U.S. Senate interview: Robert Broadus

This is the first of what I’m looking to be a series of interviews with candidates for Maryland’s U.S. Senate seat, now held by Ben Cardin. Think of it as an extension of my old “Ten Questions” series.

Robert Broadus is a former naval officer and current small business owner who may be most familiar to Maryland voters as the head of Protect Marriage Maryland, a group opposing the imposition of same-sex marriage in the state. He also ran unsuccessfully for Congress in the Fourth District in 2008 and 2010, finishing third out of four candidates in the 2008 Republican primary with 21.8% of the vote and losing the 2010 general election to incumbent Donna Edwards with 16.4% of the vote.

To begin, I was a bit confused by his website.

monoblogue: Let me start out by getting one thing straight: I was told (by a friend of mine) that you’re running for the Senate, but your website advertises “Broadus for Congress.” Having run for Congress twice before (once losing in the primary and once in the general) how does that show you’re committed to the race?

RB: Congress includes both the House and the Senate.  Keeping the committee of the same name offers me a chance to save money.  You can hear in my several public statements that I am running for Ben Cardin’s Senate seat.

monoblogue: I sort of suspected that, but it may be confusing to some who simply know you by website and recall you ran for Congress before in 2006 and 2008. So why the leap to a statewide seat?

RB: I have always believed that the Constitution puts the decision-making power of the United States into the hands of the Congress, which is the body designated to represent the will of the people and their states.  I considered running for the House of Representatives in ‘08 and ‘10 (I did not run in ‘06) because a) the House is by design supposed to be closer to the people, and b) it is only the House that has the power to introduce bills for the appropriation of funds.  I saw many of our financial problems, the reckless spending, and the multi-trillion-dollar debt coming from the mal-appropriation of funds, and I saw election as a fiscal conservative to the House as a means to remedy this problem.  I additionally saw that both Al Wynn and Steny Hoyer were Democrats who had voted out of step with their party for the invasion of Iraq, and I believed at the time that this would make them weak with their constituents.  I correctly gauged that Al Wynn was the weaker candidate; unfortunately instead of replacing him with a fiscally responsible Republican, his voters chose to replace him with the ultra-progressive Donna Edwards.

My ultimate decision to run for Senate was prompted by the fact that Ben Cardin was the first Senator to introduce Obamacare to the public, holding the very first townhall meeting in the majority-black setting of Prince George’s Community College.  Part of my encounter with Senator Cardin can be viewed here.

I was also interviewed by Neil Cavuto afterwards.

So, although the event was almost 2 years ago now, I believe that if voters really care, and if they are truly angry enough about the destruction of their liberties, they will support my efforts to take the issue of Obamacare directly to Cardin in serious debate, and to make him pay for what he and his party did to us by giving him a pink slip in November 2012.  I believe that the issues of loss of freedom, if framed correctly, will resonate with Black Americans, and the issues of unconstitutionality should appeal to Republicans in such large numbers that they will vote together to get better representation in the Senate.

I also recognized other statewide issues that needed to be addressed, and which were not being heard with me running in a single congressional district.  Issues like same-sex marriage and illegal immigration were clearly issues that crossed party lines, and got people from all demographics to come out and challenge their legislators about what was being done almost in secret, against the will of the voters.  So, I realized that I also needed to make these issues part of my Senate campaign.  I very much believe that if we can unite the social conservatives throughout the state, the fiscal conservatives who recognize the tragedy being inflicted on us by the Democratic Party’s monopoly over Maryland, and inspire them to fight for their freedoms and demand that government respect us as people—as full-grown men and women—as the true rulers of this country, then not only can we win this election, but we can also achieve the goal that our founders and even Abraham Lincoln spoke glowingly of: the goal of self-government, which is in reality the goal of independence: EMANCIPATION.

The people of Maryland need to hear the message of freedom again, and that is why I am running for Senate.

monoblogue: I’ve noticed on your issue page that you cite the Constitution frequently – that’s a good trait to have in a Senator.

I’d love a comment on your call to repeal the Seventeenth Amendment – given Maryland’s longtime love for all things Democratic, isn’t that going to cost you a job in the Senate? Or were you planning on term-limiting yourself anyway?

And a more important question: how do you get out the message of freedom in an era when 30 second sound bites are the norm and Ben Cardin is sitting on a cool million dollars? How much do you think you need to compete?

RB: I consider that a great compliment.  While I believe that there have been many violations to the Constitution over the years, I note that there are a small handful that can be looked at as absolutely the most egregious, the most anti-American, and the most destructive of liberty.  We can point to the “progressive” amendments as being some of the most dangerous changes to our American system of government—even to the point of taking us backward by making the Constitution an instrument of oppression rather than one of liberation and freedom.  The 16th, 17th, and 18th Amendments were all passed during what was known as the “progressive era.”  The 18th, as we know, was justly repealed by the 21st.  The other two should be as well.  The 16th was implemented to make certain the Congress had a power to tax people’s property in the form of their only means of sustenance—their incomes.  The 17th was implemented to destroy the critical functioning of the States as an integral part of the federal government.

In the Federalist Papers, James Madison makes a point of arguing that while the original Constitution (the Articles of Confederation) provided for a “federal” system of government, the new Constitution would provide for what he calls a “combined” government—namely, a hybrid between a “federal” government (a confederation, or government of sovereign states) and a “national” government (a popular government.)  To assure his critics that the States would not be destroyed, he argued repeatedly that their continuance was guaranteed by their constitutionally-guaranteed role of appointing Senators.  For example, in Federalist 45, he writes: “The State governments may be regarded as constituent and essential parts of the federal government; whilst the latter is nowise essential to the operation or the organization of the former…The Senate will be elected absolutely and exclusively by the State legislatures.”

In fact, the entire argument of the Federalist Papers (and therefore, that of the Constitution) depends on the fact that the States were guaranteed not only representation, but EQUAL representation in the national legislature, much as they had been under the Articles of Confederation.  To take this component away not only undoes the character under which the Constitution itself was ratified, but it also destroys the “federal” nature of our system of government.  So, whereas the Federalists Papers are written to argue the need for a combined federal/national government, what the 17th Amendment created was a purely national government, in which the States are mere subdivisions of the country—no more sovereign or independent than counties or towns are to a State.  We are seeing with Obamacare and other pieces of unconstitutional legislation just how insignificant and powerless the States have become.

While I support term limits for all federal offices, I do not have plans for what I will limit myself to.  My primary motivation for running is that there is something dreadfully disastrous happening to our American republic, and it needs to be fixed.  If I am able to affect the system (either from within elected office or outside of it) in a way that these problems will be fixed, then I will have no more need to be in the Senate, and will gladly step aside to allow other citizens to represent the State in that capacity.  It is also important to understand that even in the House of Representatives, you are chosen to represent your State—not “the people” per se.  Only in the twisted political worldview that emphasizes cronyism, pay-to-play, and “bringing home the bacon” has it  been interpreted that members of the House only represent their districts (or certain special interest groups within their districts) and not the entire State.  I further understand that Maryland’s political history means it is almost certain that the legislature will continue to appoint Democrats to the U.S. Senate.  However, when it comes to the Constitution and Liberty, principle is more important than any political ambitions.  If the Constitution says that Senators must be appointed by the legislatures, then I would not support a system that tries to subvert that just because I’d like to see a Republican in office.  In fact, this is one of the motivations behind this rule—Senators should reflect the political disposition of the State.  If enough people in Maryland really want a Republican Senator, then they will work to get a Republican State Legislature.  In fact, I firmly believe that if more people focused on their local politicians rather than national offices such as the presidency, they’d have much more control over their government, and would be happier with the representation they were getting, both in Annapolis and in DC.  This, I think we can do if we change the way we look at politics, and focus on making Maryland a 2-party state instead of a monopoly for the Democratic Party which it has been for its entire history.

Regarding how to get out the message of freedom in an era of 30-second soundbites, this is really up to the people of Maryland.  If they want to hear my message, they will donate to my campaign and give me the platform to speak—in the form of TV ads, mailers, radio spots, etc.  I don’t have to have the most money—I just have to have the backing of the citizens of Maryland, or even of the Republican Party.  However, the grander question is, “Does the Republican Party want to be represented by the message of freedom?”  Do they want it on their airwaves or plastered on billboards across the state?  Last election, the message we heard in Maryland was extremely diluted down to “More Jobs, Lower Taxes.”  Although the Tea Parties had a great influence, and basically saved the MDGOP from extinction, the establishment shunned the Tea Parties and rejected their message of a return to the Constitution and conservative values.

Ben Cardin is sitting on a lot more than a million dollars.  One report I read from several years back showed his personal wealth above $5 million—which he could donate to his own campaign.  But in 2006, Cardin raised over $9 million.  Even though Michael Steele reportedly raised slightly more, Cardin won the election.  So at the end of the day, it is not about dollar figures alone.  With Barack Obama on the ticket and the future of America at stake, we can expect Cardin to exceed $10 million or more, if such amounts are needed to keep the seat in Democratic hands.  Cardin basically has unlimited funds, and can raise whatever he needs.  But more than money, it is the message that will make the difference of a win or a loss in 2012.  If the people of Maryland are ready for a change to what they’ve been getting—a change from high unemployment, high taxes, high inflation, and high treason against the Constitution, then all of these messages combined can overcome those millions.  If they are tired of their money being used to fund abortion clinics, violate their religious liberties, indoctrinate their children with socialist values in public schools, and dole out their money to entice illegal immigrants to settle here, they will also have motivation, regardless of party, to demand new representation.  People can get out and start spreading the word that a renewed spirit of freedom is in the air, and that we must change our way of doing business if we want to pass on a Maryland (and an America) to our children and our grandchildren that was as vibrant and free as the one we grew up in.  We are on the verge of an ideological split, and like in 1861, today we are very much a “house divided.”  However, the division today is not over race and cotton.  It is over freedom to live and work and do as you please versus subservience to an oppressive state that declares that all must participate in the “shared sacrifice” of a tyrant’s will.  Such tyranny is not lodged in a single party—it is lodged in the will of all our politicians to violate the principles of the Constitution, the only thing that guards our freedoms.

I plan to offer the people a choice in the matter: freedom, not slavery—liberty, not death.   If freedom is popular, and if the people value their liberty, then nothing can stop us from winning.  But if they prefer anything above liberty—whether it be safety or security, wealth or celebrity, then they will receive anything but liberty.

To illustrate this point, I will quote Madison again (whom, because of his short-sightedness, I am not a fan of) but who recognized the dangers of Obamacare 224 years ago when he wrote in Federalist #57, “If it be asked, what is to restrain the House of Representatives from making legal discriminations in favor of themselves and a particular class of the society? I answer: the  genius of the whole system; the nature of just and constitutional laws; and above all, the vigilant and manly spirit which actuates the people of America—a spirit which nourishes freedom, and in return is nourished by it.  If this spirit shall ever be so far debased as to tolerate a law not obligatory on the legislature, as well as on the people, the people will be prepared to tolerate anything but liberty.”

There is a very serious problem that has arisen within our government, and we need someone who will go to Washington, who will fight for Maryland and its people, and who will not rest or cease from fighting until that problem is fixed.

monoblogue: Well, there’s not a lot I can argue with there, aside from the fact that I took the million-dollar figure from Cardin’s most recent FEC report. But speaking of getting out the message, are you finding your work with Protect Marriage Maryland and travel around the state in promoting marriage between one man and one woman is giving you a leg up for campaigning? How much influence do you think social conservatives can have in this state?

RB: I believe that working on the marriage issue has given people a subject to associate my name with. People who care about preserving traditional marriage very often associate me with it. At the same time, people who are opposed to preserving traditional marriage also know me as a pariah. In my view, this helps to separate the wheat from the chaff. People who outright reject social conservatism will most likely go and find other candidates to support.

On that note, I do believe that social conservatives can have a great influence in this state, but like everything else, it depends on them wanting to make their voice heard. The first question Republicans must ask themselves is, “Why am I a Republican?” Some will just be Republicans because their parents were Republicans and they were raised to like the Republican “brand.” But if anyone is a Republican because they truly believe in a set of principles, they will most likely find themselves describing conservative principles. Is there a difference between social conservatism and other forms of conservatism? On the surface, the answer seems to be, “yes,” but in reality, the answer is, “no.” When you look at issues like abortion, single-parenthood, inner-city violence, illegal immigration, same-sex marriage, etc, these all boil down to economic issues, even moreso than being issues of faith. The chief distinction of where we fall is whether we let our particular circumstances interfere with our own willingness to support the conservative message.

(It is important to note that like most Blacks in America, I did not start as a conservative, and would not have identified myself as a conservative 10 years ago. But the more I have thought on the issues, the more I realize that I either have been a conservative all my life, but didn’t know it, or that I want to be a conservative on certain issues, but just can’t bring myself to give up certain idiosyncrasies that I’ve grown up with, such as identity-politics or a deep-seated belief that there are some things people can’t do without government.)

To that point, the question of being a conservative (and more importantly a social conservative) rests largely with the MDGOP & the National GOP’s desire to push the message out to voters that conservatism is cool. As long as the MDGOP’s mantra is that we have to moderate on some issues to win over liberals, we will never be in a position to win the argument. What they are really saying is that they do not feel confident enough about their own ideology to convince others that it is the right philosophical approach to life.

The reality is that like myself, most Marylanders have been conservative all their lives, but didn’t know it. They believe in liberty, fiscal responsibility, and that justice is best achieved by adhering to the rule of law. They believe in treating other people the way they’d want to be treated—which means not only giving lovingly from your heart, but also showing “tough love” by withholding charity when instead what the person needs is a swift kick in the rear. They believe in doing “what’s right,” and that means sometimes you’ve got to tighten your belt and delay gratification to get through the tough times and see better days.

The unfortunate thing is that liberalism (or statism) teaches people that government can solve all their woes, and even better than that, it can solve them instantaneously—all they have to do is believe that government is the answer to all their problems and serve it unerringly. Whenever government fails, just turn a blind eye or blame the other party; and whenever things go well (no matter how slightly,) showcase it as evidence that government works. Yet the truth is that government cannot ever make your life significantly better. It can only make you dependent. And it is unraveling this fallacy that causes the fiscal conservative (or conservatives of another category) to eventually arrive at the same point as the social conservative. The social conservative isn’t so because he worships a certain religion (although he may have found conservatism because of his religious beliefs.) The social conservative is so because he wants to stand on his own two feet. To do so, he must act with wisdom, which means avoiding foolish risks and frivolous lifestyle choices. If he does make such a bad choice, then he must be prepared to live with the consequences—he does not expect society to pick up the slack for his personal decisions.

And this is the difference. Every time you hear a Republican say something like, “I’m normally against government welfare, but…” you are witnessing a fiscal conservative cave in to his own principles. And the liberal (statist) has a million ways to pry us from our values. Their favorites are words like “compassion,” “love,” and “pity.” Another one is a hyphenated form of the word, “justice.” Recently, they’ve begun toying with the words “sacrifice” and “tolerance” to achieve the same effect. Conservatism (which is self-reliance or at least a desire for independence) requires the ability to reject all these things when they drive us away from our better selves. Liberty requires that we can place something above grandiose ideas like “love” or “tolerance.” Indeed, we can put our needs before the desires of others, and we can put our families before other families, and we can put our faith in God before other noble ideas like “love” and “tolerance.” Even “fairness,” sometimes, will fall to our greater sense of self-preservation—but that’s what liberty is all about. Liberty is not the idea that you have to do what others want—it is the idea that you can do what you want, even if others disagree.

This is a lesson that my ancestors learned and passed down through the generations, as they yearned for liberty from the slavemasters’ plantations. This is the lesson that our founders fought for as they rebelled against their King and created a new government to protect their liberties. And I believe that if we promote this message effectively, the people of Maryland will see it is a fire that still burns in their hearts and minds.

So, I do not see social conservatives as being the minority in this state—not by a long shot. I see them as being the dominant majority. It is a bit sad that their strength is not self-evident. It is just a matter of time before they awaken and realize that what they want in their hearts can be achieved by voting for a guy like me, running on a Republican ticket, and that what they want can be achieved in this next election. It won’t take 20 years of being a career politician, nor will it take a complete turnaround of the statehouse. Putting the right person in the House or Senate can magnify their voice 1,000 times beyond what they have now, which is complete silence. Not only that, but they will not get this magnified voice with any other candidate—Ben Cardin is actually stifling their voice. I will not pretend that it won’t be a struggle to get them to realize this, but I do believe that in the near-term, it can be done.

monoblogue: I think this has been a pretty thorough discussion. Is there anything else you want to add to “close the sale”?

RB: Thanks a lot, Michael.

I would simply close by saying that identifying with conservative values has enabled me to better consider why we instituted a government among ourselves, and what the Constitution is really all about.  It has enabled me to see–as many abolitionists like Frederick Douglass did well before 1865–that the Constitution is a “freedom document,” which in its best interpretation should be looked at as embodying the spirit of Independence that fueled the founding of these united States.  It has also caused me to take a more serious look at how money is created and used in our financial system.  No government that preserves an individual right to property (as our 5th amendment requires ours to) can do so without supporting a capitalist economic system based on sound money.  And it has enabled me to see that in our current struggle, the Republican Party is the party that stands for the liberty, independence, and even the equality of opportunity for all people willing to put in the required work and remain dedicated to achieving success, happiness, and prosperity.

The greatest threat to our future can be described in two ways that are closely related:  the first is forgetting that we were created as a republic of free and independent States.  It is the States that serve as a check on the national government to protect the rights and sovereignty of the people.  We are losing this as we embrace an increasingly nationalist government.  The second is in neglecting the vital importance and proper interpretation of the 10th Amendment, which locked into the Constitution the very principle of the rights and sovereignty of the States.  The 10th Amendment tells us how to read the rest of the Constitution, and defines its character completely.  The notion that the government’s powers are limited, and that it does not have the authority to employ any means whatever to achieve its desired ends over the rights of the people are contained nowhere else in the Constitution but there.  Obamacare represents an unbridled assault on the heart of the Constitution in the form of rendering inert the 10th Amendment.  I have had several occasions to speak with Virginia’s Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli, and he expressed the same concerns.  I stand by his efforts and the efforts of other States’ Attorneys General to defend the rights and sovereignty of their States regarding an issue that the federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved with.  We all need to stand in this critical hour—in 2012–to save our States and protect our republic, as that is the only way we will protect our liberties.

**********

Personally, I think Broadus lays out a very compelling case as a conservative Senator. He obviously has the strikes against him of a lack of name recognition in most of the state and perhaps being too closely identified on the surface as a one-issue candidate. However, in this interview he displays a depth of thought which should be able to convince voters he has sound positions on most issues outside the narrow range of social conservatism.

That narrow base of support could be his downfall in an election year such as 2012, where the primary is early. That gives an advantage to candidates who already have a support system in place.

Yet Robert reminds me a little bit of 2010 U.S. Senate candidate Jim Rutledge – not necessarily in style, but in the way he speaks at length and depth about conservative issues. If Robert’s as good of a speaker as he is a writer, I’d love to watch him mop up the stage with Ben Cardin in a debate – that’s probably why you won’t see one.

Ten questions for – Deborah Johns

It was one year ago Tuesday that I ran my first Ten Questions with today’s subject, and the reason I caught up with her again was to get her reflections on the TEA Party Express tour she participated in which crossed the country leading up to the 9-12 TEA Party rally, along with speaking at the Washington, D.C. rally itself.

Deborah is an ordinary citizen who became extraordinary through the intersection of hard work, devotion to country, and love of freedom, so I’m proud to once again bring you Ten Questions for her.

**********

monoblogue: Having interviewed you last year on the eve of the “Stop Obama” bus tour and now that you’ve completed the TEA Party Express, I’m talking to a seven-time bus tour veteran. Obviously each tour is different but what sticks out to you most about this particular go-round?

Johns: What sticks out in my mind is how many people who have come out to a political event for the first time in their life ever, whether they identify themselves as a democrat or a republican.  We asked at each of our rallies for a show of hands as to how many people has been to an event of this nature for the first time in their lives, and there were so many who raised their hands.  Also how many people brought their children to be part of a history making event, because getting out and “protesting,” is something that most conservatives just have not done.  Like Ronald Reagan said “Most conservatives are meat eaters and retreaters, who would rather go home at the end of the day and be frustrated at the news on television, than get out and do something about it.”  Well these meat eating retreaters are now getting out and doing something about the direction of their country.

monoblogue: Since many of the stops were the same as last year’s tour, could you sense a different mindset among the crowds at those locations? And how did looking out over the vast multitudes in Washington D.C. affect your perception of the tour’s success?

Johns: I did sense a different mind set with the crowds.  Last year everyone was galvanized by “hope and change.”  The American people really believed that electing Barack Obama was going to bring change they hoped for.  I think for liberals that meant one thing and for conservatives it meant another and in the end neither side is ultimately getting the change they hoped for and pretty much the feeling of the American people is one of disbelief and the feeling that they were sold a bill of goods.

The crowd of 1.5 million people who came by buses, car pool, train and air, was so amazing.  People really for the first time felt like their voice was making a difference, and they were there in DC to make sure the clunkers in the Capitol knew they were hearing them.  The chants of the people were awesome, “We own the Dome,” the Constitution begins with “We the People,” and so many more.  It truly gave me a greater sense of pride and admiration for the great country we live in, to see all these people be inspired in the cities we went to, and even the ones we could not get to, feel a sense of urgency to do whatever it took for them to get to DC to be heard and be part of a history making event.  The sleeping giant has awoken.  People standing shoulder to shoulder to fight for the freedoms and independence our men and women in uniform have given us, and now they are being responsible for these freedoms on the home turf. 

monoblogue: Taking into consideration the mood of the country regarding politicians, it’s noteworthy to me that your tour (and the 9-12 rally itself) did not feature any true “name” political figures. Just from your perspective as somewhat of a political outsider, would you say that the TEA Party Express benefited from being somewhat apolitical and more issue-based?

Johns: Our focus was on the issues and that is the important agenda right now.  People are focused on the issues, and which politicians are either in line with what they want and those politicians who are not in line with the issues they are passionate about.  You first have to be able to articulate the issues and the problems, and then identify what candidates match up with your philosophy.  We feel that a leader will emerge from all of these efforts, and then that will yet again cement all of the people together.  There is plenty of time to identify the proper leader for the movement.

monoblogue: I ran across a video (and put it up as part of this post) done by the Fox affiliate in Detroit regarding your stop there, and it seemed to focus more on the people who attended the rally rather than your message. Did you find the media coverage of your tour overall satisfactory or do you feel a need to set the record straight?

Johns: I feel the cable channels and local media did a great job in providing coverage.  However, the national media of ABC, NBC and CBS did not cover any of the events on a national level.  Our events were covered by the local affiliates, but not the evening or morning shows on any of the networks.

monoblogue: I don’t want to forget the root cause of your involvement. Being a Blue Star Mom obviously the military is never far from your mind, and your primary objection to President Obama was based on how you imagined he would be as Commander-in-Chief. Is there any way he’s performed above your low expectations or is it even worse than you dreaded? And do you ever get that “I told you so” thought when Obama carries on policies on the War on Terror (oops, “Overseas Contingency Operation”) put in place by former President Bush?

Johns: Let me put it this way, his foreign policies are a total failure.  I do not want a President who goes around the world and apologizes for anything in the past of the actions of this country or our military.  We have nothing to apologize for.  I am also offended when he has hugged Hugo Chavez, agrees to meet with the President of Iran without conditions, bows to the King of Saudia Arabia, and allows his Attorney General to investigate our CIA members for their past actions, putting them in essence in jeopardy for career decisions they made that were approved by the Bush administration, and now they are being investigated, and having this doubt cast over their good actions to keep this country safe is disgraceful on the part of the President.  He also does not want pre-emptive air strikes in Afghanistan because of the fear of either death or injury to civilians in the area, and would prefer to risk the lives of American ground troops first.  Anyone knows you always send in the air support first as a means of clearing an area, and then you send in the ground troops.  Remember the shock and awe effect when the Iraq war started?  No one wants innocent civilians to be killed, but unfortunately war is not a tea party, and unfortunately innocent civilians do get killed, but it is the best thing, as evidenced by our generals, air support should come first before the ground troops.

monoblogue: In that same vein, given the focus on domestic and economic issues, do you think the our foreign policy and our effort against terrorism is being hurt by this shift in focus from years past?

Johns: I feel that if our CIA members are going to continue to be investigated by the Attorney General, that will most definitely hinder continued investigations by our CIA and military personnel who act in the proper manner to keep this country free from attack again like what happened on 9/11/01.

monoblogue: Last year I asked you about future political plans and you responded that if you were to go that route it would be a few years down the road, at least until your youngest child graduated high school. Is that timetable still intact or has the spirit shown on the TEA Party Express moved you to reconsider?

Johns: It is all possible.

monoblogue: The area where I live is definitely in play next year as a swing district because we have a “Blue Dog” Democrat freshman representing our area. Naturally that prompts me to ask: will you be doing yet another Our Country Deserves Better tour for the Congressional elections in 2010?

Johns: Yes. (In fact, just after I did my e-mail exchange with Deborah it was announced that a second TEA Party Express will launch October 25– of course, she will embark on bus tour number 8.)

As the Our Country Deserves Better tour announcement notes:

“We’re going to send a message to the politicians in Washington that if they are supporting bailouts, out-of-control deficit spending, higher taxes, increases in the size and instrusiveness of government, then they should probably be looking for a new line of work, because we’re going to be sure they are out of job come next November,” said Joe Wierzbicki, coordinator of the Tea Party Express.

The “Tea Party Express: Countdown to Judgment Day” will depart San Diego, California on Sunday, October 25th, and traverse the nation from coast-to-coast, border-to-border, before ending up in Orlando, Florida on Wednesday, November 11th (Veterans Day).

This tour will take in portions of the country omitted on the original TEA Party Express, focusing on stops in the Pacific Northwest and southern states – alas, it comes no closer to here than South Carolina.

But I also want to thank Deborah for taking the time to answer my questions and hope that she finds the next tour as exciting and fulfilling as this one!

Ten Questions for – Dr. Jim Pelura, Chair of the Maryland Republican Party

As I like to do on about a monthly basis, here is another installment of what I call Ten Questions.

Back in December of 2006, Jim Pelura and I came into our positions at the Maryland GOP together - I was sworn in as a Central Committee member and he was elected at that convention as Chair of the Maryland GOP. Admittedly, I voted for his opponent but obviously he didn’t hold that against me when he agreed to do the interview.

monoblogue: Let’s go back to the beginning. The 2006 elections have just concluded and Republicans were shut out in statewide races, including the relatively popular Governor Ehrlich losing a reelection bid. Nationally the GOP faced the prospect of being in the minority for the first time in 12 years. So what motivated you to run for the Chair position you now hold, and how many people thought you were completely crazy? 

Pelura: Why did I run?

I had been concerned for some time that the MDGOP was out of touch with the grassroots and the traditional Republican philosophy of small government, low taxes, fiscal responsibility and faith in the individual. I was concerned that the liberal agenda of the Governor and majority of the General Assembly would have no voice of opposition among the Republican rank and file. I was not ready or willing to give up on Maryland that easily.

As for the second part of your question………not as many as one would think, although a friend said that he was going to give me a few sessions with a psychiatrist for Christmas that year!

monoblogue: Oh, there were and still are plenty of voices of opposition to liberal policies here in the Free State. But you found yourself inheriting a Maryland GOP which was in dire financial straits and had to make some unpopular financial decisions. Were you surprised at the extent of the problem when you came onboard? And do you think that the Maryland Republican Party will be able to compete financially in 2010?

Pelura: If you remember, at the December meeting where I was elected, the outgoing Chairman announced that I was being left about $300,000.00. We all knew that fundraising would be difficult due to the recent elections and that money in the bank would be needed to “get over the hump”.

As we soon learned, that $300,000.00 was actually about $20,000.00 and there were about $60,000.00 in bills to be paid. Needless to say, I was surprised.

But, by making significant cuts in expenditures and taking out a line of credit, we survived.

Fundraising is still a concern, however, but there are significant “bright spots”.

The line of credit is nearly paid off, small donations are way up from in the past (in terms of the “health” of the Party, I would rather have 10,000 $1.00 donations than one check for $10,000), and many of the “big” donors are showing interest in giving to the MDGOP once again.

The Maryland Republican Party will be ready for 2010, both financially and in terms of good and credible candidates for elected office. Read more

Ten Questions for – Bill Wilson, President of Americans for Limited Government

I was pleased to have the opportunity to quiz ALG head Bill Wilson about a number of issues facing the conservative movement and the nation at large.

Bill was elected President of Americans for Limited Government two years ago, which was the latest step in over 30 years of work within the conservative movement. Wilson began as an organizer for Ronald Reagan’s 1976 Presidential campaign in Maryland and southeast Pennsylvania and later spent a decade at the National Right-to-Work Committee before spending the last 15 years with the Americans for Limited Government organization. He’s also been active on the political end, managing a number of Congressional, state, and local campaigns.

monoblogue: Obviously you’re an advocate for limited government, simply based on the name of your organization. With the recent election of Barack Obama and the promise of a more powerful federal government, how do we sell the benefits of limiting government when millions of people want to get their piece of the bailout, either via their employers or their mortgage companies?

Wilson: As a country we are at or very near the tipping point. With approximately 40% of the population now dependent on government support and 60% doing the supporting, the first step has to be to do no more damage. Organizing the producers of income to defend their position is the first and most important step we and others interested in restoring Constitutional government have to take. No American likes to be conned or ripped off. But that is exactly what is happening. Constantly pointing that out, giving examples, and providing ways and platforms for those paying taxes to fight back is our primary objective.

monoblogue: With that said, Obama won because he promised “change”, and many of his promises involved increasing spending in a number of areas. What do you see as the biggest threat on the Obama agenda?

Wilson: There are almost too many to list. Money to do many of the things Obama promised will simply not be available. The government is already putting the country in position for a massive inflationary cycle. Every new spending item only will make it worse and longer. So, I am betting Obama will push the ideological, non-spending items. Things like union-boss privileges with Card Check or forced local unionization, the gag law known as the “Fairness Doctrine,” and every loony environmental scheme Al Gore can come up with. These actions taken one by one may not appear to have that much impact. But taken together they comprise a radical shift in power.

And, of course, trumping all of this will be the Obama defense policy. Keeping Robert Gates was designed to calm fears. But with zealots like Barney Frank calling for a 25% reduction and key slots manned by anti-defense advocates, this could be the one ultimate battle everyone will have to fight.

monoblogue: Now letʼs look on the other side of the aisle. Many conservatives arenʼt fans of President Bush, and in many respects itʼs because he grew the federal government in a number of areas. While you and I probably agree thereʼs a number of programs and initiatives ripe for criticism, which Bush-era program do you think was the worst offender?

Wilson: Many of our supporters would say the so-called Patriot Act was the most offensive because of its destruction to civil liberties. I believe the most long-term destructive policy advanced by the Bush Administration is the $700 billion give-away package to Wall Street. Bush has legitimized attacks on the very concept of free markets. This one action will be seen as igniting an inflation bomb that, when it explodes, will destroy the savings and livelihoods of millions of families. Absent the bailout, I would have said No Child Left Behind. The federalization of education has accelerated, and will continue to exacerbate, the downward spiral of education in America, affecting the future of everyone in the country for the worse.

monoblogue: There is some tension in the conservative movement between those who favor a strict limit on the size and influence of government and the social conservatives who look to the federal government in order to limit or eliminate abortion, same-sex marriage, etc. Does the limited government ALG favors leave an exception for social issues?

Wilson: Yes and no. Our view of limited government is based on the clear intent of the Founders for localities and states to run their own affairs. Those advocating a variety of social issues have seen great success on the local and state levels. I see our efforts running in parallel – to the extent we and others working in the area of limiting government succeed, social issue advocates will find they can expand their successes. Where we will not agree is looking to an all-powerful federal government to impose any set of cultural policies on the entire nation.

monoblogue: In that same vein, does the definition of limited government as you see it call for a non-interventionist foreign policy?

Wilson: Again, yes and no. The federal government’s primary responsibility is the common defense. And, I have no doubt that ensuring that common defense will from time to time require the U.S. to be very interventionist. But as a rule, any government powerful enough to intervene in the affairs of other countries on a whim is just too powerful and should be cut back.

monoblogue: On the federal level there have also been attempts to enact a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution and a call for term limits for members of Congress, with the argument that these would encourage a more limited government because members would have to prioritize spending and not be quite as likely to dole out pork to ensure perpetual re-election. Does this also fit into the scope of limited government as you see it or is that too much intervention in the process?

Wilson: It does fit into our view. For nearly 150 years of our history, men and women were elected to Congress, stayed a short period and, for the most part, followed the intent of the Founders by returning back home. Government started down the road to becoming the massive, centralized beast we see today when politicians began staying for longer and longer periods of time. Term limits were debated at the Constitutional Convention, but were thought to be unnecessary – which proves that even the great ones miss now and again.

The “process” has been so distorted and mutated by those looking to build power bases and expand the reach of government that now only counter-intervention can restore the rights of the people and return us to a system of true self-government.

monoblogue: Certainly the impact of big government isnʼt just felt at the federal level but at the state level as well. Given the number of governors forming a line to receive a federal handout from the bailout money, are there leaders we can point to at the state level as good examples to follow in limiting government?

Wilson: Absolutely. Mark Sanford in South Carolina has drawn a clear line in the sand over spending, taxes, and individual liberty. Rick Perry in Texas has been a leader, too. As for that mob of Governors running to the federal government for handouts, they really are pathetic. Having spent money like fools in the good times, they are now refusing to take the necessary steps to put their fiscal houses in order. They know they are spending more than they can ever hope to legitimately pay. But rather than rein in their wretched excesses, they go begging the Feds pay their bills. As for those ideologically blind who push for higher taxes, I believe they will find a very hostile and energized public.

monoblogue: In the previous election cycle, a number of Presidential candidates and others formed groups to finance chosen political candidates in the form of political action committees – some examples are Fred Thompson starting FredPAC, Mike Huckabee creating HuckPAC, and the Our Country Deserves Better PAC formed by Howard Kaloogian in California. Since itʼs not apparent that Americans for Limited Government participates in that arena, is this something ALG will be exploring for the next election cycle?

Wilson: ALG has no plans for a PAC that would spend hard dollars. Frankly, we have no desire or intent to be strip-searched by the Thought Police of the FEC. That said, ALG has and will continue to engage in free issue discussion. The Supreme Court decision in Wisconsin Right to Life v. FEC sets out clearly the path to get in the middle of the debate without surrendering First Amendment freedoms to the bureaucrats of the FEC. We intend to be very active in speaking out.

monoblogue: Given that there will be 35 Senate seats, all 435 House seats, and 37 governorships up for grabs in the 2009-2010 election cycle, who would you most like to see ejected by the voters the next time theyʼre on the ballot?

Wilson: Oh, that is a long list. There is Harry Reid in Nevada, arguably one of the most ruthless hacks in Congress. And, it can be argued that Barney Frank has done more damage to America than any other single member with his defense of the theft by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. As for Governors, I would personally hope that any of them who abdicated their responsibility by running to Congress for bailout money would be kicked to the curb.

monoblogue:  ALG is trying to expand its influence on the internet with the Daily Grind update that you edit (and I subscribe to) along with the formation of the NetRightNation website, which promises to harness the power of thousands of grassroots bloggers to influence policy. While you are making steps in the right direction, what other steps are you contemplating to combat the massive Obama propaganda organ and e-mail machine?

Wilson: Building traffic to our sites and expanding our email outreach capacity is the first step, of course. But it will have to go a lot further. The real genius of the Obama operation was that he melded new media outreach with a wide reaching old-style on the ground organization. The GOP and many conservatives seem to miss that point. At the end of the day, boots on the ground capture turf. The Internet, with all the new and expanding methods of communication, is a tool for organizing on the ground. Our goal is to unite a growing Internet based presence with on-the-ground organizing in selected locations aimed at having maximum impact on the legislative and political process.

**********

Once again, my thanks to Bill for participating in what turned out to be an excellent exchange along with thanks to Alex Rosenwald of ALG for helping to set things up.

Ten Questions for – Blue Star Mom Deborah Johns

Last week I devoted part of a post to the my interview subject, who as I reported was preparing to embark on a two-week barnstorming tour of America; a tour intended to point out the deficiencies of Barack Obama as Commander-in-Chief. She’s a Blue Star Mom who’s proud to support the military and has been termed by FOX News as one of their favorite military moms.

Today I bring back my Ten Questions (even though I actually asked a few more) feature with Deborah Johns, spokeswoman for the pro-troop organization Our Country Deserves Better and soon to be political tourist. As part of her sixth such effort, she will be in the region as her tour wraps up in Washington, DC on October 29th.

monoblogue: According to the press release that brought your upcoming national tour to my attention, you thought it was worth giving up two weeks of your life to defend the honor of your fellow Blue Star Mom, Vice-Presidential nominee Governor Sarah Palin. Were you a John McCain supporter beforehand or did the Palin selection and subsequent fallout goad you into action?

Johns:  I supported John McCain since the primary and have been even more energized with Senator McCain’s selection of Gov. Palin to be his vice presidential candidate. I can’t tell you how proud I am to see a Blue Star Mom on the verge of making it to the White House!

monoblogue: In looking at the planned route, you’ve scheduled a pretty ambitious 14 day agenda which will cover a number of swing states, including ones your PAC is running ads in. How is the fundraising going for the trip, and is the schedule pretty much set now?

Johns:  The fundraising is going very well, however, on every cross-country patriotic tour I’ve been involved with (and this will be my sixth one!) we have always had to work very hard to raise the money it takes to fund the trip (renting vehicles, paying for gas, hotel rooms, etc…) and to get the word out! So many times people have heard we are passing through their city, and call frantically asking us to stop, and if our schedule will accommodate it, then we will make every effort to greet supporters.

monoblogue: Your son William’s devotion to his mission (having served three tours of duty in Iraq) is obvious but is there a military tradition he’s following in the family? Corollary to that, did you have a history of political involvement before becoming involved in the Move America Forward and Our Country Deserves Better political groups?

Johns:  I come from a long line of military family. I have uncles, great uncles and grandfathers that have served from WWII, Korean and Vietnam. They have all been in either the Army or the Navy. William is the first Marine in the family.

I have never had any political involvement prior to becoming involved with Move America Forward and/or Our Country Deserves Better. All of this was because of a request my son made and God laid this on my heart to do the right thing. Casey Sheehan was killed in April 2004 from volunteering to be a convoy driver to drive supplies to a forward Marine Unit (my son was in that forward exploratory unit), Casey’s convoy went the wrong way and his vehicle was hit by an IED. In May of 2004, Cindy Sheehan had begun to make a lot of noise against President Bush and the War. My son called home at Mother’s Day, and asked what was going on back in the states, and questioned why the American people don’t support the troops any longer. William told me about all the good things that the troops were accomplishing, and asked me, “Mom please don’t let us come home to another Vietnam.” So that is when I began to appear on talk radio shows, television news programs, and speak out at public events and rallies – to tell the stories of what the troops were doing. Things have just blossomed from there and others have been inspired to start up their own non-profit organizations to support the troops, and their families.

monoblogue: Given that you’re a military mom who’s working for a pro-troop organization, it’s inevitable there will be comparisons between you and Cindy Sheehan. What are your thoughts on Mrs. Sheehan and how she handled the death of her son? And how have you prepared yourself for that possibilty affecting your life?

Johns: I certainly do not stand in judgment on how Ms. Sheehan has handled the death of her son. The loss of a child is something I hope I never have to go through, and how someone deals with the loss of a child is different for everyone.

However, let me make it clear that I certainly do stand in judgment on how Ms. Sheehan has attacked our country and our military. I take issue with the fact that she has made statements calling the al-Qaeda terrorists, “freedom fighters from other countries.” I take issue with her attacks on U.S. troops who went to New Orleans to help in the wake of Hurricane Katrina – she declared their presence made it “occupied New Orleans.” I take issue with her endorsement of the murderer, Marxist dictator of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, who Ms. Sheehan praised: “I admire President Chavez for his strength to resist the United States” and “I’ve always admired President Chavez for standing up to imperialism.” Finally, Ms. Sheehan has called President Bush, and U.S. troops the “real terrorists.”

Well, just as Cindy’s son, Casey, wore the uniform of the United States Army, my son wears the uniform of the United States Marines, both boys were in Iraq at the same time, and neither of them are murderers or terrorists. I am completely offended by these statements and that she had gone around the world and supported dictators like Hugo Chavez saying she wishes he was her President. Her hateful, anti-American rhetoric has inspired insurgents and terrorists to continue to pick up their weapons and kill our American Soldiers and Marines and that is Ms. Sheehan’s cross to bear. Her actions since the death of Casey and taking it out on the Soldiers and Marines who gladly serve this country are deplorable.

As for my preparing for the untimely loss of my son – William, I have had a very detailed conversation as to what I am to do if he is killed while serving his country, so all of those details are in order. However, I don’t think one can ever be prepared for the knock on the door. Each time William has been deployed, he has lost guys in his unit. I remember in January 2007 when his unit was on patrol and 2 Marines were killed. We all knew it was someone from the 21 MEW, and in a special forces unit, but we had no idea who. I was gripped with fear, tears and tons of emotions over fear that I was going to get the knock on the door. I could not leave my house for 3 days until the notifications came out. That waiting is something no one can imagine unless you have been faced with it. Then when you finally get word as to who it was, you have a split second of relief, but then you feel horrible from survivors guilt and you have even more tears and a different wave of emotions for the loss of the Marine and his family who did get the knock on the door. It is a pit in our stomach you never get over.

monoblogue: Closing the book on Sheehan, most people are aware that she’s running for Congress against Nancy Pelosi. Do you see a run for office in your future or is the involvement you already have politically enough for you?

Johns:  Sheehan running for Congress – I gave it great consideration to run for Congress against both Cindy Sheehan and Nancy Pelosi. However, I would have had to uproot my 2 sons at home and move to the Bay Area, which is something I was unwilling to do. Although I feel I could have been a formidable opponent to both of them, as a single parent my sons have to come first. This may be a consideration in 3 years when my youngest graduates from High School.

monoblogue: Getting back to your national tour, what sort of press reception are you expecting for your message? Do you anticipate any negative reaction from Obama supporters like protests or threats on your safety? (I see you have a stop scheduled in his hometown, that should be interesting.)

Johns:  Well the press obviously has a biased opinion when it comes to reporting fair and balanced events from McCain to Obama. The press is doing everything they can to distort things against the McCain/Palin campaign. Cindy Sheehan always had way more press than I did when John Kerry was running and she was their poster child. I do expect that we will have some press coverage, but it is anyone’s guess as to how much local and/or national press coverage we will get.

As for Obama supporters etc. – I have gotten death threats when I spoke out against Cindy Sheehan. I do expect to get them again with this campaign, and some of the staff has already had some breach of privacy from Obama supporters. They are very ruthless, and will stop at nothing to get what they want by intimidation, up to and including physical harm.

monoblogue: It’s also worth asking with your connection to Move America Forward (whose PAC is supporting a number of Congressional candidates) whether you’ll be coordinating your efforts with those candidates, or is this simply a “stop Obama” tour?

Johns: Currently this is a “Stop Obama” tour. There is probably no doubt that we will probably end up doing some joint support work with good candidates who can make change happen in Washington.

monoblogue: President Eisenhower once noted, “Politics ought to be the part-time profession of every citizen who would protect the rights and privileges of free people and who would preserve what is good and fruitful in our national heritage.” Obviously you were an average mom who took it upon herself to get involved, much like Governor Palin. What advice would you give to someone who would like to get involved in the world of political advocacy?

Johns:  Anyone wishing to get involved in the world of political advocacy needs to have a passion for their cause. If you are not passionate about it, then you will come off as a fake. You need to be genuine, authentic, articulate and well informed about what you are speaking about. You also have to have a thick skin, because the media critiques everything about you from your hair, clothes, shoes, weight, what you say and your family and then they say very nasty things about your family, then death threats if they really don’t like you. So you have to be strong, and don’t let them see you sweat.

monoblogue: Final question. If, despite your efforts to the contrary, Barack Obama takes the Presidential Oath of Office next January, will you remain in the political realm and if so where would you channel your efforts?

Johns: Well I don’t think I will have to worry about Obama taking that oath of office in January, because I am confident it will be John McCain taking the oath of office. But just for the sake of answering your question, I will probably remain in the political realm working with the Veterans Administration helping our veterans and advocating for their benefits and helping them transition from active duty to civilian life.

**********

I’d like to thank Deborah for her participation. As she noted in one of her answers, there’s always a demand to place a stop on her route and I made my play for a stop here on the Eastern Shore – however, they revised the tour slightly to exclude a couple Virginia stops and she’ll arrive in Washington from the north.

I’ll leave you with her closing comment from the correspondence she sent to answer my question:

I would love to try to get to the Eastern Shore of Maryland to see you and your great supporters, hopefully we can work that out.

Thank you again for your interest in Our Country Deserves Better, because it does, it deserves John McCain and Sarah Palin.

Semper Fi

No, Deborah, thank you, and best of luck for your tour and your family.

One set of answers to my Ten Questions

Yesterday I received my first answers to my Ten Questions that I posted last month, having sent the questions to most of the First District Congressional participants [except the late-arriving E.J. Pipkin, who can answer them after he reads them here, just e-mail replies to ttownjotes (at) yahoo.com.] However, these particular answers aren’t from a participant in our local election.

Instead, they come from a gentleman who’s running in Maryland’s Fourth District race, a district currently represented by Rep. Albert Wynn. His name is Michael Starkman and he’s one of the four Republicans vying for that seat. Part of his campaign site tells about his interesting background, particularly his faith.

Some may ask why I’m printing his answers despite my base on the Eastern Shore, far from the Montgomery/PG County area District 4 lies in, and I have three reasons. First of all, Mr. Starkman found my website, introduced himself, and willingly answered the questions when the opportunity was extended to him.

Secondly I’ll crosspost this article as a contributor to Red Maryland, which is read by people all over the state, including his district.

Third and most importantly, it shows that someone is interested in having a campaign that’s based on the issues. Perhaps another aspirant from that district – or any other – will see that someone is willing to answer these questions that I think are tough but fair.

Here’s how Michael Moshe Starkman (which is how his name will appear on the ballot) answered the Ten Questions. As in past Ten Questions practice, I do not edit the remarks so any misspellings, poor grammar, and the like is reflected in the answers. They are in standard type with my questions in italics.

Right after the 9/11 attacks President Bush noted that the retaliatory fighting soon to ensue would be a long-term effort. Since then the focus has been on military targets in Iraq and Afghanistan. How do you best feel we can achieve victory in this effort?

I believe victory will be achieved through redoubling efforts to engage allied countries; strengthening our human intelligence network in the Middle East; and demonstrating early, decisive advances against known terrorist entities.

Last year Congress passed a measure intended to begin construction of a security fence along the Mexican border. More recently the immigration bill that some decried as amnesty failed to attain cloture in the Senate. If you’re elected do you feel we should pursue border security first or deal with those illegal immigrants already here?

Fence first, there is no question.

While an energy bill (HR 6) passed through Congress this year it did little to impact gasoline prices. Renewable energy is a sound long-term goal, but reality is that we’re decades away from those sources being the mainstay of our energy use. For the short- to medium-term, what steps do you feel we should undertake to cut our dependence on foreign oil sources?

Identifying domestic energy sources and encouraging citizens to utilize energy efficient tools will begin the path towards independence. Energy is an issue that I am currently researching and retain the right to substantially revise my opinion upon further consideration.

While the current Congressional majority had as part of their 2006 campaign the promise to eliminate the “culture of corruption”, the reality has been that members of both parties have been caught in illegal or at least dubious actions since the 110th Congress got underway back in January. What reforms would you like to see enacted in the 111th Congress to make it more accountable to the voters?

I would like to see greater transparency in spending and a drastic reduction, if not altogether elimination, of earmarked projects.

In 2006 then-Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney signed a bill into law mandating the state’s residents carry health insurance of some sort, whether through their employer, privately, or via the state. Would you support a similar program as a federal initiative, leave it up to the states, or come up with another system – and why?

I believe diversity is the single best friend of innovation and civil development. In this light I would leave the matter of health insurance to the states so as to determine what is best for their respective inhabitants.

As you know the 2001/2003 tax cuts enacted by President Bush face expiration in 2010. While the debate has gone on whether these cuts have helped the economy or simply fattened the wallets of “the rich,” another alternative has been suggested, one of a national sales tax popularly known as the “FairTax.” Another idea is to simplify the tax system by going to a flat tax with few deductions allowed. Where do you stand on how the government collects its revenue?

I believe our tax codes are convoluted and support reforming federal tax collection. I support the FairTax initiative but would consider moving to a flat tax as an improvement as well.

Every month the U.S. adds a little bit to its trade deficit, particularly with China. Further, a common complaint I have (and I’m sure many others echo) is that you can’t find things that are made in the U.S.A. anymore. How do you think the trade imbalance should be straightened out and what role do you see Congress having in restoring a manufacturing base to our shores?

Congress retains the right to establish tariffs and other means of creating an economic environment that is favorable to US manufacturing. More than economics, the US-China trade deficit subjects the United States to considerable national security risks. China, who has been a hostile state towards the US, is the not type of government we want to see rise to the level of world power.

Much wailing and gnashing of teeth among those in local and state government occurs when they have to deal with the dreaded “unfunded federal mandate.” Where do you see the line being between the rights of individual states and the federal government – would you seek to fairly fund the mandate or reduce the burden on the state by eliminating it?

I believe the current engagements of federal government have extended past the original intentions of the Constitution. I advocate for a significant reduction in federal government and would oppose most legislation that enforces uniform policy on a citizen’s county or state.

The recent Minnesota bridge collapse has placed our nation’s infrastructure front and center as a political issue. Some say higher gasoline taxes are the answer, but critics of that argument charge that reallocating the federal share toward highways and away from mass transit and bikeways would eliminate the need for an increase. What would be your order of priority for transportation and infrastructure spending?

The safety and welfare of the US citizen is the premier concern for US government at every level. I believe that through better discretion, a reduction of wasteful spending, and prioritizing projects, the federal government is capable of meeting the needs of the country without further raising taxes.

Easiest question with the shortest answer. If you were to choose three Presidential candidates you’d prefer to work with in the 111th Congress who would they be?

It would be “the most conservative one”, “the one strongest on defense”, and “the one with strong faith and integrity”.

So this is how the game is played, politicians. Who has the guts to be the next to answer these questions? I’ve had a couple people promise me to do so but no takers until Michael became the guinea pig. For that I thank him and encourage people to look into his campaign further through his website.

It’s a good post for a milestone one, this is item number 750 on monoblogue. By the way, tomorrow should also be a milestone for my cohorts at Red Maryland, they’re approaching their 1000th post.

Crossposted on Red Maryland.

Ten questions everyone should ask their Congressional candidates

A little over two months ago, I sent the following list of questions to many of those who seek the Congressional seat here in the First Congressional District. The others should have received a copy in their e-mail a month or so ago. But even after I called them all out, I’ve still received only silence.

With that in mind, I’m going to release them now in the hopes that more people call on these candidates (and those from any other district, they’re not written to be specific to mine) to answer what I consider tough questions that provoke thought and seek specific solutions to issues we all face. All I ask is that if you use them on your site, give me credit (Michael Swartz at www.monoblogue.us) A link would be nice, too.

So here goes, questions the candidates are afraid to answer:

1. Right after the 9/11 attacks President Bush noted that the retaliatory fighting soon to ensue would be a long-term effort. Since then the focus has been on military targets in Iraq and Afghanistan. How do you best feel we can achieve victory in this effort?
2. Last year Congress passed a measure intended to begin construction of a security fence along the Mexican border. More recently the immigration bill that some decried as amnesty failed to attain cloture in the Senate. If you’re elected do you feel we should pursue border security first or deal with those illegal immigrants already here?
3. While an energy bill (HR 6) passed through Congress this year it did little to impact gasoline prices. Renewable energy is a sound long-term goal, but reality is that we’re decades away from those sources being the mainstay of our energy use. For the short- to medium-term, what steps do you feel we should undertake to cut our dependence on foreign oil sources?
4. While the current Congressional majority had as part of their 2006 campaign the promise to eliminate the “culture of corruption”, the reality has been that members of both parties have been caught in illegal or at least dubious actions since the 110th Congress got underway back in January. What reforms would you like to see enacted in the 111th Congress to make it more accountable to the voters?
5. In 2006 then-Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney signed a bill into law mandating the state’s residents carry health insurance of some sort, whether through their employer, privately, or via the state. Would you support a similar program as a federal initiative, leave it up to the states, or come up with another system – and why?
6. As you know the 2001/2003 tax cuts enacted by President Bush face expiration in 2010. While the debate has gone on whether these cuts have helped the economy or simply fattened the wallets of “the rich,” another alternative has been suggested, one of a national sales tax popularly known as the “FairTax.” Another idea is to simplify the tax system by going to a flat tax with few deductions allowed. Where do you stand on how the government collects its revenue?
7. Every month the U.S. adds a little bit to its trade deficit, particularly with China. Further, a common complaint I have (and I’m sure many others echo) is that you can’t find things that are made in the U.S.A. anymore. How do you think the trade imbalance should be straightened out and what role do you see Congress having in restoring a manufacturing base to our shores?
8. Much wailing and gnashing of teeth among those in local and state government occurs when they have to deal with the dreaded “unfunded federal mandate.” Where do you see the line being between the rights of individual states and the federal government – would you seek to fairly fund the mandate or reduce the burden on the state by eliminating it?
9. The recent Minnesota bridge collapse has placed our nation’s infrastructure front and center as a political issue. Some say higher gasoline taxes are the answer, but critics of that argument charge that reallocating the federal share toward highways and away from mass transit and bikeways would eliminate the need for an increase. What would be your order of priority for transportation and infrastructure spending?
10. Easiest question with the shortest answer. If you were to choose three Presidential candidates you’d prefer to work with in the 111th Congress who would they be?

It’ll be interesting to see just how far this goes, won’t it? I’m not holding my breath on getting answers, but maybe if enough people with enough pull ask the questions we may get somewhere. How about basing your political contributions on getting answers? That’s a thought – we all know money talks and you-know-what walks!

Crossposted on Red Maryland.

10 questions somewhere else

I KNEW I should have put a copyright on the phrase. Oh well. It’s still a good idea and I just might have to try this version, despite my face for radio and voice for the print medium.

In this case, the hat tip goes to Michelle Malkin.

Still no answers to my e-mail version for the Congressmen though.

It’s time for some answers

One thing I strive to do with monoblogue is inform the voters of my area about those who they’ll be asked to select from in upcoming elections. As I’ve often said I hate politics based on sound bites and thirty second commercials.

Back on September 8, I sent out what I call the Ten Questions to five of the candidates who are seeking the First District Congressional seat. Incumbent Wayne Gilchrest and challengers Andy Harris, Joe Arminio, John Leo Walter, and Christopher Robinson were all sent a copy based on contact addresses from their website. (There was no e-mail contact noted on Frank Kratovil’s and to be quite honest it slipped my mind until just now to send him a snail-mail copy. If a Kratovil supporter wants to help me out and supply an e-mail contact that would be fine too.) Maybe it’s just another survey to them but it’s citizen journalism in my eyes and I had multipartisan participation last year when I did this for U.S. Senate and local General Assembly candidates.

The idea behind the Ten Questions was to help the voters get a feel for how they’d approach a number of issues I and most likely many others in the First District deemed of great importance. In no particular order my questions ask about energy independence, taxation, infrastructure spending, illegal immigration, health insurance, federal mandates, the Long War, ethics in Congress, trade and job creation, and who they’d prefer to work with in the Oval Office. I thought I put together a broad spectrum of questions that sought basic answers on how these aspirants thought best to attack these issues – unfortunately thus far I’ve been met with nothing but silence.

The goal of this was to devote a particular post to each candidate’s answers, with a small amount of editorial content at the end. (You can find examples from last year under the “Ten Questions” category along the left-hand column.) Then around the first of February, the idea was to have separate debate-style posts for the Republicans and Democrats so voters in each party could compare and contrast their views, informing the electiongoing public where these men stand. And it’s free publicity for the campaigns.

However, 37 days have elapsed since I sent out these questions and I have zero responses. It makes me wonder what all of the candidates are trying to hide (excepting Mr. Kratovil, of course.) Certainly some have their hot-button issues on their websites, but this exercise was intended to force some more specifics out of them. However, they can answer with six paragraphs or six words, it’s their choice.

Maybe it’s time for my loyal readers to put some pressure on their candidates to answer my questions. I tried to write them in a balanced manner and present some alternatives because I knew the intended targets had viewpoints all over the political spectrum. Also, if some of my non-local readership would like to ask these questions of their own candidates, let me know and I’ll send you a copy for your use (with proper source credit, of course.)

Otherwise, I’m just left to wonder why they’re afraid to answer the questions of one First District voter. Personally, I feel that if they don’t want to answer my questions then just say so – while I’m not going to be happy about that at least I have a response to judge them by. But I reserve the right to let my readers know of their recalcitrance.

Ten questions for…Marc Kilmer of the Maryland Public Policy Institute

My “Ten Questions” series returns with a twist.

Believe it or not, in less than two weeks (January 10) the sausage-grinding begins in Annapolis as the 2007 General Assembly gets underway. With that in mind, I went to a local man who’s quite familiar with many of the issues that will face our state in this and future years. But he’s not an elected official.

Regular readers of monoblogue may recognize the Maryland Public Policy Institute as an organization whose views I amplify from time to time. With a mission to “formulate and promote public policies at all levels of government based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, and civil society” it’s more often than not that I agree with their stances. So, I’m pleased to have discussed the issues in a recent e-mail interview with Marc Kilmer, who is a local resident and Senior Fellow with the MPPI. Mr. Kilmer is also a Research Associate for the Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions, which was a happy accident since I had a nodding familiarity with that group from my native state.

While Marc did want me to note that his opinions are not necessarily those of MPPI, I’m quite happy with how the interview came out and think local readers will be as well.

monoblogue: I’d like to start out by asking a little bit about your background and how you came to be involved in the Maryland Public Policy Institute.

Kilmer: I was raised in Idaho and when I graduated from Hillsdale College in Michigan I moved to Washington, D.C. While there I worked for Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) for four years and was then the Executive Director/CEO of a trade association representing nonprofit providers of services for people with disabilities (organizations similar to Dove Pointe and Lower Shore Enterprises here in Salisbury). My wife took a job in Salisbury so we moved here a year ago. At the same time, a friend working for the Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions, a free market think tank in Ohio, was looking for someone to take over one of his projects. Since I was looking for work, I began contracting with the Buckeye Institute to write on technology issues. After a few months I looked around for similar think tanks in Maryland and found the Maryland Public Policy Institute. I contacted Christopher Summers, the President, and offered my services, and I’ve been doing health care work with the MPPI since July.

monoblogue: It sounds like you’re a fairly ambitious entrepreneurial type. Having lived in and studied about several different places (including my native state of Ohio), how would you say Maryland’s business climate compares as far as taxation, red tape, etc. to other areas you’re familiar with?

Kilmer: I’ve really only studied the business climate of one other state (Ohio) and Maryland generally comes off better. That may be a little surprising, since Ohio is a Republican state (the recent election of a Democratic governor notwithstanding) and Maryland is quite liberal, but I guess it goes to show that poor economic ideas are not confined to either party.

Ohio, for instance, ranks 47 on the Tax Foundation’s business tax climate index. Maryland ranks 22. Of course, that isn’t all that great when you look at Maryland’s neighbors, which all rank higher (Delaware is at 8, Virginia is at 19, and Pennsylvania is at 16). The state could certainly do better by lowering taxes and easing some economic restrictions.

I am troubled, however, at the increasingly business-unfriendly actions being taken by the General Assembly. From raising the minimum wage to passing the “Wal Mart bill,” it seems that our legislators are increasingly enamored with passing legislation that is completely symbolic in terms of “solving” a problem and yet is quite destructive for certain businesses. While I am not generally in favor of imposing heavy burdens on business, at least if a legislature is going to do this, these burdens should be an effective remedy to some problem. Our General Assembly, however, does not seem to feel the same way.

Although I am disturbed by the actions of the General Assembly, I am more concerned about anti-business action on the county level. The slow growth agenda so popular here in Wicomico County is much more destructive to business than almost anything the General Assembly is contemplating. Although it is packaged in nice rhetoric, the heart of the slow growth movement is the desire by one group of citizens to tell another group how it may use its private property. Meddling in the choices of others through restrictive zoning, impact fees, and the other tools of “smart growth” is much more destructive to the economic life of Wicomico County than a higher minimum wage or the Wal Mart bill.

monoblogue: I tend to agree with you regarding growth in general, but those who favor slower growth or a complete moratorium on it bring up a valid point in claiming that when growth is too fast or poorly planned it creates large problems because infrastructure isn’t necessarily improved at the same time.

With the state looking at huge budgetary mandates outside the realm of capital spending, what steps (if any) would you advocate the state take to assist the local counties, or is this better left on a local level?

Kilmer: To continue the digression on smart growth policies, I agree that infrastructure needs to keep up with growth. I have issues with people who use terms like “make growth pay for itself,” and then try to increase taxes and fees on developers and newcomers. Growth does pay for itself — new residents pay the same taxes as the old residents.

Governments should use this increase in revenue to pay for new or improved infrastructure and not try to increase the tax burden on new arrivals. Furthermore, everyone uses the new infrastructure, so trying to force only newcomers (or people who buy new houses) to pay for it is unfair.

I could go on, but I should probably get to your question:

As far as mandates, I’m not completely familiar with all the mandates imposed on local governments, so I’ll have to be general. To meet state mandates, I’m not sure what needs to be done at the state level except ensure the state is very careful to impose mandates quite narrowly and give counties the freedom to meet these mandates in different ways. At the local level, however, we need elected officials who are willing to look at innovative ideas that can help local government complete its necessary functions as well as use tax dollars most efficiently. For example, with education our county leaders should consider privatization efforts as well as public-private partnerships. Counties have a lot of authority to experiment, but many county leaders seem to think the only way to do things is how they’ve been done for the past thirty or forty years. That needs to change.

monoblogue: As we speak of change, it has to be noted that with an entirely new leadership at the top of state government (new governor, LG, comptroller, and attorney general) it’s obvious state priorities would change. In the case of MPPI, you’re losing a govenor who I’m assuming was amenable to your interests and getting one who’s likely more hostile. Will this entail a strategy shift for the group, or is it still too early to tell?

Kilmer: I can’t really speak on that, since I wasn’t working with MPPI long enough to get a feel for how it interacted with the Ehrlich administration nor can I speak on its strategy for the future.

monoblogue: Fair enough. Let’s shift gears a little bit here. As I posted a few weeks back, you had an enlightening town hall meeting in Salisbury (one of a series across the state.) The predominant subject of discussion was possible remedies to the problem Maryland has with health care coverage. Last summer Massachusetts passed a measure mandating health insurance coverage for all state residents. Could you share with the readers some of MPPI’s reaction to this idea being translated into Maryland?

Kilmer: While I don’t necessarily speak for MPPI, I do see some troubling aspects of the Massachusetts health plan. I’m even further troubled that in Maryland we have the Chamber of Commerce joining with the liberal advocacy group Health Care for All to push aspects of this plan in the next session of the General Assembly. I’m even more troubled that this plan is being embraced by so many Republicans, who ostensibly hail from the “free market” party.

The key of the Massachusetts plan is that individuals are mandated to purchase health insurance. Individual mandates are flawed on both theoretical and practical levels. On the theoretical level, I do not support the notion that the government should force someone to buy any product as a prerequisite for living in the state. Until Massachusetts enacted such a mandate, no state in the U.S. had done this.

On the practical level, there is no way to enforce this mandate. In Massachusetts the state is doing so by forcing people to report their insurance number on their taxes. The problem is that tax compliance is completely voluntary for most people. Government does not check the accuracy of tax returns for the vast majority of filers. It, on the whole, accepts what taxpayers say as true. In order to ensure that people are not lying about having health insurance, the government would be forced to greatly expand its enforcement efforts. And, of course, what about the low-income residents who do not pay taxes? How will the mandate on them be enforced?

So while using tax returns to enforce such a mandate is deeply flawed, it is unclear what other method would produce the necessary results while avoiding massive government intrusion into the life of average citizens.

Some may be able to justify this expansion of government power because they see the problem of the uninsured as so dire. Well, the facts are that the problem of people not having health insurance isn’t all that huge. Only 16% of Marylanders lack insurance. 61% of them have incomes above the federal poverty level. 40% have incomes twice the federal poverty level. And, if Maryland follows national trends, between half and two-thirds only lack insurance for part of the year. There really is only a small percentage of very poor people who don’t have insurance in the state. The rest either lack insurance for only part of the year (likely due to changing jobs) or have enough money to afford it if they really needed it. There is no need to enact unprecedented government mandates and dramatically expand its power over everyone in the state to address the problem of such a small percentage of Marylanders.

monoblogue: Unfortunately, government expanding mandates seems to be the way of the world. Another area this applies to is the educational arena. I know MPPI has done a huge amount of work in supporting school choice, so what’s the best argument to use against one who contends that the public schools are good enough for our children?

Kilmer: School choice is important because different kids have different needs. Public schools are not set up to meet every child’s needs. Some kids need more discipline, some need a more rigorous academic schedule, some need special help, etc. Giving parents a voucher to send their children to schools that meet those children’s needs just makes sense. There is nothing logical about the government deciding that if you have a certain zip code your kids must go to a certain school. Schools should be freely chosen by the parent, not forced on children by the government.

The one thing we often hear in opposition to school choice is that we should focus on improving public schools instead of taking resources away from “underfunded” public schools via vouchers (it’s a whole other debate about whether public education is “underfunded” or whether more funding increases educational results, so I’ll leave that alone). We have been trying to solve the problem of public schools for decades, and there is scant evidence that these reforms have worked very well. Part of that is due to the opposition of teachers’ unions to any real education reform. While these unions hide behind the rhetoric of helping “the children,” people need to realize that teachers’ unions represent teachers, not children. The interest of teachers comes first to them, and their interests do not always coincide with what is best for kids. So reforms like making it easier to fire bad teachers or instituting merit pay for good teachers — commonsense reforms to help incentivize better education — are strongly opposed by teachers unions.

Instead of holding children hostage to continual social experiments to “fix” public schools, it makes sense to let parents who are dissatisfied with these schools to have a voucher to explore an alternative educational situation. That gives parents an opportunity for a better education for their children, but it also gives public schools an incentive to improve. Look at Ohio, which has fairly vigorous school choice in terms of charter schools and vouchers. Public schools are losing students and money, and these schools are responding by improving their programs. The only people who don’t benefit from school choice are bad teachers and bad school administrators.

monoblogue: Given that, would it be a fair statement to continue in that vein and infer that MPPI isn’t too crazy about the Thornton funding mandates in Maryland, or, to use another example I’m familiar with and you might be as well, the huge capital outlay the state of Ohio has undertaken over the last decade to build and rehab all of the state’s K-12 schools?

Kilmer: In MPPI’s Guide to the Issues, Karin Flynn and Tori Gorman did a chapter on Maryland’s budget problems. Part of that was devoted to education spending. In it they noted that since the Thornton Commissions recommendations were codified (more funding that was supposed to be followed by an increase in student achievement), we have seen more funding going to Maryland schools but not similar rise in achievement. There has been some increase in the Maryland School Assessment test scores since 2003, but the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) test has shown no similar trend. As they point out, “. . . by 2005 (the most recent year for which education test scores are available), the state’s education budget had increased 25%, but by all measures [the state] has not seen a concomitant increase in academic achievement.”

monoblogue: I’m pretty familiar with the book and MPPI should be commended for putting it out to contribute to the discussion of issues facing Maryland. But one topic that’s not covered and is going to be a hot-button issue right off the top is expanding the state’s gambling industry by allowing slot machines at the horse racing tracks (and possibly other locations.) Does MPPI have a stance on the issue; or, if they don’t, as an MPPI contributor where do you stand on it?

Kilmer: MPPI doesn’t take stances on issues — it gives scholars a forum to present research and analysis about public policy. However, back in 2003 Tom Firey and Jeffrey Hook did an analysis of this issue for MPPI. Their conclusion: “if the state elects to adopt slot gaming, it should auction off a small number of slot operating licenses via a ‘Reverse Auction’ whereby potential private sector operators (including state horse tracks) vie for the licenses by offering to retain the smallest portion of the win. Under that design, our modeling shows the state would receive $1.6 billion annually from gaming.”

As far as whether the state should allow slot machines, my personal opinion is that it should. The state is obviously not opposed to gambling. It runs a lottery, after all. If the government can run a gambling enterprise, why prevent private businesses from doing the same? And why force people to drive to Delaware or Atlantic City or West Virginia to gamble? People want to gamble. I say let them.

monoblogue: By your answer to that question, you sort of half-answered my next one, so I’ll ask it this way. Because MPPI isn’t a lobbying organization per se, it doesn’t sound like they’re in the business of supporting candidates or advocating the General Assembly directly for pet issues. Would this mean that the business side of MPPI pretty much depends on book sales and contributions with its overhead just being salaries, printing costs, and keeping the lights on?

Kilmer: MPPI isn’t a political advocacy group or lobbying organization. It does not support candidates or bills before the General Assembly. It’s a think tank that is set up to, as its mission statement says, “provide accurate and timely research analysis of Maryland policy issues and market these findings to key primary audiences.” It does so from a free market perspective, but it does not follow any political party line.

As far as its business side, the president of MPPI, Christopher Summers, could answer that better than I can. In most think tanks, there is something of a wall between the analysts and the business side in order to help preserve the independence of analysts. However, I think MPPI’s funding comes from contributions, foundation grants, and book sales. As for overhead, I think you described it pretty well.

monoblogue: Two final questions. I don’t know how successful your pre-session forums were back in October, but will these become an annual event? And are there plans to publish the Guide to the Issues on an annual basis?

Kilmer: The town hall meetings will not be an annual event (although MPPI does hold other forums) and the Guide to the Issues is published every four years.

******************************

I hope readers found this as enlightening as I did. I truly enjoyed doing this format as opposed to my Ten Questions that were aimed at candidates because I got to cover the topics I wanted to hit on but the interchange also suggested additional lines of inquiry that I didn’t think of originally.

For further information on the Maryland Public Policy Institute, their website is www.mdpolicy.org. I highly recommend a visit, and even more highly recommend placing your e-mail address on their mailing list for information on their events and press citations (as mine is.) They’re going to be a busy crew over the next several years as our state faces a number of difficult decisions.

And once again I’d like to thank Marc for taking time out of his work over several days for his participation.

Ten questions returns!

Stay tuned for a post next year (or to be more precise tomorrow.) Ten Questions return with a few new wrinkles.

Nice tease, huh?

On District 38 races

Gee, that was quicker than I thought. This post is very simple because:

Our incumbent Senator is unopposed.

The incumbent Delegate from District 38A, Page Elmore, really doesn’t go in-depth on any issues on his website, and opponent Patrick Armstrong was kind enough to answer my Ten Questions. Because District 38A is first on my list, Armstrong gets the catbird seat.

Michael James in District 38B has a similar advantage. I did find a little bit on his GOP counterpart Bonnie Luna but not a whole lot besides generalities from the incumbents Norm Conway and Jim Mathias.

So this will be relatively brief, and like I did for District 37, I’ll put in something at the end about the NAACP forum and what was said there. And once again, I skip Question #9 on early voting since the point’s now moot.

Question #1:

Some of you participated in the recent special session to modify the large rate hikes that were to be enacted by Baltimore Gas & Electric. However, our electrical rates from the local Eastern Shore suppliers went unchanged. With that in mind, would you be more in favor of a total repeal of the 1999 deregulation laws, or do you believe the concept is sound and only needs a few guardrails and rate safeguards?

Armstrong: We have seen the effects of deregulation of energy across the country over the past several years and those who pay the bills have felt the pain in their wallet. I believe that deregulation was a mistake made several years ago by the General Assembly and I favor repealing that decision. I believe that energy is such a vital service that we must not allow shifting markets and unforeseeable problems to stand in the way of access to electricity. As it stands today I support efforts to reduce the strain of increased electricity costs to families on the shore. I do not believe re-regulation is likely to occur but I would support it and encourage it if elected. I also would have worked with the General Assembly and the Governor to address the rate hikes taking effect from Delmarva Power. We need a new leader who will stand up and give the lower shore a voice in the legislature.

James: I am in favor of deregulation as long as there is an adequate climate for competition. Obviously the utilities are essential to our society, so if there was a catastrophe or an accumulation of issues that forced costs to rise to the levels that harm the economy or create an unusual burden on our citizens, the Government would need to intervene until the market stabilized. The 1999 deregulation was odd in that it was accompanied by 1993 level price caps. The General Assembly should have known there would be unusually high increases once the caps expired. Instead, they ignored the issue until it could be called a “crisis”. They then used the PSE and its chairman Eastern Shoreman Ken Schisler as a scapegoat to divert attention away from their own mistakes.

Luna: According to Bonnie, “In 1999, the majority of the legislature voted to cap electric rates for seven years. While energy costs for everyone else continued to rise, our electric bills were kept artificially low. When it finally came time to lift the cap, that same majority denounced the Governor and the Public Service Commission for allowing reality to intrude on their fantasy world. They even passed legislation to fire the Commission members, and overrode the Governor’s veto of it. That measure is now in the courts. Any guess as to whether it will survive judicial review? If the majority had spent as much effort dealing with energy cost issues as it did finding ways to blame others, we would surely have found better ways to manage the change to market-based electric rates.”

Question #2:

In the last two sessions of the General Assembly, the issue of health insurance and who pays for it has taken center stage. (Examples: the Fair Share Health Care Act and its proposed expansion with last year’s HB1510, which was sponsored by Delegate Hubbard and defeated in committee.) Recently the state of Massachusetts adopted legislation effective in 2007 mandating all residents secure coverage under some public or private health insurance plan or face a financial penalty. Do you see this concept as an idea Maryland should adopt?

Armstrong: I think this idea should be given serious consideration by the General Assembly. While the infrastructure is not yet in place to a point where we can force individuals to purchase health care it is possible to however to work towards this goal. The high cost to Maryland taxpayers paying for emergency room visits by those who have no insurance must be addressed. This is an issue I feel should be taken up the legislature and I would support it with the proper safeguards in place to protect working families and the working poor.

James: NO. That would be too close to a nanny state.

Luna: Rather than focus on the insurance issue, Bonnie chooses a different approach: “Health care costs continue to rise. You’d think there was plenty of money to be made in it. So why are doctors retiring early, cutting services or just quitting altogether? One big reason is the cost of liability insurance. Doctors who commit malpractice should be held accountable. Patients who are hurt by negligence or incompetence should be compensated. But frivolous lawsuits and sky-high jury awards have taken their toll on the health care industry. Insurers have raised premiums, and doctors who are merely accused of malpractice find their rates going through the roof…A solution to this is tort reform. While making sure those who are harmed are made whole, it would limit the wasteful lawsuits that drive up the costs for all of us. We pay for ridiculous legal judgments through higher fees and less available health care. It’s time to reform our tort laws.”

Mathias: Jim briefly states he wants to have a health care summit and work on “practical and financial solutions to the concerns facing us all.”

Conway: Norm claims on his site that, “Affordable health care should be available to all Marylanders. Norm Conway led the fight to boost funding for Medicare and children’s health programs by $220 million so more seniors and families can get the coverage they need. He supported a bill to recruit and retain doctors; so that when you get sick you will not have to wait as long to see your doctor.”

Question #3:

Within our area, Somerset County traditionally has among the highest unemployment rates in the state of Maryland. In every election, well-paying jobs and how to secure them is an issue. If you are elected to the General Assembly, what policies would you favor commencing or retaining in an attempt to create or lure good-paying jobs for the Eastern Shore?

Armstrong: I believe the eastern shore can thrive with the growth we are already seeing and that we can manage that growth to fit within our communities. I support business incentives to draw companies to the shore. I support easier access to community colleges and universities for our residents who wish to study a trade. I support an increase in job fairs and mobile job recruitment vans. I would support legislation to encourage businesses to invest in the shore and create infrastructure capable of allowing businesses to expand onto the shore. I believe growth and expansion must be managed keeping in mind the way of life of the communities involved and ensuring proper environmental protections as we try to bring new jobs and smart growth to the lower eastern shore.

Mathias: Jim favors “Solidly supporting 21st century technology, continuing education programs, and (a) pro-business platform to create and encourage good paying jobs for the citizens of our district.”

James: We need to work independently on the shore as well as work with The Maryland Department of Business and Economic Development to attract businesses to our area. I support tax incentives, tax credits for training and state grants for the county economic development efforts. I believe all three counties in District 38 have a lot to offer potential employers. I believe by working jointly the three counties have a story to tell and resources to market to future employers. The reason so many people want to relocate here are the same reasons this region would be attractive to growing companies.

Question #4:

This year a state takeover of several failing Baltimore City Schools was thwarted by the General Assembly overriding an earlier veto of a bill Governor Ehrlich rejected. A few states, though, are attempting to remove themselves from the federal “No Child Left Behind” regulations for various reasons, even at the risk of losing federal dollars. Do you support the federal NCLB mandates or do you feel the state could and should go without the additional restrictions (and funding)?

Armstrong: Today I believe that Maryland should stick with NCLB and the federal funding it brings. As for he legislation passed by Congress, NCLB is a lousy legal mess. The problems it creates for teachers and the roadblocks it puts into place for students are numerous. While many provisions are important for the future of our schools the majority of NCLB has failed our children and our schools, as many states and school boards across the country and in Maryland have discovered. This in mind, Maryland is currently in compliance with NCLB and I believe that we should continue to accept the federal assistance for our schools at this time. As for Baltimore, if a failing school cannot be remedied by the local jurisdiction than it should be taken over by the State until a solution can be found. No school in Maryland should be allowed to fall below our highest expectations for performance and quality education.

James: I support NCLB.

Question #5:

In the 2006 General Assembly, the Blackwater development in Cambridge became a contentious issue which led to legislation that was eventually defeated. However, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation has continued to apply pressure to legislators and encourage voters to speak out on what they perceive as a threat to bay water quality. On the other hand, the city of Cambridge sees Blackwater as a needed shot in the arm for its economy and tax base. Where do you see yourself on this issue and related development matters?

Armstrong: I believe that development can occur without serious damage to the bay and surrounding waters. Unfortunately, at this time we do not have in place the proper laws requiring strict environmental protections from runoff and waste disposal. I believe that Blackwater is a dangerous development plan and should be held to much stricter environmental protections than those that are currently in place. As for the lower shore, we understand the importance of the Bay’s health and we understand the need for growth. I propose we hold developers accountable for protecting the bay as they build and ensure that every possible safeguard is in place to prevent further devastation to the waters around the eastern shore.

Conway: Norm states that, “Farming is a way of life on the Eastern Shore yet farms are under pressure by development and the changing economy. Norm Conway brought farmers and environmentalists together to tackle this issue. He turned their ideas into a landmark bill to help farmers stay in business and promote agricultural practices that will help clean up the Chesapeake Bay.”

James: From my view, the Blackwater Developers played by the rules, followed the permit process, and communicated with state and local officials from the beginning. It may have helped their cause to do more in the beginning to reach out early to their future opponents, but that is just speculation.

I feel the state government plays a needed role in protecting our environment and should monitor development to ensure that the benefits are not outweighed by problems, current or future. The state should stay active in development matters, however I feel it is unfair to legislate retroactively.

Luna: In her campaign announcement, Bonnie remarked, “we need to be wise about
how we develop our land. Should we stop development? No! Should we restrict economic growth? Of course not. We just need to do it in a way that makes sense. We need to do it in balance. We don’t need to deprive land owners of the value of their property, we can simply manage growth in ways that minimize the impact on the land. We can have new businesses that don’t pollute and we can protect our natural resources which are what make this the ‘Land of Pleasant Living.’ As Christine Todd Whitman, former Administrator of EPA, said, ‘It’s not about having a clean environment or a healthy economy. It must be about having both.’…We can do it, not by stopping change, but by managing the process by which we change.”

Mathias: In brief, his goal is, “Responsibly protecting our environment to preserve our legacy and enable future generations to enjoy the bounty of our area.”

Question #6:

The last two sessions of the General Assembly have seen an inordinate amount of time spent dealing with personnel matters and political appointments. Some have claimed this as a usurpation of power properly belonging to the executive branch (governor’s office) but others see this as a proper extension of the duties of the General Assembly. In your opinion, has the General Assembly gone too far or does the Governor still wield too much power when it comes to personnel decisions?

Armstrong: Members of both political parties can agree that political establishments in Maryland have too much power. I believe that removing some of the more basic appointment decisions from the governor is a reasonable step to take. Our executive branch has more power than any other in the country and by reducing that power we can be sure that appointments are keep in check now and in future administrations of either political party.

James: The General Assembly has gone too far. They have now spent over $1,000,000.00 on their politically motivated hearings.

Question #7:

For the Eastern Shore, transportation can sometimes be tricky because of Bay Bridge traffic and traveling to and from the beach on a summer weekend can be a real headache. Solutions advocated range from another Bay Bridge to a ferry service to a light rail system, and as always people want the existing highways improved. What transportation improvements do you feel are a priority for the Eastern Shore, and how would you pay for them?

Armstrong: I believe that we must focus on improving the highways we have and in looking into the addition of a new Bay Bridge. If it were to be deemed economically feasible for a ferry or light rail crossing to succeed than I would strongly support both measures in an attempt to lessen the stress of traffic on our highways and the Bay Bridge. Were a light rail system to be in place to bring residents from Baltimore and neighboring counties all the way to Ocean City than I would see that as a major step toward reducing highway traffic, environmental impacts, and reducing the strain on our oil supply. If this would be used by residents I would strongly support such a project as would I support a ferry crossing.

Mathias: According to his website, he’ll focus on improving Maryland Route 589, as well as U.S. Routes 13 and 113.

James: With the growth we have seen in recent years, there are several needed road projects. Dualization of 113 and 589 are very important, as are many other projects. As a state delegate from 38B, I will fight for our fair share of transportation funding. This will be important due to the large sums of money the metropolitan counties will be looking for to fund the ICC and mass transit.

Question #8:

Drugs and gangs are a growing problem on the Eastern Shore. The local authorities do their best but we’re a long way from fighting the problem successfully. In what ways do you think the General Assembly can best address this crime issue, and what tools do you see working best?

Armstrong: Gang violence starts small and spreads. We need a strong crack down on gang violence in Maryland. The General Assembly needs to consider increasing state funding for police in areas where a limited tax base cannot afford the necessary improvements to police forces. The lower shore needs such support to curb gangs and violence. The General Assembly must also stand strong in supporting after school programs on the lower shore. Nothing has proven more effective in stopping gang proliferation than healthy after school programs for kids in danger of falling through the cracks.

James: Working to stop the flow of drugs is the most important part of reducing gang related crime. The drugs are the financial lifeline that keeps the most violent criminals in business. I am in favor of increasing funding for undercover agents and officers as well as increasing money for training to ensure our law enforcement agencies stay current and have the most capable personnel as possible, and technology that is superior to that of the criminals.

Question #10:

It is almost a certainty at this early date that either Governor Ehrlich will be reelected or Baltimore mayor Martin O’Malley will take over the governor’s chair early next year. If you are elected to the General Assembly and the representative of the opposite party (i.e. a Democrat would be working with Governor Ehrlich, a Republican would be working with Mayor O’Malley) wins election, with what issues do you see being able to find common ground with the governor?

Armstrong: I have supported Governor Ehrlich’s budget plans and his fiscal responsibility. I support his dedication to stem cell research. I also support limited slot machine usage at certain Maryland racetracks under strict containment conditions. I believe working with either Bob Ehrlich or Martin O’Malley will involve great cooperation and a healthy spirit of ideas. I would like to be elected to represent the lower shore in the General Assembly regardless of an individual’s vote for Governor. Crossing party lines is a great show of just how much choice we have in America when we go to vote. I hope that members of both political parties will choose me when voting for the House of Delegates.

James: I believe regardless of who is Governor, I will find common ground on issues related to economic development. This would include making sure farming is profitable, job creation is important and tourism is promoted. I have said from the beginning, to have a strong community for our families, we need to have a healthy business community. That is just common sense. For the record, I believe Governor Ehrlich will be re-elected by a margin of at least 4 points.

NAACP forum (8-3):

Incumbent Page Elmore is using his retirement to serve his constituents. After 35 years in business he ran for and won the Delegate post. He sought a “level playing field” for those in his district, and bragged that he had the most bills passed of any first-time delegate. With his background, it was obvious that most of his answers centered around using resources available to citizens of Maryland to encourage small business startups, thus creating jobs and opportunity for people of all races. Minority set-asides, he continued, were difficult to fill on the Eastern Shore because of a lack of qualifying contractors and companies.

Former Ocean City mayor Jim Mathias told the gathered that his “number one priority was to work for you.” Speaking in the third person, he said that “Jim Mathias was accessible as mayor of Ocean City.” As a delegate he would be “accessible to small business people”, and that working together we can make a difference. He didn’t carry a lot of specifics with what he said, and I think a part of this is being an appointed delegate with no real record of accomplishment but on the other hand being targeted as part of the Democrat machine in Annapolis. He did deliver his remarks with the polish one would expect from a veteran politician, though.

Bonnie Luna can be best described as one who has her priorities straight. In her time at the podium, she noted during the “accessibility” question that her priorities, in order, were “God, family, and her job” but she would give her time and talent to her constituents as part of her task. The other part I liked about her words was when she said she would treat all of her district residents equally, as long as they claimed the equality granted to them under the Constitution. The equality theme was also apparent in her answer regarding minority businesses, where she noted that obstacles are the same for everyone, and that there were already plenty of resources available through the government. And Bonnie’s quite quotable, as her goals are to “bring common sense to Annapolis”, place “people before politics”, and “do the right thing.” She pledged to work on bringing civility back to Annapolis and to get past partisan politics. It takes two to tango in that realm, though.

The sole elected incumbent of the two who already occupy the 38B seats, Norm Conway…touted his experience and leadership as well and informed those who were running for delegate posts that if they weren’t accessible now, they would become so the moment they won the job. But the money quote to me from Delegate Conway was that he “firmly believes in the One Maryland concept.” I just have to put on my editorial hat here and disagree, because to me what’s good for Garrett County may or may not be the best thing for the Eastern Shore and certainly the needs of Baltimore City are different than either. Now if he’s referring to his philosophy of giving all an opportunity to be successful I won’t argue with that but I’m not certain about whether he’s coming at the issue through a philosophy of government or through mandates and legislation. I tend to think the latter, which to me becomes a disagreement on the means to achieve the goal.

Finally, we come to Michael James. He portrayed himself as an outsider who wanted to give a “different type” of representation, as he was a political neophyte but, more importantly, was a businessman who had created jobs. He also took a swipe at the perception of Maryland as anti-business when he spoke of minority-owned businesses, saying that the state needs to market its programs better and “(not) drive jobs away.” As he said, having no jobs is equal to having no tax base. And James was the person I adapted the opening from, as he closed by saying that most of them agreed on the problems but the position was about much more than who was effective at winning elections. Obviously you do have to win two elections in order to get to the General Assembly, at least in most cases.

(District 38A candidate Patrick Armstrong didn’t attend this forum.)

******************************

Because of the nature of remaining races, this will be the last upclose look at the local election contests. For example, I can’t find anything issue-related on Congressman Gilchrest’s website nor did either he or Jim Corwin answer my Ten Questions I presented to them. On a more local level, I’ve attended and written on at least two forums involving the Sheriff’s race, plus one for the Clerk of the Courts and Orphans’ Court races. The same goes for County Council posts. Generally, the number of issues involved and the fact that information becomes harder to come by as the stakes get smaller has led me to decide that my time is better spent on other issues. Besides, over the next few days I’ll be helping some candidates with their final push and working at party headquarters so this seems like a good point to end these articles at.

But I have more commentary on the election to come, I promise!

Next Page »

• Hit My Tip Jar

  The server isn't free...

  

  And did you know you can support me through Amazon? See right sidebar below.

• Loyal sponsor

  TEA Party Posters

• Warm news

  • Same-sex marriage opponents closing in on signature goal
  • Shorebird of the Week – May 24, 2012
  • The Republican blame game
  • Coalition to Reduce Spending looks for candidates to endorse
  • McDonough challenges Baltimore mayor to improve safety or resign
  • A chance to meet two Presidents
  • Dock Daze 2012 in pictures and text
  • Union picketers engage in ‘shame’ campaign
  • The SEO blues
  • Wright to leave Wicomico BOE

• 2011 monoblogue Accountability Project

  The 2011 edition can be found here, in PDF format.

• Archives

  Select Month May 2012  (35) April 2012  (36) March 2012  (40) February 2012  (37) January 2012  (43) December 2011  (35) November 2011  (33) October 2011  (35) September 2011  (46) August 2011  (35) July 2011  (39) June 2011  (35) May 2011  (38) April 2011  (34) March 2011  (44) February 2011  (42) January 2011  (35) December 2010  (47) November 2010  (44) October 2010  (46) September 2010  (47) August 2010  (40) July 2010  (57) June 2010  (57) May 2010  (46) April 2010  (43) March 2010  (55) February 2010  (54) January 2010  (59) December 2009  (58) November 2009  (46) October 2009  (41) September 2009  (37) August 2009  (31) July 2009  (33) June 2009  (28) May 2009  (20) April 2009  (25) March 2009  (25) February 2009  (30) January 2009  (45) December 2008  (39) November 2008  (38) October 2008  (48) September 2008  (46) August 2008  (44) July 2008  (47) June 2008  (46) May 2008  (48) April 2008  (54) March 2008  (44) February 2008  (42) January 2008  (41) December 2007  (34) November 2007  (46) October 2007  (39) September 2007  (43) August 2007  (37) July 2007  (38) June 2007  (37) May 2007  (39) April 2007  (37) March 2007  (36) February 2007  (24) January 2007  (25) December 2006  (19) November 2006  (30) October 2006  (21) September 2006  (43) August 2006  (29) July 2006  (29) June 2006  (36) May 2006  (18) April 2006  (22) March 2006  (18) February 2006  (16) January 2006  (18) December 2005  (20) November 2005  (1)

• Bloglist

  • Michael's Facebook page
  • monoblogue fan page
  • monoblogue Myspace site
  • ttown’s right wing conspiracy

• Daily news and commentary

  • All-American Blogger
  • American Thinker
  • Atlas Shrugs
  • Bob Owens
  • Death By 1000 Papercuts
  • Dr. Melissa Clouthier
  • Front Page Magazine
  • Gateway Pundit
  • HotAir
  • Instapundit
  • Michelle Malkin
  • NetRightDaily
  • NewsBusters
  • NewsMax
  • Patterico
  • PJ Media
  • PoliPundit
  • Power Line
  • Red County
  • Right Turn
  • Right Wing News
  • Sweetness & Light
  • The Corner on National Review
  • The Lonely Conservative
  • The New Editor
  • The Other McCain
  • The Right Scoop
  • Twitchy
  • U.S. Constitutional Free Press
  • WorldNetDaily

• Delaware

  • Blue Hen Conservative
  • Delaware Grapevine
  • Delaware Liberal
  • DelawarePolitics.net
  • Delmar DustPan
  • Resolute Determination
  • Sussex County Angel
  • The Colossus of Rhodey

• Eastern Shore

  • afterthegoldrush
  • Atomic Donkey Brewing
  • Cecil Times
  • Chesapeake Journal
  • Delmarva Observer
  • Delmarva Shorebirds blog
  • DirtyBury
  • Easton Savvy
  • Lower Eastern Shore News
  • Patty Hancock
  • Questing for Atlantis
  • Reflections on Delmarva's Past
  • Right Coast Conservative
  • Salisbury News
  • The Other Salisbury News
  • The Pocomoke Public Eye
  • Twirling…towards freedom

• Maryland

  • A Citizen's View
  • A Conservative Lesbian
  • A Republican Out Of The Blue
  • Anthropocon
  • Blue Ridge Forum
  • Carroll Standard
  • Cecil Calvert
  • Center Maryland
  • Cross Purposes
  • Eye on Annapolis
  • Global Rhetoric
  • Letters from Glome
  • Maryland Juice
  • Maryland Reporter
  • MDGOP Insider
  • Old Line Elephant
  • Potomac Tea Party Report
  • Red Maryland
  • Red Meat Conservative
  • Sarah Says
  • The FreeStater Blog
  • The Quinton Report
  • The Vail Spot

• Other great blogs

  • Bob McCarty Writes
  • Datechguy's Blog
  • Drea Wood
  • Energy Tomorrow
  • Jen Kuznicki
  • Kira Davis
  • Melinda Musil
  • Michael Yon
  • There She Runs
  • Thurber’s Thoughts
  • Tygrrrr Express
  • Wake Up America
  • Zilla of the Resistance

• Political Links - my side

  • Castle Coalition
  • Cecil County Patriots
  • Club for Growth
  • Delegate Mike McDermott
  • Follow the Money
  • Maryland Business for Responsive Government
  • Maryland Constitution
  • Maryland House GOP Caucus
  • Maryland Republican Network
  • Maryland Republican Party
  • Maryland Senate Republican Caucus
  • Maryland Society of Patriots
  • Newt Gingrich
  • Opensecrets
  • Red State
  • Rep. Andy Harris
  • Somerset County GOP
  • Stimulated Yet?
  • The Center for Union Facts
  • The Maryland Public Policy Institute
  • Wicomico County GOP
  • YR Network

• Political Links - the loyal opposition

  • Daily Kos
  • Democratic Underground
  • Governor Martin O’Malley
  • Maryland Democrat Party
  • Maryland General Assembly
  • Sen. Barbara Mikulski
  • Sen. Ben Cardin
  • The Stakeholder
  • THOMAS

• Sporting Life (teams I follow)

  • Cleveland Browns
  • Delmarva Shorebirds
  • Detroit Lions
  • Detroit Tigers
  • Miami University Athletics
  • Toledo Mud Hens

• The local media

  • Cecil Whig
  • Star-Democrat
  • The Daily Times
  • WBOC-TV (Channel 16)
  • WICO-AM and FM
  • WMDT-TV (Channel 47)

• Eastern Shore Political Buzz Examiner

  

• Syndicate

  

  Subscribe to this site's RSS feed.

  Desktop Reader Bloglines Google Live Netvibes Newsgator Yahoo! What's This?

• Support my advertisers!
• 
• 
• 

• The Poll

• Campaign 2012 – President

  On-ballot candidates are first, with write-ins afterward:

  Mitt Romney (R)
  Gary Johnson (Libertarian)
  Barack Obama (D - incumbent)

  Write-ins:

  Tiffany Briscoe (D)
  Matthew Lydick (R)
  Richard Duncan (I)
  Michael Boyles (I)
  Fred Dickson (I)
  Nelson Keyton (I)

• Campaign 2012 – U.S. Senate

  Daniel Bongino (R)
  Ben Cardin (D - incumbent)

  Write-ins:

  Brandy Baker (I)
  Dennis David (I)

• Sign the petition

  Go to mdpetitions.com to sign the petitions forcing same-sex marriage and our state's blatant gerrymandering to referendum. Even if you favor the ideas, it should be obvious that the people deserve the final say.

•  

  May 2012

  M	T	W	T	F	S	S
  « Apr
  	1	2	3	4	5	6
  7	8	9	10	11	12	13
  14	15	16	17	18	19	20
  21	22	23	24	25	26	27
  28	29	30	31

• Advertise with monoblogue and you’ll reach a lot of people!

  

  Click on the photo for details.

• My Twitter feed...

  • Same-sex marriage opponents closing in on signature goal http://t.co/IVqXUPsz via @sharethis #MDGOP #mdpolitics #mdreporter about 4 hours ago from Tweet Button
  • The newest Shorebird of the Week http://t.co/ZxPUhCG5 #Shorebirds #LetsGoShorebirds about 22 hours ago from Tweet Button
  • Coalition to #Reduce_Spending looks for candidates to endorse http://t.co/JkJhl8j7 via @sharethis #RonPaul #SenRandPaul 01:45:06 AM May 24, 2012 from Tweet Button
  • McDonough challenges #Baltimore mayor to improve safety or resign http://t.co/c6kFZGCA via @sharethis #MDGOP #mdreporter #mdcons 12:10:57 AM May 23, 2012 from Tweet Button
  • A chance to meet two Presidents http://t.co/qAXhExvW via @sharethis #snark 11:49:47 PM May 21, 2012 from Tweet Button

  @ttownjotes

  Powered byWordPress Twitter Widget Pro

• Link to Maryland Democratic Party

  In the interest of being fair and balanced, I provide this service to readers. But before you click on the picture below, just remember their message:

  

• More Campaign 2012

  Congress

  First District:

  Andy Harris (R - incumbent)
  Wendy Rosen (D)
  Muir Boda (Libertarian)
  Marc Cohen (I)

  --

  Second District:

  Nancy Jacobs (R)
  C.A. 'Dutch' Ruppersberger (D - incumbent)

  --

  Third District:

  Eric Delano Knowles (R)
  John Sarbanes (D - incumbent)

  --

  Fourth District:

  Faith Loudon (R)
  Donna Edwards (D - incumbent)

  --

  Fifth District:

  Tony O'Donnell (R)

  Steny Hoyer (D - incumbent)
  Arvin Vohra (Libertarian)
  Jeremy Stinson (I)

  --

  Sixth District:

  Roscoe Bartlett (R - incumbent)
  John Delaney (D)

  --

  Seventh District:

  Frank Mirabile Jr. (R)
  Elijah Cummings (D - incumbent)
  Robert Brookman (I)

  --

  Eighth District:

  Ken Timmerman (R)
  Chris Van Hollen (D - incumbent)
  Mark Grannis (Libertarian)
  George Gluck (Green Party)

• Categories

  Select Category 50 Year Plan  (30) All politics is local  (1196) Baltimore Examiner  (73) Bloggers and blogging  (237) Book Reviews  (4) Business and industry  (391) Campaign 2008 – Congress  (235) Campaign 2008 – President  (155) Campaign 2009 – Salisbury  (20) Campaign 2010  (379) Campaign 2011 – Salisbury  (40) Campaign 2012  (118) Campaign 2012 – President  (107) Campaign 2013 – Salisbury  (2) Carnival of Maryland  (6) Communications  (33) DC Examiner  (20) Delaware politics  (42) Delmarva items  (1935) Delmarva Shorebirds  (224) Detroit Tigers  (27) Education  (10) Inside the Beltway  (372) Kratovil Watch  (62) Liberty Features Syndicate  (45) Live Blogging  (2) Local Music  (128) Mainstream media  (45) Maryland Bloggers Alliance  (6) Maryland Politics  (1082) National politics  (1087) NFL News  (13) Ohio politics  (14) Op-ed columns  (7) Pajamas Media  (18) Patriot Post  (6) Personal stuff  (724) Politics  (1995) Polling  (27) Radical Green  (144) Red County National  (10) Senator Watch  (87) Sports  (259) State of Conservatism  (556) Ten Questions  (49) Toledo Mud Hens  (10) Uncategorized  (3) Wal-Mart  (21) Wicomico County Examiner  (65)

• Locals flock to monoblogue

  

  Click on the photo for details on advertising opportunities.

• Text Link Ads

  • Maryland Self Storage
  • auto financing

Please note that the opinions expressed on monoblogue are not necessarily those of the Wicomico County Republican Party Central Committee, of which I'm a member. (But they probably should be.)