Tag: Jim Mathias

Is redistricting a done deal?

Well, perhaps, and that’s how my sentiments lean when it comes to the question of redistricting in Maryland.

But Saturday around 30 interested observers sat in the brand-new Perdue School of Business at Salisbury University to listen to eight observers testify before the three members of the Redistricting Advisory Committee who could be present – while Chair Jeannie Hitchcock, President of the Maryland Senate Mike Miller, and board member Richard Stewart were there, board members James King and Speaker of the House of Delegates Michael Busch were unable to attend. The size of the room made the crowd look smaller, too. While Hitchcock said the group was “here to listen, primarily” I noticed some of the members seemed a bit disinterested at times.

Out of eight speakers, five of them represented Democratic interests while the other three (including myself) were Republicans. However, there was one piece of common ground expressed by both sides, that being the issue of resident Delegates. As you’ll read, though, the ideas on how to achieve this were somewhat different.

Continue reading “Is redistricting a done deal?”

Blessing of the Combines in pictures and text

Today my significant other and I wandered down to Snow Hill for the 13th Annual Blessing of the Combines. In its short history the event appears to have placed the otherwise sleepy town of Snow Hill on the map.

(Just so you know, some of the photos I’m featuring come from my girlfriend, and if you can’t figure it out from the enhanced quality of her photography compared to mine I’ll have to clue you in. The one to start this post is by Kim Corkran.)

The event begins with a parade, and seeing a row of combines coming down the road can be impressive.

Some of the combines had politicians on them. Andy Harris joked that it was one of the few times he was on the left, but Norm Conway and Jim Mathias were at home there.

I did get the chance to bend Andy’s ear a little later. The lady in the center is former Delegate candidate and Worcester County Republican Chair Marty Pusey. (Photo by Kim Corkran.)

Now that they’ve wrapped up the budget, I want Andy to work on reducing those government mandates!

Both political parties were represented there, although the Republicans were a little more open about it.

Meanwhile, two tables down the Democrats were trying to register voters as well.

But there was something I noticed about their table – not one item I saw mentioned President Obama. Odd, don’t you think? Maybe the local Democrats are running away from him?

Interestingly enough, the featured speaker was Nelson Brice. He serves the federal government as the District Conservationist for the USDA, and he pointed out how farmers were helping the environment.

Still, most of the people there weren’t interested in politics. The actual blessing was handled by the Rev. Rick Edmund, a former Snow Hill pastor who now serves a church in the village of Ewell out on Smith Island.

For the kids, there was plenty to do – crafts, face painting, a bounce house, a petting zoo, and the chance to play in a bed of soybeans, all tucked away on Pearl Street.

If their parents wandered around the block the kids could have a pony ride as well.

This feathered friend awaited across the way (photo by Kim Corkran.)

And kids of all ages who like to eat had plenty to choose from. I took this while standing in line waiting for some pit beef.

While standing in that line, Kim took this unique crowd shot. (So did I but hers came out better.)

While we were eating, the band began to play. Mike Short, Jr. and Statewide were the featured performers, playing a mix of country and rock originals and covers.

The second photo of Mike is by Kim Corkran.

After listening to his band for a spell, we worked our way down to one of my favorite parts of the event, the Wheels That Heal car show.

Here’s a pair of Pontiac Firebirds from a bygone era.

My dad used to have a truck like this but it was in nowhere near this good of shape.

For those who wanted to really relive a bygone era, there was the opportunity to ride a horse-drawn carriage.

It also was a chance to meet friends old and new. Kim took this last picture of this couple, who have been married 55 years. Surely they saw a lot of people they knew and probably recalled a lot who are no longer with us.

If you weren’t there, you missed a chance to celebrate our rural heritage with a family-friendly event. Come the first Saturday in August 2012 you just might find us there again!

An alternative arises

I actually learned of this group a couple months ago, but it took awhile for them to get their website off the ground.

Like it or not, money talks in politics. That’s the way the system is set up and no matter how much some on the Left pine for public financing of campaigns that’s not a viable model. To begin with, who decides what the criteria is for a candidate? The hypocrisy shows most clearly in their chosen 2008 candidate eschewing the public finance laws and raising hundreds of millions of dollars – this time he’s shooting for a billion.

So a group of conservatives got together and realized a shocking truth – we on the right may have let some close races slip away by not having enough financial backing. For want of 641 votes, Michael James could have eliminated Jim Mathias from state office after just one term and a few weeks – now we’re stuck with him for at least four long years. A number of House seats could have turned if Republicans had gained additional vote totals like 284, 319, 398, and 491. That would have put the GOP delegation in the House of Delegates right at the magic number of 47, a total which would guarantee relevancy because, united, they could bypass committees on key bills. (It’s sort of a nuclear option, but it can be done.) Locally, Mike McDermott flipped the House seat formerly held by Jim Mathias but imagine the impact if Delegate Norm “Five Dollar” Conway had been defeated by Marty Pusey, the queen of eliminating two laws for each one passed? Now that would be leadership in the right direction.

Of course, the CCforMD group is seeking to raise money. First among their fundraisers is a raffle for a Beretta shotgun, to be held in late October at the MarylandCAN conference. (Tickets start at $5.)

Granted, making money $5 at a time isn’t going to raise a significant sum right away but it’s seed money for the real fundraising the group will need to do by 2014. And in focusing on local, comparatively low-dollar races I’m sure the group feels it will get more bang for the buck. (Yes, the pun was intended. I’m here all week.) Contributing $1,000 to a House of Delegates race will help a conservative candidiate more than donating $5,000 to a statewide race (although both are necessary.)

Perhaps the future of politics is within organizations such as these which work outside the party apparatus. Lord knows the Maryland Republican Party doesn’t have a great deal of resources to work with, but part of the state party’s problem is in the brand name created by their national big brothers; for every conservative firebrand like Michele Bachmann or Jim DeMint the Beltway establishment seems to back at least one or more squishy moderates – cases in point: Maine’s Senator Olympia Snowe, House candidate Dede Scozzafava of New York, or former Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania. Conservatives tend to look past the party affiliation and kingmaking done by party leaders on high to donate to individual campaigns. (DeMint has taken it upon himself to back conservative primary challengers to establishment-backed candidates.)

Obviously CCforMD joins a crowded field of political groups looking for money in tough times. But at least you have a shot (again, those gun puns!) at something tangible in return soon and better political leadership down the road.

MTA toll hearing comes to the Eastern Shore

Last night over 250 people came to listen or generally express their opposition to a series of proposed toll hikes at the Bay Bridge and several other structures operated by the Maryland Transportation Authority.

This was a panoramic shot I took just as the event was beginning.

Of course, the MTA had flyers, a video, and a series of presentation boards available in an adjacent room to state their case. As you can see in the first photo below, they had a room full of boards. Below that are a few examples.

The sum of their case was that they needed toll increases to fix their aging infrastructure, while other goals were to standardize their toll structure, incorporate the cost of collection into the toll, and have vehicles pay a “proportionate share” of their costs.

On the other hand, Nick Loffer of AFP-Maryland was outside rallying the troops to sign a petition against the toll increases.

And the media was there as well. For all I know, I was on the news.

The two local Delegates also made their presence known. Norm Conway was being interviewed by the media while Mike McDermott chatted up the crowd; in this case fellow local blogger G.A. Harrison.

Delegates Charles Otto of Somerset County and Jay Jacobs of Kent County were also there and testified in opposition.

The hearing itself started a short time after those in the room had assembled. We watched the short MTA video stating its side, and their members pled the case that “Maryland has some of the lowest tolls in the country.” But Board Chairwoman Beverley Swaim-Staley also wanted to point out the toll increases were intended to “generate enough revenue…to maintain (our) bond rating.” It was also pointed out that EZPass patrons (except communters) would get a break.

Interestingly enough, the Board sat silent through the testimony, as one ground rule laid out was that they wouldn’t respond to questions or comments.

Elected officials were allowed to pull rank and testify first. It began with Wicomico County Republican Central Committee member Dave Goslee noting, “people’s wages are not going up…government should live within its budget.”

It set the tone for remarks by Pocomoke City Mayor Bruce Morrison, who stated he and the three members of his City Council all came to show their opposition to the proposal. “Think of us on the Shore, too,” he pleaded.

But Mike McDermott got the crowd on its feet.

McDermott thundered, “The Bay Bridge is a cash cow for the state of Maryland!” He also wondered how the MTA came up with an $8 toll figure, feeling that was “arbitrary.” “No one would be here for (an increase of) 50 cents,” said McDermott.

Then he asked what the need was. Answering his own question, Mike claimed that I-95 improvements and the Inter-County Connector are going to be financed by “you and me” on the Eastern Shore.

While he went way over the allotted five minutes, the patrons didn’t mind and gave McDermott a standing ovation once he was through.

“I want (the Bay Bridge) to be as strong and dependable  as it can be,” remarked Norm Conway. But the audience booed Conway when he said “most people would consider” a $5 toll to cross the bridge. He asked the MTA board to listen to people across the state and perhaps readjust the toll structure for SUVs.

Speaking on behalf of State Senator Jim Mathias, Linda Donaldson stated the Senator’s suggestions to proceed were:

  • A “significant discount” for EZPass
  • A “significant” commuter discount
  • Be mindful of the overall cost of operating vehicles
  • The fundamental need for public safety on the structures

Delegate Jay Jacobs, who was on his third hearing for the toll increase, believed that “a 300 percent increase in tolls, I guarantee, will send people to Delaware shopping.”

And while Delegate Charles Otto called the Bay Bridge a “godsend” for the Shore, he pointed out it may cost trucks an extra $1 per mile to go from the Bay Bridge to Salisbury when the tolls are factored in. “I hate to get political, but all I heard this time last year was that a fee was a tax,” concluded Charles.

I testified at the event as well. This is how I wrote the draft of my remarks; it wasn’t quite the Gettysburg Address but it got applause:

Good evening.

My name is Michael Swartz and I’m proud to be an elected member of Wicomico County’s Republican Central Committee.

First of all, I’d like to thank the MTA for bowing to demand and having a hearing on the Eastern Shore. By my count, the closest MTA facility is about 90 miles from here so one might think we’re not affected by a toll increase.

But we are. It’s going to affect tourism, it’s going to affect commuters, and most importantly I see a negative impact on our agricultural industry.

After all, $8 to cross a bridge isn’t a large part of someone’s vacation budget. But increasing the rates on commuters could hamper growth and progress on the Eastern Shore. Over here we already feel shellacked as victims of the “War on Rural Maryland.” They couldn’t take away our septic systems, but they can throttle development in other ways like making the Eastern Shore a more expensive place to live.

More importantly, one should consider the impact a toll increase would have on commerce. Because we have little in the way of railroads or port facilities on the Eastern Shore, over-the-road trucking is truly our one option for both delivering and providing goods and commodities, as Mr. Goslee and Delegate Jacobs pointed out before. A large toll increase would be detrimental, and basically amounts to a redistribution of our wealth to other parts of the state.

A smarter plan would be to keep the tolls where they are, but if an increase is necessary it needs to be smaller and phased in over a longer period. It’s not our fault you didn’t raise tolls earlier, so don’t make us bite the bullet now.

Thank you.

From the AFP perspective, Nick Loffer made the overall suggestion of running the toll facilities as a business and regionalizing the operation. He chided the MTA for a lack of forethought and felt that created the anger in the audience.

Other speakers from the audience termed the toll increase a “soft tyranny,” believed the decision is already made, and called the increases an “assault on the middle class.”

There were also several business leaders who spoke up. The toll increase would be “a wedge…that turns the Bay into a barrier,” claimed Brad Bellacicco of the Salisbury Chamber of Commerce. One business owner, who runs a turf farm in both Anne Arundel and Queen Anne’s counties, believed the increase would add a $150 per acre cost to his business, tripling the tax on his four-truck fleet from $16,000 to $48,000.

Needless to say, tourism and Ocean City officials chimed in, too. Tourism creates 134,000 Maryland jobs and $1.6 billion in revenue, according to the Maryland Tourism Council. Their official warned of “unintended consequences” from the hikes. “Without tourism, we have no jobs in Ocean City,” added the director of their hotel and motel association.

Closing the testimony, Ocean City Mayor Rick Meehan, who stated that his town attracts 8 million visitors a year and creates $150 million in state revenues,  pleaded with the board to “moderate your position (and) discount EZPass.”

I look at this more as a development issue, however. If fewer people come to the Shore as tourists, fewer jobs are created and fewer people have an incentive to locate here. And while that may suit a lot of Shore natives just fine, the corollary effect of increasing business costs will be to drive jobs out of the area. We already lose a lot of our local college graduates who can’t find good-paying jobs in the area.

Not one person last night said $8 was a great idea. Yes, there was one crank who considered this part of the war on the middle class promoted by greedy corporations and rich Republicans like Andy Harris, but we can ignore his screed. Some on the conservative side also strayed well off the topic at hand, which was a problem.

As I’ve said, a modest toll increase may be required but not a giant jump as is planned. A suggestion I didn’t hear last night but will toss into the hopper: perhaps they can bring construction costs down by eliminating “prevailing wage.”

Alas, I think the die has been cast. All we opponents did was have our say, but the state needs the money. Think of it as a prelude to this fall when the General Assembly really loots our wallets.

Conway, Mathias join O’Malley in electric rate hike bid

It’s more than just the regular hot air coming from Annapolis – in this case, they want to mandate that it turns a wind turbine.

Proponents of a wind farm off Ocean City say electric rates could ONLY increase $1.44 a month for residential electric customers, but others claim it could be more like $3.61 per month. Or it could be much, much more – what government-sponsored plan ever comes in on time and under budget?

Included in that group backing the rate hikes are Delegate Norm Conway and Senator Jim Mathias. They are respectively co-sponsoring House of Delegates and Senate measures that will force utilities to purchase power from a offshore wind farm which could be on line as soon as 2016, according to a recent Washington Post story by Aaron C. Davis and Steven Mufson. Never mind that:

  • the project will produce power at 16.4 cents per kilowatt hour (the average going rate is about a dime.) I thought wind was free!
  • O’Malley’s former Chief of Staff, Michael Enright, is spearheading the effort for one company to secure federal leases. No conflict of interest there, move on, there’s nothing to see…
  • The last line of the Post story: “Banks consider the projects high-risk, so developers are seeking Energy Department loan guarantees to bring down financing costs.” Can you smell the pork? I can.

Contrast this with O’Malley’s approach to extracting the proven and much less expensive natural gas reserves at the opposite end of the state, our small portion of the Marcellus Shale formation. He’s supporting a moratorium on natural gas permits until August, 2013. (A bill dubbed the “Marcellus Shale Safe Drilling Act of 2011” is also in both the House of Delegates and Senate; notably, none of the co-sponsors are from the affected area. Instead, it’s the usual gang of limousine liberals, mainly from MoCo.)

If it wasn’t already crystal clear, this is more proof that O’Malley and his environmentalist wacko friends are just a bunch of liberal do-gooders who would love to saddle the average consumer with much higher energy costs. Even if they wouldn’t love to do so, their actions will create the situation of making Maryland even less industry-friendly than it already is, if that’s indeed possible.

A far smarter approach would be to leave the wind farmers (who ironically are leasing territory originally intended for oil exploration) twisting in the wind and let the natural gas companies do what they do best out west in the Maryland panhandle. Considering unemployment in two of Maryland’s three far western counties was above even the national average in December, they sure could use the jobs that natural gas exploration would bring.

And I’d rather have jobs in the hand now than those pie-in-the-sky green jobs in the bush, perhaps three years down the road (if they ever come at all.) The electric ratepayers of Maryland, who already get about 3% of their power from natural gas, would be thankful as well.

As for the duo of Conway and Mathias, well, we see where their loyalties lie. Sure, there could be some temporary job creation as these windmills are built, but those rate increases are much more permanent. It’s worth noting that Delegate McDermott isn’t signed on so apparently he stands with the ratepayers and not the special interests and friends of O’Malley. But I repeat myself.

The end of Americans for Prosperity?

Well, at least one observer thinks the TEA Party will be awful mad about a recent statement by the group’s president.

Writing at the Green Hell Blog (h/t Blue Ridge Forum), Steve Milloy posits that a Wall Street Journal op-ed by Rep. Fred Upton, incoming head of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Americans for Prosperity head Tim Phillips charts a course toward capitulation to the Democrats and Obama Administration through a “sensible bipartisan compromise” on delaying the EPA regulations until the courts can determine their fate.

Obviously each individual chapter of AFP need not follow the dictates of the group’s president, but at a time where the group has been criticized locally (by a onetime AFP head) and around the state for being too co-opted by “establishment” Republicans who wanted to take advantage of the TEA Party and its energy, this is probably not the way for the organization to go.

Conservatives and TEA Partiers were already upset that it was Upton’s turn to be head of that committee, preferring instead that Rep. Joe Barton reassume the job he lost when Republicans were ousted from the majority in 2006. He would have needed a waiver of a six-year term limit on the chairmanship, but argued that his term effectively was wasted for four of those years by being simply the ranking member.

The problem with “sensible bipartisan compromise” is that one man’s ‘sensible’ is another man’s ‘surrender’ and it seems to me we have the mandate on our side. (Never mind that one side also has the tendency to lie through its teeth when it comes to cutting spending or the size of government. Their idea of government cuts? How about the ‘peace dividend’ and other ways of gutting the military?)

Furthermore, we’ve just come out of a ‘lame duck’ Congressional session where bipartisan compromise in the Senate gave us gays serving openly in the military, a bad nuclear treaty, another round of unemployment benefit extensions, and restoration of the death tax in exchange for a puny two-year extension of current income tax rates. Perhaps some of these shortcomings can be addressed in the upcoming 112th Congress (which will, among other things, replace our local ‘Blue Dog’ Democrat Frank Kratovil with conservative Andy Harris) but if this piece by Upton reflects the tenor of House leadership toward Democrats the TEA Party will be sorely disappointed.

At risk is a group which already has a serious strike against it by being, as they state on their website, “a section 501(c)(4) organization under the Internal Revenue Code… AFP can advocate for and against specific legislation at the state and federal levels.” But they can’t advocate for or against particular candidates, which becomes a problem in the cases where a conservative squares off against an “establishment” party member in the primary. While other TEA Party organizations scored successes in that area (like electing Marco Rubio in Florida) AFP had to remain silent and watch as other TEA Party conservatives like Joe Miller in Alaska or Sharron Angle in Nevada lost close races, in part because of the reluctance of ‘establishment’ Republicans to back the upstarts.

On a more local scale, imagine if AFP could have openly backed Michael James for a Maryland Senate seat or Joe Ollinger for County Executive. It could have made the difference, particularly in the Senate race where Democrat Jim Mathias all but portrayed himself as Ronald Reagan reincarnated.

Locally, the AFP chapter has waned since one co-founder left after her ill-fated run for office and the other, ironically enough, vacated to take an elected position in the local Republican Party. The former has shifted her involvement into the Wicomico Society of Patriots, an offshoot of the state group.

And she’ll be the one who might be saying “I told you so.”

Obviously, unless they decide to seek office and win, the amount of fealty an officeholder has to someone’s set of principles will almost never be 100 percent. (Witness the results of the ongoing monoblogue Accountability Project, which will return next summer.) But in the political arena, where making law is akin to making sausage, compromising the broad set of principles most in the TEA Party stand for should be a last resort and not an opening parlay. That’s a gambit which will never pay off in dividends for freedom-loving Americans like those in the TEA Party and may lead to a damaging third-party effort come 2012.

Words to the wise

Just a little something before bed, from Dick Morris:

The danger, here, is not overconfidence, but under-confidence, and that Democratic incumbents who could be defeated will skate to victories. Despite a massive victory in the offing for Republicans, there could be great gnashing of teeth when they see how narrowly some of the icons of the Democratic Party are reelected.

I take this to a local level as well, because I tell people I’m greedy: I want the Eastern Shore of Maryland red from the Susquehanna to the beaches of Assateague. That means we keep the General Assembly seats we have and wave goodbye to Rudy Cane, Jim Mathias, and Norm Conway – men who talk conservative when they are here but vote like good, docile little liberals once they’re back up Route 50 about 100 miles. Democrats should be an endangered species here because what have they done for us?

And before you answer that question, consider what genuflections they’ve had to do to the rest of the state to get our crumbs.

I moved to the Eastern Shore in 2004 convinced it could be a boom area; a place where the rural character could be maintained but the enjoyment of a resort area was easily within reach. We have most of the tools we need to succeed, with the possible exception of a highway or rail system more conducive for moving goods to the markets of the Northeast.

Yet in the time I’ve been here it seems we have gone backwards, and for that I blame the state’s leadership. The concept of ‘One Maryland’ seems to be that of coddling the I-95 corridor at the expense of our more rural areas. Sure, we are a fairly small percentage of the state’s population and probably always will be unless we strike gold under this peninsula we call home. Still, we seem to be stuck in what I call ‘flythrough country’ – the Baltimore and DC slickers fly through on their way to their beachfront condos.

I believe in walking the conservative, limited-government walk as well as talking the talk, and most Democrats I know (there are exceptions, but none of them are running for these offices) can’t do both.

So let me return to that quote. In Dustin Mills, Charles Otto, Marty Pusey, Mike McDermott, and Michael James we have a great team who would stand up for our part of Maryland. It’s sort of amazing that all of them have the potential to learn and grow as state legislators simultaneously under the tutelage of our area stalwarts Rich Colburn, Addie Eckardt, and Jeannie Haddaway, leaving us the potential of a decade or two of solid representation.

Beginning Friday, those of us who claim to be conservative can’t be lured by the siren song of ‘oh, Jim Mathias is such a nice guy’ or ‘Norm Conway is head of the Appropriations Committee.’ As I see it, that and five bucks will get you a sub at Subway. (If those two raised it, chances are it was raised at a big-bucks fundraiser coordinated by someone across the bay anyway.) It’s time for our representation to reflect who we really are, and we are not so easily seduced by the power games being played in Annapolis. Instead, we stand up for principles like limiting government, creating jobs, and allowing us to give each other a helping hand without the nanny state stepping in.

People have had enough, and I want to see the Eastern Shore come home to its conservative roots. It’s time to finish the job Rich Colburn said he began about three decades ago and paint the Eastern Shore all red. We can do better, and given the chance, we will.

CAR/Chamber forum part 2 (District 38)

By far this was the more interesting of the debates; perhaps it’s because it covered my personal district. But just as a review from my other part:

The group asking was relatively diverse and included local businesswoman Dawn Tilghman, Terrence Lee of WMDT-TV, and Jennifer Cropper-Rines, president of the Coastal Association of Relators (CAR). Susan Parker of the Daily Times served as moderator. After an opening statement, candidates had to answer one question from each panel member and, with six to eight candidates on stage and two minutes allotted, there was really little need to get questions from the audience (hence my first post on the forum last night.)

Because of how the forum was set up, I’m going to evalute each question and answer in turn rather than summarize what each candidate said as a whole. I run the risk of writing this in a more dry fashion via this method but I think it would be more informative. This begins with the opening statements.

Opening statements:

Marty Pusey talked about limiting government and her respect for the other candidates in the race. “I believe strongly in protecting the public dollars,” she stated. Calling the election a “critical point for our country,” she further claimed “our state has an addiction, they raise taxes…we need to send our state to rehab.”

Michael James told the crowd “we need good representation now” and the “budget is in peril.” You raise revenue by creating jobs, and the worst thing the state did was raising taxes. We need a private sector person in office.

Recounting how as a child he built a paper route into a lucrative business, Norm Conway talked about his “work ethic” and how he set a goal to become a member of the House of Delegates.

Adding just a little humor to the proceedings, Mike McDermott talked about how he wasn’t cut out to be a chicken farmer. Instead, he went back into law enforcement and was happy there until he “saw a need” to get involved politically at the local level.

Since he served as Ocean City mayor, Jim Mathias claimed the “stable economic environment” he created helped the town grow. He would “strongly, proudly” represent the lower Shore in the Senate and “make one become 24”, referring to getting a majority in the Senate.

My faith “defines who I am,” said Mike McCready. He also spoke of his work ethic, his agricultural background and experience with MAFOs and CAFOs, and promised regular meetings with stakeholder groups like watermen and farmers.

Gee Williams stated the obvious: “We’re living in extraordinarily challenging times.” Recounting his business experience in the publishing industry and with nonprofits, he ticked off four bullet point items he’d like to accomplish: creating jobs, reducing fees, targeting tax cuts, and streamlining regulations. As a “principled, pragmatic” leader, he tried to paint himself as a centrist: “I reject extremism.”

Charles Otto went over his background and experience with the Maryland Farm Bureau and Farmers and Planters. In a nod to his predecessor, he praised the late Page Elmore by saying “he made a difference” for Somerset residents.

The first question, from Jennifer Cropper-Rines, asked about the possibility of alternate sources of funding for municipalities like a piggyback tax.

Mike McCready stated, “I wouldn’t be in favor of raising it any” and talked about the surplus they had in Somerset.

Similarly, Charles Otto was in favor of “limited” taxes, but the state does play a role.

Michael James would allow it if the voters wanted it, but personally would oppose this. Municipalities needed to watch their spending.

Norm Conway thought municipalities “should have options” through enabling legislation.

To Marty Pusey, “a tax is a tax is a tax.” She would try to have state funding restored first, in order to create as much of a positive business environment as possible and would vote against such measures.

Gee Williams wouldn’t support new revenue streams, since government should live within its means.

Jim Mathias wouldn’t initiate new tax mechanisms, but we needed to build a consensus on taxes with the business community. He also talked about the concept of “local courtesy” and how it would apply to this situation.

More bluntly, Mike McDermott said the power to tax was the power to destroy. Our legislature “understands destruction” but needed instead create a better environment for business.

Terrence Lee used an audience question asking about the education background each candidate had in economics.

In truth, only Marty Pusey and Charles Otto had taken college-level classes in economics, so most candidates cited their real-life experiences.

Mike McDermott talked about balancing his checkbook each month and how Maryland was living outside its means. We had gotten “off track.”

Jim Mathias told us “my degree in economics is the real world” and explained that he vetoed two Ocean City municipal budgets which included tax increases.

Again, Gee Williams spoke of his life experiences running 12 newspapers, working for the State Highway Administration, and various nonprofits. “Life is too complicated” right now and we should lower our expectations until we rebuild the economy.

Besides the college course, Marty Pusey cited her experience with creating budgets and working with the state’s accounting system for doing so.

Norm Conway said that as a youth, “my goal was to make money” – it was real-life economic training. He claimed the state had reduced spending $5.5 billion this term and that his goal was fiscal prudence with social responsibility.

“Maryland’s economics will not work long-term,” countered Michael James. We need to have business profits to create the revenue from businesses that the state needs.

Charles Otto put it simply and eloquently: “You learn to balance a budget when you get a 60 bushel crop and you expected 180.” His more formal economic training came from his agribusiness studies at Virginia Tech.

Mike McCready said that in his life, he set aside 10 percent as a tithe and 10 percent for a rainy day before he even considered which bills to pay. This is “not a time for a weak mind or inexperience” and referred again to lowering Somerset’s tax rate. He also claimed that, “we’re in better shape than the other Lower Shore counties, dollar for dollar” and how tax credits they could afford created or saved jobs at Rubberset and other companies.

Dawn Tilghman asked about the aggressive regulatory climate in the state.

Again talking about quarterly meetings with stakeholders, Mike McCready decried “one size fits all” solutions but supported a concept of the state picking up part of the salaries of people hired off the unemployment rolls. He would work across party lines to find solutions.

Charles Otto believed it was “time to restructure government” and these fines were “extortion.” It was a symptom of a “state government that knows best,” in the meantime “we have problems to solve.”

Michael James warned us we shouldn’t lose local control and needed to eliminate the perception that government is out to get businesses.

It was an “out of line, out of control” situation that needed to be modified, according to Norm Conway. He also blasted as “totally unreasonable” the University of Maryland law school for getting involved in the Hudson farm lawsuit on the environmentalists’ side.

We take away choices every time we pass regulations, said Marty Pusey. Environmental regulations should be “based on real science” and the assault on the poultry industry was “unacceptable.” But my favorite line of the night was when she said for every new law we create two old ones should be removed. That brought a “hell yeah” from me!

Gee Williams agreed with the tenor of the group, saying “they don’t give towns breaks.” While the goals of the Maryland Department of the Environment were noble, the application was unreasonable. “Litigating first and asking questions later is setting back our community,” concluded Williams.

A more educated regulator would help, argued Jim Mathias, yet we need to communicate our strengths and advocated for what we have. Agriculture was a “tremendous asset” to the state, and when we talk about it the governor and his staff listen.

Mike McDermott disagreed strongly, rebutting to Jim that the talk goes in one ear and out the other. Because of one-party rule in Maryland, “we are myopic.” He thought it was funny to hear liberals talk about conservative values. “Don’t tolerate that nonsense,” he said.

Closing statement:

Charles Otto believed part of our problem was the federal government – we are living in a “broke country…it’s time to change.” On the environmental front it was a question of compliance vs. stewardship, and he believed that some of the most recent and draconian regulations needed to be rolled back.

Gee Williams wanted our representative to “sit at the table and not at the back bench.” We needed to elect people who can make government work and disagree respectfully.

“Experience counts,” said Mike McCready, “and being County Commissioner counts for something.” He pointed out that his county was the only local county whose board of education didn’t request a maintenance of effort waiver from the state.

Jim Mathias rested on his “proven record” in securing capital projects and again promised to make one Senator into 24 by working with like-minded Senators.

“This is the election of our lifetime,” Mike McDermott said. “If we don’t see a change (we’ll get) bigger government and more taxes.” It’s not about edifices, but wholesale change from liberal values to conservative values.

Norm Conway “doesn’t consider himself a liberal or a conservative.” He was proud of the credibility he’d earned and believed in One Maryland.

Michael James accused the two incumbent Democrats of “reinventing their records” and asked where they were on sex offender laws before Sarah Foxwell. He promised to follow in the footsteps of outgoing Senator Lowell Stoltzfus.

Marty Pusey expounded on her “unique combination” of experiences and skills, though “we do need a change of culture in Annapolis. She pointed out the low marks business groups gave Conway based on his voting record, and promised to do right by the Maryland Constitution, which she waved a copy of during her close.

One item not used during the first session was the rebuttal. But both Mathias and Conway wanted to rebut Michael James’s assertion they’d voted for tax increases.

Mathias claimed that he’d voted for the House version of one package but it was changed in the Senate before the final vote, when he voted against it. (See below.) Norm Conway added that he voted for the one-cent increase of the sales tax, but half of that was supposed to go to the Transportation Trust Fund – without it, U.S. 113 would not have been dualized nor would future work on Maryland Route 589 (once Ocean Downs is renovated for slots) be on the radar.

Mike McDermott pithily rebutted Conway, noting that over the 40 years dualization of U.S. 113 was discussed they’d done one mile per year, it would already be done.

Michael James wanted to rebut Conway and Mathias, but moderator Susan Parker of the Daily Times denied his request, saying he’d made the original point. Fellow blogger G.A. Harrison commented from the crowd on the unfairness of that ruling but it stood. It ended a forum that became heated and contentious at the end.

My take:

First, as a service to readers, Mathias is correct that he voted against the tax bill (SB2) that became law in 2007. (The fiscal note explains the provisions which changed pretty well.) However, many of the same provisions were present in the House bill (HB2) that Mathias voted in favor of. (It also has a fiscal note.) Conway voted for both versions (along with the sales tax increase of HB5 that Mathias voted against), so his objection came from the substance of the legislative package as a whole.

It’s obvious that we may have a good cop-bad cop scenario here among the Republicans. McDermott and James are very forceful in painting their Democratic opponents as liberals, and here’s why – they are liberals! Just look at their voting records.

But Marty Pusey avoided being as confrontational and that may score her some points. In many respects she’s the most conservative of the bunch and her two-for-one line was my favorite.

Again, the Democrats who aren’t in office did their best to talk about crossing the aisle and bipartisanship, but I liked how Mike McDermott slapped that argument down. There are very few Democrats in Annapolis who give Republicans the time of day, and the limited number of instances where local Democrats are right is akin to a stopped clock being right twice a day – any other time it’s far from reliable and perhaps even detrimental.

There’s a reason that I get day after day of mailings from Jim Mathias explaining how, despite his Baltimore roots, he’s an Eastern Shore conservative at heart (today it’s being against “liberals” and for the death penalty.) Annapolis Democrats wouldn’t be backing him if he weren’t useful to them – they know the score and the fact they need Republicans to have fewer than 19 Senate seats to keep them meaningless. He will be no such thing as a loose cannon.

And Gee Williams will have to be happy with his back bench even if he wins – the real Democratic power in Annapolis represents the urban areas. We all know this.

Indeed, we can do better and last night’s forum showed why we need conservative leadership from the Eastern Shore.

It’s time for (more) accountability

If you liked what I had to say before about the Eastern Shore’s version of the Three Stooges – Rudy Cane, Norm Conway, and Jim Mathias – then you should like this piece.

I was shocked to go to my mailbox today and not find a full-color 4-page mailing from Jim Mathias expounding his so-called independence and love of us peon taxpayers. But a phrase on the first mailing belies his true intentions:

In the State Senate, (Jim will) push to cut wasteful government spending and reinvest the proceeds in small business jobs and the Eastern Shore.

Certainly that sounds innocent enough when taken on the surface. But that doesn’t mean government spending will be any less. Instead, Jim seems to believe that the problem isn’t that government is Maryland isn’t too large or overbearing; the problem is that it just spends money in the “wrong” places.

That may be the reason why he and his cohorts have voted for every O’Malley budget. And when floor amendments are made to cut wasteful spending, these three regularly vote against them:

Even in the 2007 Special Session, where Jim Mathias stood against his party on tax increases, he still voted for the budgetary shell games (which included a prospective tax increase at the county level) and not to make more meaningful cuts. Meanwhile, Norm Conway voted to increase income and corporate tax rates in that session, and in 2008 all three voted in favor of the millionaire’s tax, which drove capital out of the state.

And as far as accounting for the stimulus dollars that Governor O’Malley has desperately needed over the last two years as a fix to his junkie-style spending habit, our merry trio voted against an attempt to put the funds under the normal budgetary process and have Governor O’Malley report where the money was spent.

So when Jim Mathias, Norm Conway, and Rudy Cane try to sell their fiscally conservative soap at your door, it’s easy to find the real truth if you know where to look. We can do much, much better.

By the way, I’m not done yet. More at a later time.

It’s time for accountability

You know, I didn’t begin the monoblogue Accountability Project for my health. When the cycle came back around to the point where our General Assembly came up for election I wanted the actual vote tallies to tell you what our legislators are REALLY voting to do. It’s especially apt when you get a full-color mailer telling you that “Jim Mathias is one of us.” (We’ve received two in the last week; the other said he was small business-friendly.)

Before I go on, allow me to say that Norm Conway and Jim Mathias are nice guys; I can talk to them and in most cases we agree to disagree. But there comes a time to be held in account for the votes they’ve taken and I’m not going to let them get away with talking conservative in the district but voting against its interests when they are in Annapolis.

For example, how many of you like the electric rates you pay? Well, the state mandates the utilities get a portion of their electricity from “renewable” sources or fines utilities who don’t comply. In the last four years both of these Delegates voted for legislation that would charge utilities up to 45 cents per kilowatt hour if they fell short of goals.

Speaking of goals, the pair also believed the hype about greenhouse gases and foolishly signed on to a job-killing measure to reduce greenhouse gases to 75% of 2006 levels by 2020. I’m sure they’ll say that there is an “out” within the law if the economic price is too high (which there is) but why would someone agree to this pig in a poke in the first place? By that same token, these two stuck it to utilities through mandates regarding energy conservation. (This is why companies like Delmarva Power have to push their programmable thermostats.)

And thanks to them our new cars now have to be compliant with the more expensive California emissions standards.

These two even played smoking Nazis when they both voted to ban indoor smoking. Mathias even voted for an amendment to ban tobacco statewide.

And is it small-business friendly to vote every chance you get to empower unions? Over the last four years this dynamic duo (along with Rudy Cane in many cases) have gifted Big Labor with fees from child care providers, gifts to the teachers union, a double dose of mandated breaks (each voted for one version of the bill), binding arbitration (regardless of the cost to local governments), and making those who wish to opt out of the union still pay union dues (as Delegate Conway did in committee.) If it were a vote to amend prevailing wage or beat back the repeal of ‘living wage’, Jim Mathias – yes, Mr. Business-Friendly himself – was there.

How about fans of paperwork? Anyone? Well, these esteemed Delegates put recordkeeping mandates on business, adopting federal mandates for an unemployment bailout after Rudy Cane and Norm Conway helped put the system in a bind by making part-time workers eligible. Even the half-hearted effort to help them this year comes with a number of strings and paperwork attached.

So when these Democrats try to pull the wool over your eyes and tell you they’re business-friendly, you may want to ask them why they voted for these measures. The next installment I’ll do over the next few days looks at just how fiscally responsible these local Democrats are (insert derisive snort here.)

Hometown homage or ambitious career move?

Just five years ago, Jim Mathias was the established and popular mayor of Maryland’s resort haven of Ocean City. Elected in 1996, the affable and gregarious Mathias, 59, could have easily served as the city’s chief executive for decades to come in the tradition of Harry Kelley.

But the death of longtime Delegate Bennett Bozman in April 2006 worried local Democrats who wanted to keep the seat in the face of creeping Republican gains elsewhere on the Eastern Shore.

(continued on my Examiner.com page…)

I note in the post that Jim talks conservative but votes with most other Annapolis liberals. With the exception of the 2007 Special Session Jim has voted against conservative interests at least 75% of the time (see page 8 here). Given the option of taking someone I agree with perhaps 15% of the time or a guy who should pile up a rating in the 70’s or 80’s you know what I’d prefer.

Then Jim can spread his campaign finance wealth around some other way.

A thought or two on Page Elmore

I pretty much knew this was coming, probably sooner than later. But a number of people have weighed in on the passing of Delegate Page Elmore, according to this Daily Times report. Additionally, candidate for District 37A Delegate Dustin Mills wrote:

I had the pleasure of knowing Page and working with him on several occasions; he was a man I considered a mentor and friend. I always admired the way he carried himself and the easy manner in which he spoke with both opponents and friends. While we did not always agree, Page was truly a stalwart leader in Annapolis. He always represented his district well and was a strong representative for his constituents. He was a man many admired, despite their political affiliation. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the Elmore family in their time of grief.

Personally I wouldn’t say I was a great friend of Page’s, but I did appreciate how he would make sure to greet me at those events we were together at. He didn’t come across as phony as some politicians do, probably because he made a living as a businessman and his political life was how he spent “retirement.” Some may feel it’s a shame that Page didn’t take it easy in his waning days but then again if retirement is the time to do that which you love it’s obvious he loved what he did.

Certainly one can find fault with his voting record (Lord knows I did as he voted with I-95 corridor Democrats far too much on key items) but it’s true that you’d be hard pressed to find someone who valued constituent service and the county he represented as much as he did.

Perhaps, though, Elmore’s death at the age of 71 represents the beginning of a changing of the guard in local politics. Of the eight representatives who serve us locally, only two are under 60 years of age (Jim Mathias is 58 and Jeannie Haddaway-Riccio really bends the average at 33 years of age.) Otherwise, we have Rudy Cane (76), Norm Conway (68), Addie Eckardt (66), and Richard Colburn (60). The retiring Lowell Stoltzfus is also 60 years of age. Some of these incumbents face challengers who are many years their junior, a group which includes the aforementioned Mills. At 26 Dustin may represent the greatest age difference between challenger and incumbent in a state race.

With a strong chapter of Lower Shore Young Republicans coming into their own (as well as younger Democrats) the next couple cycles may see a complete change in the local political makeup. It’s a change that can’t come soon enough in a number of cases.