maryland (hint: it’s not the GOP) has brought about. And ads are available in the dinner program – quarter page is $35, half page is $60, and full page $100. A good idea brought up was having a page of “patrons” as well, for a smaller donation.

A couple other announcements were made , one regarding a joint fundraiser for District 37 GOP incumbents Rich Colburn, Addie Eckardt, and Jeannie Haddaway. (I state it that way since I host a link to another GOP District 37 hopeful, Redgie Lancaster.) The other had to do with a donation the club made to the local YMCA.

We also had brief remarks from Michael James, who’s running for the Delegate nod in District 38B. I’ll have much more from him next month as he will be our speaker for the May meeting. Later on (after our featured speakers profiled below), yet another District 38B candidate who has announced her candidacy but not yet filed, local resident Bonnie Luna, spoke briefly to the gathering and remarked that “one person can make a difference”, also vowing to not just represent her district but the whole lower Eastern Shore.

One final speaker under the “announcement” phase was our newly tapped Wicomico County director for the 2006 Ehrlich campaign, Ellen Andrews. She’s repeating her job from 2002. One thing she spoke of was the petition drive I alluded to a few posts back. I’m not certain I believe that the Curran opinion is valid when I read the MBOE petition form that clearly states, “Acts or parts of Acts passed at the 2005 and 2006 Sessions of the General Assembly, if they are successfully petitioned to referendum, will appear on the next general election ballot (November 7, 2006).” The early voting passed in the 2005 session, Mr. Attorney General (and father-in-law of a Democrat candidate for governor) Curran – go ahead, tell me I’m lying.

She also postulated that Governor Ehrlich isn’t going to select a lieutenant governor running mate until close to his filing, and since he has a couple months yet to do that, it’s possible (in my opinion) that the choice will be controversial. Of course anything to the right of pale shade of moderate would upset the Maryland Democratic Party, so I say go for it and pick a rock-ribbed conservative.

At last we got to our featured speakers. As is custom (and since it really did occur that way) it’s ladies first.

Maj. Doris Schonbrunner is the newest candidate for sheriff on the GOP side. She’s joined a crowded field, but her claim to fame in the race is that she’s the current #2 person at the sheriff’s office and serves in the leadership capacity when Sheriff Nelms is away. In 19 years at the sheriff’s department, she’s served in practically all the possible posts, starting as a dispatcher. She’s currently the director of administration and staff services at the department, thus she’s responsible for their $7 million budget.

Schonbrunner has also spent time on her education, with associate and bachelor degrees to her credit, as well as working on a master’s degree in management and public administration. She’s also an alumnus of the FBI National Academy.

Some of her goals for the department if she’s elected include reopening some of the rural substations, establishing a citizen advisory board on department operations (and otherwise being more encouraging to citizen input), enhancing the school officer project, starting an anti-gang program, and being more aggressive with driving enforcement. She would also like to maintain the lack of turnover in the department, since having experienced officers makes it easier to combat crime effectively.

Then it was Wayne Lowe’s turn to speak. His experience is different, having spent 23 years with the Maryland State Police after a stint working with DuPont. He retired from the force in 1992 and now works for the state attorney’s office as an investigator.

His main interest lies in crime prevention, especially in the aspects of community policing and through programs such as Block Watch. It was through his efforts that Crime Solvers was started here in the late 1970’s. As far as crime in the here and now, Lowe wanted to place an emphasis on stopping drug-related crime and pay more attention to some of the outlying communities in Wicomico County rather than just the immediate Salisbury area.

Another focus by Lowe would be in the area of crimes against children. He lamented the end of a regular program he helped teach called “Good Touch, Bad Touch” which explained the differences between things like an innocent hug by a parent vs. inappropriate touching by a classmate or stranger. Wayne also stated that his sheriff’s office would be more inclined to follow up with crime victims after their cases are closed and wanted to stress more outreach by the department to the public – one example was making a few speakers from the department available for organizational functions like our meetings.

Since she is a current member of the sheriff’s department, Maj. Schonbrunner was the beneficiary of most questions from the assemblage. One point that she brought up in response to the queries was the success of a program that allows deputies to maintain the use of their vehicles while off-duty. This was an easy way to show more of a presence in the community, since a criminal likely wouldn’t know if the sheriff’s vehicle out and about was on duty or not. Another item she brought up is that the sheriff’s department is being used more heavily as a backup security of sorts – one example was additional security at the new cineplex in the Centre of Salisbury mall. At the request of the theatre chain, more police are present. The Wicomico County sheriff’s office was brought in after the Salisbury Police refused to take on the extra duty.

The only question that Mr. Lowe had addressed to him specifically was being asked about any budgetary experience, since Schonbrunner noted her budget responsibilities. He admitted to not being fully in charge of putting together budgets during his stint as an officer, but in his work with the state attorney’s office he did assist with their putting together annual budgets. One departmental weakness Schonbrunner admitted to was a lack of success in getting out servicing papers in an orderly fashion. She also cited an increase in the numbers necessary for court security as taking away resources to combat street crime.

I did find out an interesting statistic tonight, though. The city of Salisbury has crime statistics that are 2 to 3 times the national average for similar-sized cities – but Wicomico County crime statistics are half those of similar sized counties. So the challenge for whoever becomes the next sheriff will be to maintain the excellent county crime statistics while working with the Salisbury Police Department to cut down the offenses there and hopefully not just push them out into the county.

As always, Dr. Bartkovich made his push for more candidates for the other spaces on the slate. He also hinted at there possibly being statewide candidates at the Lincoln Day dinner. But his final little announcement was sort of intriguing. The spring state GOP convention will be held nearby in Cambridge on May 13th. Since anyone can show up, I think it may be an interesting little trip to take and see the sausage being ground for myself.

So tonight’s meeting was an interesting one, as meetings that discuss pocketbook issues tend to be. While one may not necessarily think of crime as a pocketbook issue, take into account the $7 million spent on the Wicomico County Sheriff’s Department, then add in the lost property and even lives that hardworking taxpayers have to either make up for with their tax dollars, or worse, out of their own pockets. That’s why tonight’s meeting was well-attended and why this year’s local elections are crucial to the success of Wicomico County residents. We had two fine candidates for Sheriff attend tonight, hopefully we’ll hear from others prior to the September primary.

One less little Indian

In a statement posted on her website, Lise Van Susteren became the first to drop out of the race to succeed retiring U.S. Senator Paul Sarbanes. It’s the first of many such announcements as the 2006 campaign season slowly kicks into gear. While she hadn’t officially filed, Van Susteren had announced last fall she would be seeking the Senate seat.

The Senate hopeful had raised a half million dollars for her campaign, but did not deem it enough to reach a sufficient number of voters to win the Democrat nod. A recent poll by Gonzales Research found her third in the Democrat field, but with just a low single digit number.

If you’re handicapping the Democrat field to decide who will face presumptive GOP nominee Michael Steele, the Gonzales poll of 423 likely Democrat primary voters came in as follows:

Ben Cardin 39%
Kweisi Mfume 31%
Lise Van Susteren 4%
Allan Lichtman 2%
Josh Rales 1%
Dennis Rasmussen 1%

Basically the undecideds came in well ahead of the bottom 4 in the field.

This poll also gave both Cardin and Mfume a lead over Steele, Cardin being up 49%-35% and Mfume up 44%-39%. Perhaps the leak of a purported Democrat memo cited by the Maryland GOP served as a reminder to black voters about keeping on the plantation.

Sign the petition, I will

Art. 16. That sanguinary Laws ought to be avoided as far as it is consistent with the safety of the State; and no Law to inflict cruel and unusual pains and penalties ought to be made in any case, or at any time, hereafter. – Maryland Constitution and Declaration of Rights

And there’s a law out there that is quite sanguinary. It’s called the early voting law, or as I see it, the “invitation to voter fraud” law. The Maryland GOP is planning a petition drive to allow a true democracy to judge the bill by its merits, that being the people of the state of Maryland.

On the surface the bill seems to be in the public interest, as the proponents state that low turnout on Election Day is caused by people who may work two jobs or odd shifts (those mythical “working families” again) not having an opportunity to get out and vote – thus, we need several extra days of voting to accomplish as large a turnout as possible. However, the party out in front of this measure just so happens to be the one that is supposedly helped by a large turnout. I have no problem with turnout – personally I think everyone eligible should get out and use the right our forefathers died for – but the abuse of that right is the crux of my problem, and having multiple-day elections seems to me a situation ripe for exploitation.

I have worked the polls as a campaigner for many years on Election Day. I know that the voting turnout is pretty slow the first hour (Ohio voting runs from 6:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.), picks up between 7:30 and 9 a.m., has a small peak at lunchtime, and is heaviest from 5 to 7 p.m. The poll workers almost always take their lunch breaks between 1 and 3, when few voters show up. The polling place I generally worked as a campaigner was also my personal voting place, so a lot of years I was voter #1 or #2 since I voted first thing then passed out literature or held up the sign for the rest of the day. It was less than a mile from my house, so I could take 5-10 minutes for a potty break if need be. The point is, there’s 13 available hours for a person to get to their polling place, which most times is within a short distance of their home. If a person can’t make a little bit of time in that period (or get an absentee ballot, which is almost ludicrously easy to get now) to exercise their right, is having those extra days really going to matter? People who simply don’t want to vote could have all year and they won’t do it. But someone with larceny in their heart and a valid voter registration card could now make the grand tour of Maryland polling places, casting provisional ballots all along the way in the hopes that some of them sneak through into the total count.

Throughout American history there have been tales of electoral shenanigans by the party in power, from the corrupt Tammany Hall Democrats in late-1800’s New York City to the Chicago Daley machine who voted from beyond the grave. A party accustomed to power used whatever methods necessary to maintain its stranglehold on government. In this year’s General Assembly session the state Democrats unsuccessfully tried to add felons to the 2006 voting rolls to pump up their likely turnout; by selecting early polling places that were mainly in Democrat strongholds, they again attempt to jigger the results their way. (Even though, if you believe the polls, they don’t have a lot to worry about.)

To get the petition on the November ballot, the proponents of overturning early voting need to get just over 50,000 signatures by June 30, with 1/3 of those collected by May 31st. This is according to the Maryland Board of Elections. However, Democrats are quick to point out that an opinion last year by Maryland Attorney General Joseph Curran (also a Democrat, and father-in-law of current candidate for governor Martin O’Malley) established that the petition drive should have been completed last year when the law was actually passed, not in 2006 when Governor Ehrlich’s veto was overriden.

For its part, the Board of Elections petition regulations clearly state that “Acts or parts of Acts passed at the 2005 and 2006 (boldface emphasis mine) Sessions of the General Assembly, if they are successfully petitioned to referendum, will appear on the next general election ballot (November 7, 2006).” So, in my view, Attorney General Curran is incorrect, and the petition should stand if successful.

Admittedly, it would be an uphill battle to pass this referendum, even if the Maryland GOP can get the 50,000 signatures. Likely that won’t be a problem; the trick will be convincing the voters of Maryland, many of whom get their news from the anti-Ehrlich and anti-GOP major media outlets in the state, that a measure that sounds great on the surface is really a thinly disguised partisan play by a party smarting from being out of the governors’ chair for the last four years and scared of a black conservative Republican hopeful for U.S. Senator.

It is good to know that there is a method for Marylanders who are fed up with the stupidity of laws passed by their General Assembly to petition for redress of grievances. Now if they would get motivated to educate the balance of the state on the reasons why these dreadful measures get passed, we can do something about again making our nickname of “The Free State” truly meaningful.

Sine Die…for now anyway

I think the dust has sufficiently settled in Annapolis now to comment about the farce otherwise known as the 2006 session of Maryland’s General Assembly – noted by the Wall Street Journal as America’s worst. (You can’t blame me, I’ve never voted for any of them – I was an Ohioan the last time these folks were elected.)

The interim few days also gave me time to peruse some of the media coverage of the last session day, along with overviews of the session as a whole. I culled items from the Baltimore Sun, the Gazette, the Washington Times, and press releases from both parties in order to read up on the spin and the real results.

The session started and ended with a flurry of veto overrides. At the start the Democrats in the General Assembly made the Fair Share Health Care Act (generally known as the “Wal-Mart” bill) part of the state’s law books and further frustrated Maryland small businesses by increasing the minimum wage $1 to $6.15 per hour. To finish the session, the Democrats blocked efforts by the state to take over the failing Baltimore City Schools, mandated the governor must reappoint and have reconfirmed his Cabinet secretaries if he wins a second term (a clear usurpation of executive power); and overturned Ehrlich’s veto of a bill selecting early polling places that the Democrats in the General Assembly picked out, likely to their partisan advantage.

What was most noteworthy and certainly drew the most attention on the last session day was an attempt to modify proposed electric rate hikes that would begin this summer. The proposed increases came about as a sort of payment due from deregulation legislation that was passed back in 1999, under previous Governor Parris Glendenning. To be more specific, long-term contracts that locked in prices paid by consumer electrical suppliers (particularly Baltimore Gas & Electric) were set to expire and current market rates are set much higher. Instead of possibly 6-10% increases every year from 2000-2006, this balloon mortgage of sorts was slated to force a 72% rate hike on BG&E customers – a group that is a huge voting bloc, possibly the largest in Maryland short of party affiliation.

Legislation to modify these increases managed to make it through the House of Delegates, but the Senate could not ratify the bill in time. Cinderella’s horse-driven coach turned into the pumpkin of a possible special session to resolve the matter.

Moreover, the rate increases aren’t limited to just the Baltimore area, as the juice that runs my computer (and heats/cools my house, does my cooking, etc.) comes from Delmarva Power, who’s also looking to increase rates by a significant percentage. The effects of electrical deregulation have obviously become a contentious issue, and a sidebar to it is a proposed $11 billion merger between Constellation Energy (BG&E’s parent company) and Florida Power and Light. That merger was also held hostage to the whims of the General Assembly, which isn’t too friendly to business interests.

Now, generally I’m a free-market sort of person, and what I can’t understand is how deregulation didn’t work in this instance. I suppose the only explanation I can think of is that because the electrical power industry is so capital-intensive and also quite dependent on other natural resources (coal, natural gas, etc.) that new players and competitors have a difficult time getting started. Conversion is the key in this case – something has to be converted to electricity, at least until someone figures out a way to transform natural lightning into a form useful enough to supply your typical 120 volt outlet.

As it stands now, a guy like me is looking at about $300 a year more for electricity. Strangely enough, my electric bills are higher in the winter than the summer, but most people will see big bills come July and August, just in time for the campaign season to begin. For their part, even though the Democrats in the General Assembly passed the deregulation legislation in the first place and it was signed by a Democrat governor, they’re calling it “Ehrlich’s rate hike.”

And that’s a good part of the spin that they try to attach to their achievements during the 2006 Assembly session. Some items cited in their press release include:

$462 million for schools. The problem with saying that is that Governor Ehrlich sets the initial budget, so that was his amount of money – the D’s simply chose not to cut it.

The “Healthy Air” Act. In other words, more regulation on Maryland’s utilities, which will likely benefit those downwind of us moreso than our state. So I guess Delaware thanks us, while our electric rates go up to cover those mandates.

Fighting the “Ehrlich” utility rate hike. Since no legislation passed, and the Democrats run the General Assembly, I’m not certain that I’d call this a “victory.”

Fighting voter supression. In fact, I’d say the bills passed by the Democrats fight it so well that many people are going to vote 2, 3, even 4 times! And what a surprise, they’ll vote for Democrats.

Stem cell research. The devil is in the details. Personally, the only stem cell research I favor is that performed on non-embryonic stem cells. Any why is it up to the government to fund this research? Wouldn’t one think that a private comany would love to come up with a cure for an ailment that affects a large number of people and be able to profit from that? Maybe they’re seeing how the pharmaceutical industry gets treated by our lawmakers and it forces government to step into the breech.

College tuition. I have an issue with the state funding college tuition anyway. Sometimes I think that the purpose of college has become almost the same as that of a vocational school. You go to school to say, become an architect, and unless you apply yourself to the purpose like I did you don’t learn what is truly higher education, that of critical thinking.

A pay hike for “working families”. First of all, how many “working families” in Maryland really work at minimum-wage jobs? Most of these are held by teens or part-timers, where these low wage jobs exist. The market in Maryland is such that the average Joe working someplace makes far more than minimum anyway. But this measure increases costs for everyone regardless of income.

Minority Business Enterprise. At the risk of pissing off readers who trace their ancestries to sub-Saharan Africa or south of our national border, and even those who are physically capable of carrying and bearing children, I have to say that this should be phased out. I don’t believe in discrimination for or against a certain group, and a leg up to “minority” business enterprises, while necessary a generation ago, is no longer required if you ask me. Even if you don’t ask me, it’s my blog and I say so. MBE should have been sunsetted this year as proposed.

Juvenile justice failures. Honestly, with no kids in Maryland’s system, I’m no expert on whether juvenile justice needed to be reformed. This mostly has to do with a veto override in the first days of the session.

Teacher pension improvements. Yes, now Maryland is in the “middle of the pack” instead of the bottom. What they don’t say is that the teachers themselves will be fronting most of the costs. Need to keep that quiet, like the teachers’ unions would ever endorse a Republican anyway.

Tax relief. As the press release says, “Dems proposed and passed tax relief measures for those in need.” In this case, they determined homeowners, seniors, the disabled, military retirees, and heirs of small business owners were in need. I don’t have a problem with the list, but I wonder how many of these bills were Democrat versions of those introduced by Republicans, which did happen in this year’s General Assembly simply to make sure the GOP could get no credit. Really I’d like to see everyone get a tax cut though, not just a selected few.

For the GOP side, they chose a lighter approach in their view of the session. They selected the “Top Ten Silliest Bills” of the 2006 session. Rather than rehash the list (hey, just go read it – it’s funny in a sad sort of way) I wondered just how our local Assembly men and women voted on these bills! That’s way more important to me.

10. House Bill 1292 did not make it out of committee, no local elected officials were among the sponsors of either this measure or the companion Senate Bill 1017.

9. Senate Bill 983, believe it or not, passed 45-0. Both local Senators were among the 45.

8. Senate Bill 136 was defeated in committee. Sen. Richard Colburn (District 37) joined two other Republicans and 13 Democrats to sponsor the bill.

7. House Bill 1037 did not pass through its committee. No local Delegates were sponsors of the bill.

6. Senate Joint Resolution 15 passed 45-0 as well. Again, both of our Senators voted for the resolution. I have to comment on this one. Let me see, the trek of Lewis and Clark started in Missouri, correct? I went to Missouri for my vacation last year and I took two days to drive the distance. So, back in the days of horseback, that was likely a weeks’ trip or more. What the hell does Maryland have to do with this?!?

5. House Bill 1468 died a quiet death, not even getting a committee vote. None of our local Delegates were involved.

4. Senate Bill 735 was approved by its committee but did not face the full Senate. I’m not able to find out if either local Senator voted for the bill in committee or not.

3. House Bill 681 sailed through on votes of 138-1 and 133-0 (a version amended by the Senate.) All of our District 37 and 38 Delegates voted for this. The companion Senate Bill 824 was voted against by Sens. Colburn and Stoltzfus, but they were outvoted 37-8. I guess the saving grace is that an amendment sunsets the bill in 2010.

2. House Joint Resolution 2 was shot down in committee. No local Delegate was a co-sponsor.

1. Senate Bill 235 was selected as the silliest bill by the Maryland GOP. The bill allows pets to have their own trust funds. Now, I like Sen. Stoltzfus, but his voting for this makes me shake my head. Senator Colburn voted no. The measure passed the Senate 33-13 but no House action was taken.

All I have to say is thank goodness it’s over. At least the state can’t pass any more bills that restrict my freedom and grant goodies to whomever is deemed the chosen few until January of 2007, where hopefully the makeup of the General Assembly is such that any bill vetoed by Governor Ehrlich (assuming his reelection of course) would have the veto stand. I’m not that crazily optimistic that the GOP will suddenly become Maryland’s majority party, but we need to start down that road at some point.

Otherwise we might be wishing to become part of a “greater Delaware” and see what adding the “red” Eastern Shore does to that blue state.

Grading the campaign blogs

This year’s campaigns are beginning to shape up and get their websites together. One thing that I like about a number of the websites I link to is the blog portion of the website. A growing number of these sites feature a blog, many times by the candidate him/herself, and some that are also open to a number of folks who contribute to the campaign (such as volunteers.)

As such, I’ve linked specifically to the candidate’s blog in cases where I’ve found that they have a related one linked from their overall site. Today I’m going to take a pass through the ones I’m aware of. All of these are linked from monoblogue, so I’m not going to bother with hyperlinks on this post.

Before I begin, I do owe hat tips to the “Big Three” local bloggers who have pointed me at various times to local candidate sites as I try to secure a database of links to them, letting the people decide for themselves – assuming they would like to spend a few minutes perusing the campaign site and getting to know their positions on issues rather than depend on the 30-second TV ad that’s usually more about tearing the opponent down than stating where they stand positionwise. Most folks who take the time to read monoblogue and the other sites likely don’t fall in that latter category.

The grading here will be subjective, based on the number, character, and variety of posts. I’ll not go into the nuts and bolts of positions stated within each post; even if somebody is completely opposite my point of view, they’ll still be graded highly if the blog and its posts are well-written.

Let us begin with Maryland Senate candidate (and current Lieutenant Governor) Michael Steele’s blog. First I need to apologize for having a dead link to his blog, this has been fixed.

I probably could have kept it as a dead link and gotten the same effect though, there’s been no posts within the last month. Other than a spate around Civil Rights Day (aka MLK Day) there’s not been much placed here. It’s almost like Michael Steele is afraid to say a whole lot after his stem cell gaffe. The last post was basically a shill for contributions.

On that basis, I would have to give Michael Steele’s blog a D. If he’s not going to pay much attention to it, the blog is really not worth having on the site. If someone from the Steele campaign reads this, perhaps they can take pointers from other blogs I’m familiar with and will grade as I go.

Another GOP candidate is Daniel Muffoletto. His campaign website links to a blog but there’s nothing in it except what seems like a test post, thus I didn’t link it separately. He gets a big fat F.

Continuing on the GOP side, Daniel “Wig Man” Vovak blogs on almost a daily basis, generally very short entries about how the campaign is going and the curse he has had placed on Michael Steele. Of late he also notes about how many campaign cards he has handed out (gaining on 9,000.) The blog is extensive and goes back all the way to December for the 2006 campaign.

This is an interesting one to grade out. It’s a little bit like blogging in sound bites, which to me is a minus, but he’s a pretty regular blogger as well and reading on the evolution of his shoe leather campaign is intriguing. So I’m going to give it a B-, which could be improved with longer posts. I’d love to see his psychic/campaign manager toss in a few posts as well.

Now I’ll turn to the Democrat side, starting with Kweisi Mfume. His blog’s also been active awhile, nearly a year. It only had a few posts over the first few months, but lately has been updated on a fairly regular basis.

The site has had an interesting change over the course of 11 months. At the start, Mfume actually did take a few turns blogging and the posts were more of a personal character. In the past few months, though, most of the entries are used simply to link to other resources or news stories about the campaign or relevant issues. This coincided with “Dan” becoming the sole blogger. While many blogs that I read on a daily basis use this approach to highlight news stories they find interesting, I’m not so sure it’s the best format for a political blog. I actually liked the early entries better than the last ones.

The blog does have one plus though as they allow comments. I didn’t take a lot of time to read the comments, but the ability to provide feedback is a plus. In this instance, I’ll grade the blog a C+.

Allan Lichtman is another Democrat hopeful. His blog has a lot to recommend it as far as enjoyability. He and several other folks contribute to the blog, and the posts run the gamut from Lichtman’s accounting of his recent trip to New Orleans to birthday wishes for him and his son. They have even gone to archives of his posts in other places which runs entries back to January of 2005.

It has a good mix of commentary, postings on campaign events and appearances, and shows something about his character and the devotion of those people truly behind his campaign. While I’m most likely 180 degrees removed from him on the issues, I would recommend it as a good reading experience. He gets a very solid A.

Thus far, that is the extent of campaign site blogging on the Maryland Senate race. Next, I’ll turn to a Delaware Senate hopeful, Republican Dennis Protack.

Currently his blog nearly fits on one page, I barely had to scroll down to see it in its entirety. With one post in March on the ports issue (and 5 total since its inception in January), it seems to me another case where, if the candidate is not going to put his (or his campaign’s) full effort into the blog, why have it? The entries themselves are short and fairly well-written, but the interesting thing to me is that each entry ends with a question. It appears Protack is using the blog to solicit comments from the public. That’s noble in and of itself, but the lack of comments show that approach is not working. In his case, I give the blog a D+.

Moving down the Eastern Shore to Virginia, one U.S. Senate hopeful has a blog. Democrat challenger Harris Miller has the site, which is somewhat new – just starting up in February. It holds a lot of promise, in that the few entries (by various contributors, including Miller himself) speak to the variety of issues the challenger holds dear and points out differences between he and incumbent Sen. George Allen. Comments are allowed, and the site mixes news and commentary quite well. With some more diligence, Miller could have an excellent blogsite. As it is, I’ll rate it a C.

Shifting my focus to the various state Congressional races, the only blog that exists for the Delmarva district races (MD-1, VA-2, DE-at large) is a brand new blog by Delaware Democrat Dennis Spivack. The first entry was placed this past Wednesday. The two posts (an introduction post and one on health care) are nicely written.

There’s a few points taken off for not allowing comments, and several marks deducted for placing the blog on Blogspot. With the recent problems there (ask “Hadley V. Baxendale” about that!), the campaign would be much better off simply placing it as part of their overall site. I suppose there’s a “stealth” factor in this as normally leafing through Blogspot you wouldn’t find a campaign blog and several blogs I link to for political commentary reside on Blogspot. And, of course, it’s free.

As it stands, I will give this new blog a B+. Spivack’s team has a great opportunity to turn this blog into a solid campaign aid.

Coming back to the Free State, both Democrat challengers feature a blog on their site. I’ll work in alphabetical order and comment on Doug Duncan’s first.

This is another site that has all the plusses as far as these blogs go. The blog is updated regularly, almost daily. There are a number of contributors, including Duncan himself and members of his family. Comments are allowed, although there’s not a whole lot of them. Most of the posts are commentary on the campaign and issues, rather than just a link to something else. But they also get the word out about appearances and campaign events in a timely fashion. Plus the Duncan political quiz (posted April 6th) is pretty funny. I’ve lived here 18 months and I almost aced it…sad in a way.

Many of the bloggers who I comment on in this post could learn a lot about how to put together a blog in reading the Duncan campaign’s edition. All in all, another excellent blog, certainly the best of the whole lot. A+.

Martin O’Malley also has a campaign blog which has well-written entries and allows comments. A nice variety of contributors add their thoughts, including LG candidate Anthony Brown. The largest problem with O’Malleys blog is the dearth of posts. There’s only about 10 posts covering the time since November of last year. That alone hurts the grade. If the O’Malley campaign really wanted to reach out to the blogosphere, they have potential to do so if they placed more emphasis on posting in their blog once in awhile. I’m giving the site a B-.

The final blog I’ll review is one that links to incumbent Delaware treasurer Jack Markell’s campaign site. The odd thing about the “Blog for Delaware” is that it’s not truly a campaign blog. I would categorize it as more of a political blog that Markell happens to contribute to on a semi-regular basis.

So the grading is difficult to do. Yes, it is pretty well-written as far as arguments go, but there’s not the updating that’s necessary to make this a great campaign blog. It lies betwixt and between, and is most useful as background info rather than a source of campaign news and thoughts. On that basis I have to grade it as a C.

As a review, by political race:

Maryland U.S. Senate:

Lichtman – A
Vovak – B minus
Mfume – C plus
Steele – D
Muffoletto – F

Delaware U.S. Senate:

Protack – D plus

Virginia U.S. Senate:

Miller – C

Delaware U.S. House (at large):

Spivack – B plus

Maryland Governor:

Duncan – A plus (best of show)
O’Malley – B minus

Delaware statewide:

Markell – C

I’ll update the links continually as I find out about them and grade the blogs again every so often as the political season continues. With the filing deadline here and in Delaware not until over the summer, there’s still time for races to shift and new websites to be brought online.

A lot of people have some improving to do, others just need to keep up their good work.