The Andy Harris ‘job interview’

…was cleverly disguised as an Americans for Prosperity meeting.

Last night over 100 people jammed into the back rooms of Brew River to have an opportunity to ask questions of the man who wants to be our next Congressman and avenge his close defeat by current Rep. Frank Kratovil.

This should give you an idea of how the rooms were packed once the meeting got rolling.

But first, we had to sit through some brief remarks by both AFP Wicomico co-chair Julie Brewington and chapter historian Eileen Lenehan to bring the newcomers (about 15 to 20) up to speed. In particular, Julie told those gathered that “2010 was game time” for those of us who believe in Constitutional, limited government. Eileen wanted us to ponder whether, “does (a candidate) believe God is in charge or man is in charge?” Those who believed in a higher power were more likely to favor limited government.

This billboard will greet travelers leaving Ocean City beginning next month.

Steve Lind of the Worcester chapter of AFP alerted us to a new billboard which Wicomico members helped to support. This will be located just west of the intersection of U.S. 50 and State Route 589 for those traveling westbound, away from Ocean City. Nothing like putting those already leaving a fun-filled vacation in a more serious state of mind.

The chapter is also holding a street party on July 3rd at the corner of U.S. 50 and State Route 611, with more details to follow.

As a warm-up to State Senator Harris, we heard from the newly filed for re-election Joe Holloway.

District 5 County Council member Joe Holloway gave us the rundown on county issues.

In recalling his 3-plus years on County Council, Holloway likened it to a “secret society” at times, but revealed that the people are his key source of information – his job was to determine how accurate the information was and act accordingly. Holloway vowed to continue to “work for the people of Wicomico County.”

Asked about the fate of the new library, Holloway said it was “dead” and was concerned that, “when something new is needed, something old is neglected.” (Perhaps Joe read the post I cited above.)

“We’re gonna get that done,” said Joe in response to a question about night meetings. And when asked about the relationship between the County Executive and County Council, Joe conceded, “there’s been some tension” but overall having a County Executive was, “good if we have the right one.” What we in Wicomico County, “need (is) a good dose of conservatism.”

State Senator and Congressional candidate Andy Harris speaks before the Americans for Prosperity meeting, May 26, 2010.

Andy Harris was given about 15 minutes to make opening remarks before the volley of questions began. In that time he chose to briefly touch on foreign policy, including the strife between the Koreas, the broken promise of a missile shield for Eastern Europe, and our allies in Brazil and Turkey assisting Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Turning to domestic issues, Andy noted that his parents escaped communism in postwar Europe but have noticed some of the same things happening here. Washington has, “systematically dismantled in American Dream” in the last year and a half, but also noted that “if they (the 50% with no tax liability) work harder in this election, they win.”

Naturally, Andy derided the stimulus as an “incredibly bad move” since unemployment zoomed beyond the promised 8 percent total even with $500 billion or so spent. Andy proposed the remainder go toward an across-the-board tax cut to help the economy. It would allow average Americans to pick the winners and losers of our economy instead of the government doing so.

State Senator and Congressional candidate Andy Harris speaks before the Americans for Prosperity meeting, May 26, 2010.

The format had Andy speed through a number of upcoming issues such as cap-and-trade (“job creation for India and China”), Obamacare (a bill which “will eliminate private health insurance” and already influences capital decisions by hospitals), and pending financial regulations (“‘too big to fail’ should not be in our vocabulary.”) Andy concluded, “‘America the bankrupt’ is absolutely correct.”

A dozen people were fortunate enough to ask questions, and some of the best are detailed below. First out of the chute was a question on border security and illegal immigration.

Andy didn’t think they’d be crazy enough to take up amnesty in this edition of Congress, but noted that our system is “the worst of all systems” by limiting people who would be productive but rewarding those who were a net drain. States should be following Arizona’s lead.

Which agencies would Andy work to abolish? The Department of Education, Andy emphatically stated, and it might not be a bad thing to eliminate it at the state level, either. His point: education guidance should be local since it’s closest to the parent and student. Perhaps the Department of Energy could go, too, or at least be downsized.

On the union pension bailout, Andy would vote no even as part of a larger bill. But the bill may not have enough votes to pass anyway. Harris decried it as another effort to have the government pick winners and losers, and revealed that only 5% of the families in the First District were union families – they just happen to be among the most politically active.

Is the government governing against the will of the people? The framers of the Constitution understood human nature perfectly, so they allowed the people to have their say on a frequent basis. Andy did say that, “once we get to July 4th we can breathe a sigh of relief” because of the nearness of the election. But he also warned us to watch out for the lame-duck session after the election.

State Senator and Congressional candidate Andy Harris speaks before the Americans for Prosperity meeting, May 26, 2010.

When asked about the decline of America, Andy retorted that we’re “still the best country on the planet” and we just “need to return to our blueprint.” Again, the “Constitution was about human nature.”

Perhaps the biggest “trap” question was one Andy answered neatly. When asked “why can’t we get Obama out” Andy simply said, “we made a mistake” but we can “change the country the old-fashioned way – at the ballot box.”

We also found out that Andy would’ve voted to audit the Federal Reserve, would “absolutely support a flat tax” and back the FairTax if the 16th Amendment were repealed first – with a sales tax “everyone has skin in the game” and, the questioner added, it encourages savings.

Besides a number of local bloggers including yours truly, the mainstream media was out to get remarks from Andy as well.

One interesting Constitutional query: is a social safety net legitimate under the Constitution? Andy didn’t answer the question directly but advocated ways to make them “actuarily sound.” Perhaps Social Security could be made a defined contribution system at some later date; otherwise Andy’s 26-year-old son is convinced he’ll get no Social Security. (I’m 45 and convinced I won’t either.) Harris related how he tried to get the state’s General Assembly pension system switched from defined benefit to defined contribution and was called to Mike Miller’s office about it. (The amendment failed on a party-line vote.)

After Harris finished (and actually pretty close to schedule), we were briefed on next month’s meeting. Bill Satterfield of Delmarva Poultry Industry will speak on (what else?) the poultry industry.

We were also alerted to a national event, the Defending the Dream Summit, to be held in Washington, D.C. August 27 and 28.

Another rising phenomenon is the number of candidates coming to the meetings, attempting to entice the conservative vote. Besides the two candidates who spoke, seen were Council hopefuls Gail Bartkovich and Ryan Hohman, County Executive aspirant Joe Ollinger, and District 37A candidate Bob McCarroll.

Wonder if this is why we didn't have the meeting outside?

And perhaps I found out why we have the meetings at Brew River now. The next one is June 23rd.

WCRC meeting – May 2010

As the campaign season begins to hit its stride, we’re finding a larger and larger share of our attendance comes from those having something to do with a campaign, and this was the case tonight at the WCRC meeting.

Of course, we kicked things off in the usual way with the Lord’s Prayer, Pledge of Allegiance, reading of the April minutes, and treasurer’s report. That went by rather quickly so we could hear from our featured speaker.

Originally we had arranged to hear from former U.S. Senate and Lieutenant Governor hopeful Carmen Amedori, but she graciously bowed out of her speaking engagement when she exited the race. Fortunately, the speaker we wanted for April was available and Delegate Jeannie Haddaway-Riccio gave us the rundown of this year’s General Assembly session.

Delegate Jeannie Haddaway-Riccio gave us a report on the 2010 General Assembly session.

It’s somewhat depressing to know that over 2,700 bills were introduced in a short 90-day span of time, but that’s how many they had. Obviously the most important ones had to do with the state’s budget, and given the state’s budgetary rules having the House Appropriations Committee cut $11.7 million out of it was a surprise (as was the $9.3 million cut by their Senate counterparts.) Not so shocking was the $12 million supplemental budget taken from federal stimulus funds which actually increased Governor O’Malley’s original budget.

Haddaway-Riccio told us that voted against that whole mess while stating “a reduction in increase is not a cut.” She also warned that a bloated capital budget “almost guarantees an increase in property taxes” because we’re close to our borrowing limits.

Yet the Republicans were not “the party of no” as they proposed alternatives. Some examples of cuts were eliminating Medicaid fraud and abuse (saving $195 million), reducing executive branch salaries to $1 below Governor O’Malley’s ($2.3 million) and eliminating out-of-state travel expenses ($1.9 million.)

But the news wasn’t completely bad. She had helped pass a job creation tax credit (albeit with several strings attached) and also had helped with enhancing Jessica’s Law, working with business interests to grandfather in projects already in progress from onerous (“way overreaching”) stormwater regulations, and expanded the services nurse providers could provide – something which helps areas with a shortage of doctors such as the Lower Shore.

Needless to say, Jeannie did believe the business climate could be improved – otherwise “we’re chasing our tax base out of the state.

As for the future, Haddaway-Riccio thought it was important not just to put a Republican in the governor’s chair but also to increase their numbers in the General Assembly. Having just 1/3 of the seats (47 in the House, 16 in the Senate) would allow GOP legislation to be brought to the floor and not locked in a committee chair’s desk drawer. It also helps at the committee and subcommittee levels where we can best effect necessary changes.

To Jeannie, the next steps for the state would be to put our fiscal house in order, address the poor business climate, and better balance the economy and environment, a balancing act she believed could be achieved.

While many of the questions were clarifications of items she’d gone over before, a couple stuck out. Jeannie brought up the attempt to impeach AG Doug Gansler by Delegate Dwyer as an example of the need for better accountability and more transparency. She also revealed that a clone of Arizona’s SB1070 would be introduced next term by Delegate Pat McDonough.

Mark Biehl gave the Lower Shore Young Republican report – their food drive netted over $100 cash and 200 food items, which is a start. Next year they would challenge other stores to get involved. Also, the Maryland YR convention will be in Salisbury June 18-19 with other states participating in the gathering too. Featured speakers will include Bob Ehrlich, Audrey Scott, and Andy Harris, along with RNC staffers.

As for the Central Committee, John Bartkovich showed off our hardware (the Aris T. Allen Award we received at the state convention) and asked we keep up the momentum of candidate recruitment. Several future events are in the works (Farm and Home Show, Autumn Wine Fest), we need good sign locations, and our newest associate member is a familiar face – Cynthia Williams agreed to come back into the fold (she was a predecessor of mine on the WCRCC.)

We then launched into a series of campaign updates.

Newly minted candidate for Wicomico County Executive Joe Ollinger.

Joe Ollinger began by giving us a brief rundown of his biography as a retired businessman who came here nearly thirty years ago to begin his own company. This gave him the perspective of “an outsider looking in” to the county’s government as opposed to the incumbent’s view from the inside looking out. It was a contrast of having the background in government operations which Rick Pollitt has compared to the leadership Joe pledged to exhibit.

As of now, Ollinger has no events set but the campaign is working on both that and literature to hand out. He will attend the Americans for Prosperity meeting on Wednesday night, though, and his website is up and running.

Mark McIver was “humbled and excited” about being recommended to run Bob Ehrlich’s local campaign; that is, until he was told he needed to win the county with 70% of the vote and help bring more House and Senate candidates in. Yet this was a doable goal, particularly when he’s teaming up with Worcester and Somerset counties and other candidates to help out.

District 37A candidate Bob McCarroll.

One of those candidates surely will be Andy Harris. Ed Nelson represents the Harris forces locally and announced Andy will be the featured speaker at Wednesday’s AFP meeting. Key items for him were a local fundraiser June 16, a meet the candidate breakfat later that month, and getting sign placements along U.S. 50 – Wicomico has its share but Ed would like more before Memorial Day.

The one thing holding back Bob McCarroll’s campaign is the lack of a treasurer since his original choice had to back out, but once he has that locked up he’s going to hit the ground running. The District 37A hopeful can still get to events and press the flesh so I anticipate he’ll be spreading the word using some good old-fashioned shoe leather for the moment.

As for Michael James, State Senate candidate in District 38, “things are going great” according to Dustin Mills. Voters who were longtime Democrats seem to be swinging Michael’s way, and James has been very visible at several recent events.

For firsttime candidate Ryan Hohman, this may have been his initial campaign event.

Ryan Hohman is another first-time candidate getting things started, although he does have the advantage of a campaign treasurer. Ryan is running for one of the two Wicomico County Council at-large seats, presumably to replace departing Councilman Bill McCain, who chose not to seek re-election. He’s ready to start knocking on doors and getting his campaign in full swing.

Speaking on behalf of District 38B Delegate aspirant Mike McDermott, Sean Jester noted that his campaign needs volunteers (naturally, since Sean is the volunteer coordinator.) He also pointed out a curious fact – Worcester County has not been represented by a Republican in the House of Delegates since 1874. Time for a 136 year streak to end!

Don Coffin gave a report on the Jim Rutledge fundraiser last Saturday. There were a few Democrats there who were willing to switch parties just to vote for Jim, and moneywise it was quite a success. Coffin noted that Saturday was his first fundraiser and now he know “the dos and don’ts” of hosting an event. Don also volunteered a number of area sign locations to candidates meeting his standards.

Gail Bartkovich is running for re-election to Wicomico County's Council District 3.

Jeannie Haddaway-Riccio gained back the floor briefly to mention a fundraiser for Bob Ehrlich which will be held June 13 at Sailwinds Park in Cambridge.

Finally, Gail Bartkovich announced that she’d filed to run for re-election and she was ready to campaign. The County Council president represents District 3, which encompasses the eastern and southeastern sections of Wicomico County.

While he’s not a candidate, Woody Willing mentioned that the club’s Crab Feast is coming sooner than we might think – August 28 is the date. He also noted for the benefit of the candidates there that not all polling places allow signs on their property.

With that, the meeting came to an end although most of the candidates stayed around to pick up supporters and volunteers. The next meeting will be June 28 with social time at 6:30 and meeting at 7:00 – speaker is to be determined but we have invited a statewide candidate.

Wicomico Rutledge fundraiser a success

Once you found the road, the event was tough to miss. Just to make sure this display was left out by the road.

On Saturday I went to a secluded farm hard by the Worcester County line in order to attend a fundraiser for U.S. Senate candidate Jim Rutledge. Looked pretty well packed from here.

A panoramic shot taken during the Jim Rutledge fundraiser outside Salisbury on May 22, 2010. About 70 people attended.

I think the Daily Times did a decent piece on the event but underestimated the crowd a little bit. Perhaps one can count the number of people in the picture.

Rutledge gave about thirty minutes’ worth of remarks.

Candidate for U.S. Senate Jim Rutledge spoke for about thirty minutes before supporters.

Jim pounded on a number of his campaign points, including:

  • Lowering taxes – “at heart, I’m still a Ronald Reagan conservative.” Jim vowed to repeal the tax code in its entirety if elected and replace it with a flat tax with few deductions. To spur investment Jim would also dump the capital gains tax.
  • Limited government – “the (federal government) beast is out of its cage.” On the other hand, “the Constitution is a forgotten document” and “the family is the fundamental unit of government.” One thing he could do to limit government would be to defund Obamacare – “we still have the purse strings in Congress” – since the political reality is that Obama is President until at least 2013.
  • National security – this includes border security. Jim excoriated Barbara Mikulski for applauding Mexican President Felipe Calderon for trashing our laws before Congress but otherwise being “missing in inaction” on the full scope of national security.

After he gave his remarks, Rutledge invited those attending to ask their own questions. Among them were some which touched on other issues he didn’t bring up during his remarks.

U.S. Senate candidate Jim Rutledge answers a question posed by an observer at his fundraiser held outside Salisbury May 22, 2010.

  • On how to attract conservative Democrats: he’s launched campaign operations in Democratic strongholds already. Among issues, illegal immigration is a “huge issue” in the black community and school vouchers are also a winning issue. “Bold talk will bring across independents.”
  • I asked about the impact of the Deepwater Horizon tragedy. Why not convene the best and brightest to attack the problem, asked Jim back. He attacked the federal government, saying their bungling made them co-responsible. Turning to energy in general, Jim criticized the “unreasonable fear” of nuclear energy but still supports additional oil and natural gas exploration, calling it “a matter of national security…life and death.”
  • Regarding immigration, Jim opined the Arizona SB1070 bill is “constitutional” and noted that blanket amnesty would be a reward for breaking the law. One idea he floated seemed acceptable to those attending – “when folks want to come (to America) they need to post bond.” If they overstayed their visas, there could be a process of finding scofflaws for a reward just like those who skip bond in criminal cases.
  • Why not the FairTax (a consumption-based tax)? The flat tax needs to come first because it can be adopted faster, said Rutledge. We only need “a revenue source for necessary services” but if the Sixteenth Amendment isn’t repealed as a consumption tax is adopted we’ll be stuck with both.
  • Government cuts Jim would make: stopping overseas commitments like what we’re pledging to help out Greece, abolishing Congressional pensions, and “we have to get out of the grant business.”
  • Regarding the Middle East and Afghanistan, Jim struck a bit of an isolationist tone. Because the mission isn’t well-defined, “we’re in a world of hurt” in Afghanistan. It is our job to defend our own sovereign state.
  • Jim predicted parts of the Obamacare bill will be struck down in court. It’s not among those items authorized for Congress to do in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.
  • Someone asked how illegal immigrants have court standing. They have due process, stated Jim, but the immigration courts are “broken” and the message from our government is “a green light” to illegal immigration.
  • How do we fight teachers’ unions? Jim believes in “strong” schools but the unions “serve themselves.” He pointed out that he’s been endorsed by the National Right-To-Work organization.

Yet we didn’t just stand around and listen to Rutledge speak. There was good food, too.

Yes, the organizers let us eat cake. But there was seriously good pulled pork as well as other culinary delights, too.

We also had the chance to arrange for ourselves a mini-vacation as well as other silent auction items.

You could buy everything from the potted plant to a week in Florida. Yes, the potted plant was a bit cheaper.

Participants also had the chance to take a hayride, ride around the farm on all-terrain vehicles, pitch horseshoes, or just gab among themselves regarding the events of the day. This wasn’t one of those stuffy fundraisers where the candidate zips in and zips out, or you had to buy access by being a VIP – Jim was accessible to all comers and many took the opportunity. Plus they got to meet a number of other local candidates who attended.

Jim took the time to speak to a lot of folks at this event. I think people came away impressed with his openness to discuss ideas with them.

Now I like Jim, but perhaps the best thing he’s done in this campaign is make my heretofore apolitical significant other believe in a candidate. If he can inspire more like her Jim has a great chance of making it through the primary and knocking off a Senator who’s been there too long to stay in touch with her state.

Two planks to question

On Wednesday I announced that Joe Ollinger had entered the race for Wicomico County Executive, with a followup post on Thursday regarding his platform. It’s a platform which dealt extensively with the subjects of fiscal responsibility and education and included two interesting planks:

  • Empower the County Executive to appoint the county’s school board, which is one of the few remaining with members appointed by the governor. Most Maryland counties have adopted an elected school board.
  • Create one county-wide law enforcement agency, consolidating the efforts of the existing Sheriff’s Department with existing municipal police forces in Salisbury, Fruitland, and Delmar.

As you may or may not know, the Wicomico County Republican Party (the one Ollinger is supposedly a part of) has made its case for electing (as opposed to appointing) the Wicomico County board of education; a case similar to one I made back in March.

Yet Ollinger is trying to shift a system which depends on input from a Governor’s office generally at odds with the people of Wicomico County and artificially rigged to reflect a majority of the party holding that office to one which would perhaps better reflect the will of the people based on who they elected County Executive but still not directly accountable to the electorate – sort of a half-step solution which combines the worst of both worlds. Perhaps it’s a plank which Joe can be made to reconsider if and when he’s elected because, while he may hold conservative educational values, it would certainly make the teachers’ union more of a player than it already is for the County Executive race – they would have a direct stake in the outcome.

As a Republican Party we believe an elected school board is the way to go and, unlike a GOP Congress which was forced to carry water for some of President Bush’s ill-considered ideas, neither our central commitee nor Republicans on County Council (or outside conservative groups like AFP) may sit quietly and allow Ollinger to proceed with his scheme.

Similarly, the fiefdoms which are the various local municipal police departments may not be willing to have themselves absorbed into the Wicomico County Sheriff’s Department. While these departments work together on a regular basis, the logistics of such a change need to be studied carefully and most likely placed on a timetable beyond the term of the County Executive – I think such a process if undertaken would take at least five years to adopt from initial planning to final outcome. There’s also the risk of alienating bargaining units like the Fraternal Order of Police and assuredly the Maryland State Police may have to have some say as well.

In truth, we may find that the assumed efficiencies in combining departments are outweighed by unforseeable costs or a lack of coverage of rural areas as municipalities would be especially cognizant of reduced patrols and complain if the crime rate increases.

I know that there are already shared resources between local law enforcement agencies, and perhaps Joe will elaborate further on the subject as the election draws near. But it’s a plank certain to draw as much attention as his educational ideas, which can be taken at face value for what they are worth. There’s little doubt who the educational lobby in this county will support so Joe needs to take his case above them and to the people.

In print: Turnabout is fair play

While I’m pleased the Daily Times ran my op-ed yesterday (adding to the original title I use above), it’s sort of a pale pastel of what I originally had in mind. But they wanted me to get it down around 500 words so I complied. Here is the original version I wrote on Tuesday for comparison.

I was a Tea Partier before being one was cool.

For years I’ve believed in the principles of fiscal conservatism and limited government. I seethed just as much when President Bush adopted No Child Left Behind and the budget-busting Medicare Part D as I did when President Clinton vowed to “fix” the welfare reform package he’d just signed because it was too harsh for his progressive base to take. It makes me angry that the federal budget goes up and bureaucracy gets worse year after year regardless of who sits in the Oval Office or runs Congress.

Yet progressives always sneeringly ask those in the Tea Party movement, “what government programs would you cut?” Well, I have my list but others have theirs, too – that’s part of the problem with having a decentralized movement. And I also understand that responsible budget cutting is not expressed in terms of strictly dollars and cents because there needs to be a simultaneous effort at the federal and state levels to eliminate mandates which tie the hands of local government. There’s no simple answer, so we speak in those broad generalities that most of us agree with – limiting government to that which follows the intent of the Constitution as envisioned by our nation’s founders.

Given that setup, I’ll turn the question on its head and ask my friends on the left: how should we achieve the full funding that you desire for all of your pet programs? My home county came up $22 million short of departmental requests on a budget of $113 million while the state of Maryland counts on nearly $400 million of federal grants to patch the hole in its FY2011 budget. Needless to say Uncle Sam is just a wee bit short on funding for what Washington wants to spend.

Usually their answer is to tax the wealthy, so allow me to play this game of “what-if.”

Given that our President is the leader of the free world, one would think his CEO position is the most powerful job one can get. For this he makes a salary of $400,000 annually. (We all know that the perks of free housing, unlimited travel allowances, Secret Service protection, and so forth make the compensation package much more lucrative but the paycheck is still $400,000.) I can just hear the leftists say, “well, since the most powerful guy in the world makes that much no one else should make more. People can earn all they want but after $400,000 we’re going to tax them at a 100% rate.” Okay, done.

Unfortunately, that decision would have severe consequences. Those who have the capital to pay such a punitive tax rate also have the wherewithal to relocate to a financially friendlier port-of-call. Just as we’ve seen in Maryland with a much less comparatively severe “millionaire’s tax,” capital will flee at a rate heretofore unseen. As we’ve proven repeatedly with “sin” taxes, the old adage that to get less of something you tax it will come true – with undesirable results.

Somewhere there is a balance between those services we need government to provide and what we’re willing to pay for them, but to the average Tea Party participant the pendulum has swung too far off center. However, a pendulum can also swing too far in the opposite direction and cutting too much away can bring on its own set of problems – if there were no government at all our society would dissolve into a pit of chaos and anarchy.

By attempting to paint the Tea Party with the same broad brush as anarchists and others of a radical ilk, the progressives project their issues onto our side. Those who rail against Tea Partiers need to realize that we, too, see the world as complex. We know solutions don’t come simply, but we also know that continuing in the same direction will only make the situation worse.

Then again, it was your side who believed in a conceptual and unspecific hope and change during our last national election. Who are the rational ones now?

Michael Swartz is a blogger and political writer who lives near Salisbury. He is a regular contributor of features to the Patriot Post internet newsletter and writes on national issues as a syndicated columnist through Liberty Features Syndicate. He can be reached at lfs.mswartz@gmail.com.

Next time I’ll know about how long of a feature to write (slightly shorter than my LFS op-eds) so don’t be surprised if you see these things more often.

Friday night videos – episode 33

Since I didn’t do this last week, I have a lot to choose from among what the internet has offered me – an abundance of stuff. Let’s begin with this one, which features the script GM should’ve really followed in its recent commercial.

Now this is a real commercial. If Maryland elected a Secretary of Agriculture I would hope he’d do a commercial half as good.

Speaking of Maryland, Montgomery County guaranteed itself more hard times by enacting a carbon tax. Watch this county councilman call the opponents ‘astroturf.’ But wouldn’t astroturf then be taxed because of its carbon footprint? Doesn’t matter, we’re all going to get it.

Perhaps the next scenario will soon occur in Montgomery County (and probably serve them right.) In the meantime, it’s yet another witty campaign spot from Vermont.

After last Tuesday’s big Kentucky win, Rand Paul was feeling pretty good about himself. Check out this call out.

I’ll say the same thing about Frank Kratovil – please, please, President Obama, come down here to the Lower Shore and campaign for flip-flop Frank. That oughta be a good time.

On a more serious note, one Maryland businesswoman detailed her struggles for a Bob Ehrlich campaign spot.

Just let her do the talking, Bob.

Hey, do you see a pattern here? Must be an election year, huh? Here’s a guy who doesn’t have to worry about that anymore – he can live on his generous pension and endorse Democrats now. Thanks Wayne.

Okay, enough politics. I wanted to find something to crank up so this should fit the bill. 13:1 does ‘Judgement Day’ at a show in Philly.

I’ll leave you with that, see you next week.

Ollinger enters Wicomico County Executive race

This afternoon I found out that the someone on the Republican side has stepped up to challenge Rick Pollitt for the task of being our County Executive.

There is a little more on my Examiner page, but the reason I came back here to expand on this story was some of the background I uncovered simply by looking through my own archives.

In many cases, Joe Ollinger was the surrogate for Ron Alessi, who ran and lost the 2006 campaign for County Executive. For example, he spoke on Alessi’s behalf during the Pittsville forum and October 2006 Wicomico County Republican Club meeting. (You can tell it’s an old post by who comments.)

It’s my hope that Ollinger learned some lessons from Alessi’s failed campaign. Truth be told, it’s probably fortunate that the 2006 primary election didn’t occur much later because Alessi’s closest opponent, B.J. Corbin, got into the contest late but had serious momentum when September came. But the worst mistake made by Alessi is something that Ollinger doesn’t seem to have an issue with – Alessi trashed the local blogs in a memorable tirade. (That piece is also worth reading for my description of the state of the Maryland GOP expressed in the last three paragraphs. Mind you, I hadn’t been elected yet.)

Over the last four years – for the most part – the local blogosphere has evolved and grown, with just a few of us old-timers being joined by a host of young whippersnappers. Joe Ollinger and all the other GOP candidates should embrace the opportunity to have a friendly media outlet because the Daily Times is rarely on their side, WBOC spends a lot of time covering Delaware events, and WMDT political coverage is spotty at best.

Just some advice from an old hand at this.

Top of the evening (meetings)

Originally I was going to make this a simple comment to Julie’s post but figured I’d rather have the forum to myself – she can feel free to link to my reaction.

I look at it this way, as a logical manner. The County Council meets twice a month and we have five months remaining until the general election – in other words, ten meetings.

Under the rules in place, two of these meetings (July 6 and October 5) would be held at night, with the other eight being morning meetings.

With the compromise measure, five meetings would be night meetings and five would be daytime. Right now, the difference is three meetings. Certainly that would be a better situation for some, but for me it wouldn’t be the ideal hill to die on. Even Prettyman is quoted as saying she has nothing against night meetings despite the fact she voted against the latest effort, which lost in a 3-3 tie because John Cannon was away tending to family matters.

My point is that we have a ready-made issue for the next election, and the dynamics are interesting.

The loudest opponents of going to a totally evening schedule have been Bill McCain and David MacLeod, both Democrats. We already know McCain isn’t running again, so presumably we can pick up a vote there.

Meanwhile, the Republicans on County Council have generally favored the switch. We all know Stevie Prettyman is running again as is Gail Bartkovich and presumably Joe Holloway. It leaves John Cannon and Sheree Sample-Hughes as swing votes; however, Sheree’s affirmative vote on the last proposal may be in some part because she is the first County Council member to draw an opponent in Dave Goslee, Jr.

Former Councilman Ed Taylor and newcomer Ryan Hohman are in the race for at-large County Council positions (one of which will open up with McCain’s departure) and their stance on the night meetings can be made into an issue as well.

So, I suppose my thought is not to sweat the small stuff but make it into an issue of good government where leadership on the concept can be rewarded this November at the ballot box.

Library proposal put on shelf

This just in from the Wicomico County PIO:

Wicomico County Executive Richard M. Pollitt, Jr., announced today that he has received a letter from Valerie Murphy, Chair of the Wicomico Public Library Board of Trustees, in which the trustees recommended suspending consideration of a site for a new county library headquarters in order to concentrate on the delivery of basic library services.  Ms. Murphy stated, “With great reluctance, the Library Board has voted to withdraw from its $375,000 site acquisition grant award from the state and allow the funds to revert while reserving the right to reapply in the future. The Library’s 39% cut in County Operating Funds has created a crisis which makes even this preliminary step toward construction of a new Main Library impractical and inadvisable at this time.”

Mr. Pollitt reacted to the statement by saying, “Under the circumstances, I agree with the Library Board’s position and understand our immediate priority is to continue to make our county library viable and accessible to our citizens. I see this not as abandoning a noble cause but, to use a sports metaphor, it is a ‘rain delay’ until the project can resume when economic conditions warrant.  I applaud the hard work and dedication that has brought us to this point and I continue to strongly believe that it is our duty to develop and work toward a vision that improves the quality of life for our residents.  That part of the effort will continue.”

Pollitt stated that he will not pursue acquisition of a site for future library operations at this time but will work with the Library Board to make short-term improvements to the existing facility.

Obviously that will come as a relief to those who try and figure out our capital budget, but it would also be worth following up as to what the library and county consider “short-term improvements.” I have the question in to Library Director Tom Hehman regarding this priority list.

On the other hand, I could’ve done without the complaint about a 39% cut in county funding since everyone needs to tighten their belts. I don’t think anyone is going to get their full wish list in this county budget, and the library likely has pondered several areas where it can cut back or raise a little bit of revenue. You might have to wait a little longer to borrow that best-seller and I wouldn’t hold my breath on a fine amnesty, that’s for sure.

So it looks like local fiscal conservatives have carried the day on this front. While the Wicomico Library may need a new facility sometime in the future, the future isn’t now. Of course, I’m sure the state doesn’t mind getting back $375,000 in the short term either. In a time when priorities are the key, having an older library isn’t going to tip the “quality of life” scale all that much to the negative.

Rutledge slates local fundraiser

Local voters will get the opportunity to help out the U.S. Senate campaign of a conservative seeking to unseat one of Harry Reid’s Maryland toadies.

It was a year ago this coming weekend some of us were introduced to Jim Rutledge as the Lower Shore Young Republicans held a fundraiser, while others met him shortly afterward at a Wicomico County Republican Club meeting last June.

For a small price ($25 per person is the “suggested” donation, kids under 16 free) you can meet and greet the Senate candidate this Saturday. It’s a pig roast and barbecue being held at 32625 Spearin Road, southeast of Salisbury. (Take Snow Hill Road south from Salisbury and turn left on Spearin Road to the last farm on the right – if you hit the Worcester County line you went too far.)

Granted, even getting 100 people to pay $25 apiece isn’t going to make much of a dent in the incumbent’s $2.7 million cash on hand (primarily garnered from special interest groups, trial lawyers, unions, and other PACs) but making her spend that money to defend the seat creates a situation where she can’t help anyone else. As opposed to other GOP candidates, there’s local people campaigning for Jim on the street and yard signs large and small being put up by local supporters.

You may also run into a number of other local GOP candidates at this event, so it can be a “one-stop shop” for getting to know local officeseekers. If you’d like to support one of the conservatives trying to turn Maryland and the U.S. Senate in the right direction, it’s easy to do: please R.S.V.P. (include the names of each person attending) and contact Don Coffin at 410-860-2111 or e-mail dcoffin@ezy.net.

Wicomico budget meeting finds little contention

I took this just as the hearing was concluding, just to show the lack of attendance.

Two hearings for the price of one.

Perhaps this was an exercise in civility or people are just resigned to their fate. But tonight’s public hearing concerning both the constant yield rate and FY2011 budget drew only about 70 people and little if any fireworks.

The legalese of the constant yield hearing. Translation - your taxes could be lower but we won't lower them.

Let’s begin with the constant yield hearing, where Director of Finance Patricia Petersen carefully explained the legalese which in essence told us that the county was choosing not to lower the property tax rate to that where the revenue yielded would be the same (constant yield) but instead maintaining the same rate as last year. Instead of lowering the rate to 74.91 cents per $100, the rate will stay at 75.9 cents per $100 – that extra penny gained by keeping a stable rate will net Wicomico County $683,364 in additional revenue, yet no one commented. That state-mandated hearing was over in about three minutes. So while Rick Pollitt can say he didn’t increase the tax rate, it proves the old adage that “your results may vary.”

Wicomico County Council was ready and waiting to hear comments but didn't get a lot of them.

The remainder of the meeting was conducted by Council Administrator Matt Creamer. In essence, Creamer went through each department heading and solicited comments on each, saving the school budget for last. He also reminded us the budget process allows County Council to either pass the budget as is or pass it with cuts. They also can change allocations to increase the share for education (per state law) but the total budget has to remain the same by making cuts elsewhere.

Aside from education, the largest reaction came to the library budget. Library head Tom Heyman noted that 40 percent of the public relies on the library for government information, and that social media was even having an impact on the budget – a Facebook petition to save Pittsville’s library branch had garnered over 750 signatures.

Perhaps the most self-serving portion of Heyman’s remarks was his bringing up the videos being made at library locations to beg for sparing from the budget axe. By encouraging “victims” of library cuts to make this sort of scene they’re playing for emotion rather than hard facts.

On the other hand, local observer Kim Trenka used a car analogy of a Lexus versus a Honda to make her point about funding for a new library – however, there’s no money in this operating budget for a new library. (The capital budget may be a different story.) Yet Michael Calpino, another local resident, mentioned that branch hours aren’t being cut equally – the Bivalve library branch is proposed to be open just 12 hours a week. Taking 4 hours from the Centre branch and the Pittsville branch would bring the Bivalve branch back to 20 hours, a number Calpino would be “happy with.” He also suggested a fee could be charged for those out-of-county residents who use their services, particularly at the mall-based Centre branch.

After the rest of the budget was brought up, the floor was opened to general comments and Matt Trenka stepped up. His message was that the county needed to do more with less just as the Strategic Air Command did once the BRAC Commission made its recommendations. He also chided the County Executive for having a budget which was “worthless” in its lack of specificity and documentation and warned County Council not to “drink the (executive branch) Kool-Aid.”

While she didn’t dispute the lack of budget documentation, which was the subject of what she termed an “honest article” in the Daily Times last week, County Council president Gail Bartkovich mentioned that information was now more forthcoming.

In what seemed to be a much more conciliatory tone, both Board of Education president Mark Thompson and superintendent Dr. John Fredericksen pledged to help out as they could. Thompson noted the BoE was “working diligently” on addressing the budget needs while Fredericksen added, “we’re in this together.” Both were mindful of trying to minimize the effect on what Dr. Fredericksen called the “teacher-learner interaction.” Fortunately, thanks to a number of retirements the BoE was confident they could avoid layoffs.

Even local citizen Kay Gibson, a frequent critic of the BoE, was “impressed” with the board’s willingness to make painful cuts.

But not every citizen was pleased. Local political blogger and gadfly Joe Albero was disappointed that Delmar’s experiment with year-round school would come to an end as kids didn’t tend to retain knowledge over a long summer. John Palmer repeated his call that the two at-large County Council positions be eliminated.

Despite the best efforts of Creamer to close out the hearing before I had my say, I wasn’t denied. (I think he didn’t notice I was standing in the back patiently waiting my turn.)

The points I wanted to make were regarding two things: the lack of foresight I see in the budget presentation and the idea that, if this were to be considered a rock-bottom budget, perhaps now would be a good time to adopt TABOR rules. This would limit future spending increases to a factor comprising the growth of population plus the rate of inflation, computed as a percentage – for example, if population grew 1% and inflation was 2% spending could jump no more than 3 percent. It’s a legacy I believe we can live with.

Even with my closing comments, the meeting only ran 70 minutes – compare that to previous budget hearings and I think the people know that the die is now pretty much cast. There were only a dozen speakers, including myself.

As is usual practice, County Executive Pollitt did not attend the meeting but Public Information Officer Jim Fineran did represent the office.

What makes me tick (politically)

As an officeholder, I was asked to fill out this survey by American Solutions regarding my stance on issues, and I thought it was worth sharing on this Saturday. They only asked for a yes or no answer so any additional comments are part of this descriptive post, while their questions are in bold.

Michael Swartz supports American Solutions which are backed by Democrats, Republicans and Independents. We urge you to make these Solutions part of your campaigns for office.

==================================
Do you believe there are values which unite a large majority of Americans? (86% to 10%)
Yes. Looks like I agree with the 86 percent.

Are you running for office to strengthen and revitalize America’s core values? (80% to 9%)
Yes. I’m already in office but I do intend to run for re-election.

Do you believe in long-term solutions instead of short-term fixes? (95% to 5%)
Yes. I’ve been preaching this for the five years I’ve been blogging, and then some. I think the five percent inhabit Congress and inside the Beltway in general.

Do you believe government has to change the way it operates and bring in ideas and systems currently employed in the private sector to increase productivity and effectiveness? (74% to 16%)
Yes. And it begins at the local level because good government tends to start there and work upward.

Do you believe the changes we need in government have to occur in all 513,000 elected offices throughout the country and cannot be achieved by focusing only on Washington. (86% to 10%)
Yes. See above.

A January 2010 Rasmussen Reports poll found voters nationwide believe by a margin of 59% to 15% that cutting taxes is better than increasing government spending as a job-creation tool. Do you believe leaving taxpayer money in the hands of the American people does more good creating jobs than it could ever do through a government bureaucracy?
Yes. It’s simple logic because job creators can then cut out the government middleman.

Sixty-one percent of voters believe tax cuts help the economy and 59% of voters believe tax cuts are a better job-creation tool than government spending. Would you support a two-year 50% reduction in the payroll tax for both employer and employee to boost take-home pay and to free up cash for every employer to hire and invest?
No. Simply because that’s not enough, personally I’d prefer a consumption-based tax at the retail level and the abolition of backup withholding. Why stop at two years?

Do you believe in allowing small businesses to expense 100% of new equipment purchases to help them invest in new and more productive technology?
Yes. At least until the above situation is corrected.

The number one thing Americans associate with China is the “loss of U.S. jobs or cheap labor.” Knowing this, would you support helping American companies compete with China by matching their capital gains rate of zero?
Yes. Works for me, since they don’t play fairly we have to get tough on them.

Three out of four Americans polled during the 2008 election agreed that a lower U.S. corporate tax rate would attract more businesses to open in the United States. Knowing America has the second highest business tax rate in the world, would you spur business investment in the U.S. by lowering the U.S. corporate tax rate to 12.5% to match Ireland’s low rate?
Yes. And watch the revenues shoot upward, helping us balance a leaner budget or even run a surplus.

Knowing taxes are a major inhibitor of passing small businesses from one generation to the next; do you support permanent elimination of the Death Tax?
Yes. I know proponents say it only affects the wealthiest two percent, but I say so what? It should affect no one.

Seven out of ten voters polled during the 2008 election thought a balanced budget is good for the economy. Do you support a Constitutional amendment to balance the federal budget or a law to ensure state budgets are balanced?
Yes. The only exception should be in time of war. We also should have a supermajority to approve tax increases but a simple majority to approve cutting them.

A majority of Americans have consistently supported opening the Outer Continental Shelf for offshore drilling. The Minerals Management Service estimates there are 86 billion barrels of oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas not being utilized. Would you support opening the Outer Continental Shelf to energy exploration?
Yes. Drill, baby, drill. Obviously the poll was conducted before the Deepwater Horizon disaster but I’d still stack their safety record against that of oil transport overseas.

In their most recent poll on the topic, Gallup found 59% of Americans, a record high, support the United States using nuclear power. To maintain nuclear power’s current 20% share of electricity generation, 34 new plants will need to be built by 2030. Do you support eliminating bureaucratic red tape in the permitting of new facilities?
Yes. Let’s get that done. I lived within 50 miles of two plants for years with no ill effects.

Nearly one in three Americans thought that the United States would have made greater advances in technology by 2010. Would you support Congress developing a series of prizes to encourage entrepreneurs or a companies to develop a mass market car that gets 100 miles per gallon?
No. I believe this should be done by the private sector and not taxpayer money.

Oil shale is rock that contains oil that is released when heated. Would you support lifting the ban on developing the estimated 800 billion barrels of oil shale in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah?
Yes. Dig, baby, dig. Right now oil is over the $75 per barrel threshold which makes this practical – obviously the technology will advance through use and make the price point even more attractive.

CBS News found that less than half of all parents with children in grades K-12 believe their child will be prepared to enter the job market. Do you believe education everywhere should be improved to prepare students to become lifelong learners?
Yes. Please, please, please teach critical thinking! Schools bow too much to feelgood philosophy and political correctness instead of the basics of knowledge and thought.

Two-thirds of U.S. voters surveyed by Rasmussen Reports after the 2008 election say “the teachers’ unions — the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers — are more interested in protecting their members’ jobs than in the quality of education.” Do you support dismantling the power of government employee unions?
Yes. On a national and state level the union leaders don’t seem to have the interests of the children at heart – almost all teachers do. I wonder how the NEA and AFT heads would fare in an average third-grade classroom.

Rasmussen Reports found three in five Americans, Republicans, Democrats and Independents, support rewarding excellent teachers with extra pay. Do you support paying teachers for their performance?
Yes.

Do you support expanding the number of charter schools in order to provide parents more options when choosing a school for their children?
Yes. This goes with the question above in that I’d even allow for-profit schools to compete for great teachers and give them more financial security. Imagine a gifted teacher signing a multi-year contract like an athlete does.

Do you believe that we should allow professionals and experts, like engineers, scientists and accountants, with advanced degrees in their field, to teach classes part-time on subjects in the area of their expertise without the need for teaching certificates or being put through additional red tape?
Yes. Obviously the teachers’ unions wouldn’t be down with this concept but I am.

Do you believe that we should empower parents with options to avoid failing schools by creating a voucher program, similar to the Pell Grant program for college, where grants can be applied to tuition to a private school?
Yes. With one reservation – the vouchers cannot come with strings attached. We have enough problems with the government coming in with money that has mandates in exchange.

CBS News found that 70% of Americans — 85% Republicans, 53% Democrats and 73% of Independents — are either dissatisfied or angry with Washington Politicians. Do you believe that the electorate should vote out politicians who use their power to entrench themselves in office and provide benefit to political supporters?
Yes. It’s too bad the recipients of all this largesse don’t agree since they’re the ones who vote ignorantly of their best interests – there’s your 15% of Republicans, 27% of independents (who are apparently quite dependent) and 47% of Democrats.

Congressional leaders are considering a ban on “earmarks” which is when a member of Congress specially directs federal funding back to its state or district. Do you support banning earmarks?
Yes. It’s a start.

The American people have expressed outrage with politicians cutting deals during the healthcare debate like the “Cornhusker Kickback” or the “Louisiana Purchase.” Do you support Congress making legislation online for three days prior to a vote, opening all government meetings and hearings to C-SPAN and making transcripts available online within 24 hours?
Yes. The only problem with that is the old adage: you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink. We’re not going to solve this problem with simple access because the public also has to be educated as to why this is more important than who got booted off ‘Dancing with the Stars.’

The State of California is considering a paycheck protection ballot measure. Paycheck protection requires a Union member to give their approval before their union dues can be used to support a political campaign. The Orange County Register notes the initiative has support from 63% of Californians. Would you support a national or state paycheck protection law?
Yes. It should be done on each state level, beginning with Maryland. For that we have to vote out the union enablers in the General Assembly and governor’s chair.

Damn, that was fun. Wonder if they’ll send me a survey next year?