Let the Sunshine In!

Intrepid local reporter Amanda Yeager of the Howard County Times covered three stories in one article, all having to do, in varying degrees, with openness:

1) Howard County waits, with increasing bated breath, for the budget cut recommendations to be made public.  It is understandable, of course, that the County Executive needs time to review the proposals from the various departments.  No sense rushing into any decisions. Wouldn't be prudent. That said, those sands continue to follow gravity's course in the proverbial hourglass of time.  It is only a question of When and When is approaching.

How far will the tendrils of austerity extend? Who will be touched by them?

2)  Kudos to "local blogger" Bill Woodcock for filing a complaint regarding "The People's Voice's" campaign spending reports.  Do their campaign finance filings for this cycle seem a bit hinky in light of the ballots they printed?  A little bit.  Frankly, Lisa Markovitz's online reply comes off as more than a little defensive, with the headline of her complaint response being "Response to a Baseless Complaint."  No mincing words there I suppose.

In any event, I am certain a group claiming such a rigorous and undiluted dedication to the proposition of transparency will be more than happy to cooperate with the Maryland State Board of Elections as they look into this matter.     

Bottom line?  Citizen vigilance is it's own reward.

3) And Jon Weinstein, the new Council Member representing the Fightin' First will be holding his first citizen workshops soon (on January 28 "in the cafeteria of Elkridge Landing Middle School" to be precise).  Excellent news. It should be a fantastic opportunity for information-sharing and neighbor-connecting.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Nanny State Bull$#!&

From a political perspective, Howard County Executive Allan Kittleman  - that still sounds weird - did the right thing when he “officially overturned a ban on the sale of sugary drinks and high-caloric snacks on county property and at events sponsored by the county,” (as originally reported by the illustrious Amanda Yeager of the Howard County Times).

The title refers to my reaction when I first heard about the proposed ban on such sales.   Now, I am not an expert on public health policy and Lord knows that all of my friends are Clean Living adherents, ingesting only the purest, quadruple-filtered H2O and the healthiest, organic, locally sourced free-range flaxseed.  

But I do know something about human behavior and how voters perceive, and react to, actual or potential laws and regulations.  The so-called “soda ban” was a classic example of Democratic over-reach.  It so easily fed into the infuriating but persistent narrative of Democrats imposing restrictions on what people can or cannot do with their hard-earned money because “we know best” (i.e., you can't be trusted to do the right thing, so we will deny you the opportunity to make such a decision).

Now, I sympathize with those who want to promote the consumption of healthier foods and beverages.  There are several avenues to bring about this end. 

First is by embracing a culture of healthier living.  When I got serious about getting into shape, I switched from pop to water and greatly curtailed eating “junk” snacks.  Real food with nutritional value tastes better and I have saved money in the process. I know this may be more of a challenge for families with children and/or those with tighter budgets or less time to explore different food and beverage options, but I believe greater mindfulness regarding wellness practices combined with smart grocery shopping can help combat obesity and related diseases - and far more effectively than the now defunct ban. 

Another way is by purchasing healthier options from vendors who are peddling their wares on county property and/or at county-sponsored events.  The market will react to changes in buying patterns. If Frescas don’t sell, they are less likely to be carried. Space is everything for such merchants.  If water or fruit juices move, they will stock those items instead of sodas.

And the soda ban was so memorable too.  Such an easy thing to run against.  Subtext: "Can you believe those arrogant, know-it-all, pointy-headed jerks?  They don’t even want you to quench your thirst on a hot August day with a good old American Coca-Cola because they know best.  How out-of-touch are these folks?" 

I know I have some friends who think differently on this subject.  Was his decision good public policy?  That can be debated.  But this article is on the politics of the matter, and on that point, given where the electorate is, Kittleman made the best move available.

On another note, and perhaps the topic for another post, I think Kittleman’s emphasis on “trust” as a key factor in his hiring decisions is being applied in a way that will cause short and long term problems for the County and its residents.  There are some smart, talented people who are being pushed out.  Is it because of their well-known service with Ken Ulman? Affiliation with the Democratic Party?  I was not present when these personnel decisions were being made, so I have no idea what is in the hearts and minds of the “deciders” beyond their public pronouncements.  That said, the new Administration is asking several individuals with a great deal of valuable knowledge and institutional memory - and exemplary records as public servants - to move along and that isn’t sitting well with this writer.  The Kittleman folks need to have some outsiders at the table.  We see that in the U.S. Cabinet and the County Government should be no different. 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Immoderate Inclinations

1)        In a county with an active conservative/Tea Party contingent, if Senator Allan Kittleman were really that moderate, don’t you think he would have been primaried from the right?  Yet he was not.  What does that mean?

2)        To answer that question, I recommend reviewing kittlemanfacts.com.    The facts reveal a disappointingly conservative voting record on education, on guns, on economic issues, on the environment, and on women’s health issues.

3)        When a seemingly moderate persona comes in conflict with an actual right wing voting record in Annapolis, what is more important…a “nice guy” personality or a County Executive who shares your values and vision for Howard County…and who has, and who will, deliver real-world results? 

Facts matter. On Tuesday, vote for Courtney Watson for County Executive.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

The Sun Missed Their Own Point – Watson Is the Better Choice

The Baltimore Sun showered Courtney Watson with praise in their recent editorial on the Howard County Executive race.  They referred to Watson as “an immensely gifted and dedicated public servant.” They “hope she [Watson] will find many more opportunities to share her talents with the community.”

Yet, they endorsed Allan Kittleman.  Let us examine their rationale for doing so.

They appear to give a great deal of weight to the importance of having something equating to a relative degree of parity between the two parties.  I can understand the innate appeal such a proposition would have among self-described adherents of a good government philosophy.  For such voters, it sounds inherently “fair”…something that might promote moderation and compromise. However, there can still be a “competition of ideas” within a political system where one party is stronger than the other.  Moreover, many states that have more competitive two-party systems than Maryland still witness highly divisive, highly partisan political environments.   

Frankly, their argument would have more merit if Senator Kittleman had decided to run for Governor.  First, he would have been a stronger candidate for that office compared to Larry Hogan. Second, even the Sun editorial stated that “Maryland is stronger when it has two viable political parties…” Note that.  Not “Howard County” specifically but “Maryland” in general.  Kittleman is not running statewide.  At least not in this election cycle.   

It has been established that Senator Kittleman’s voting record is more conservative than his persona.  How, precisely, is his “kind of independence” going to work out with a Democratic County Council and a Democratic state legislature?  Further, wouldn’t a Republican County Executive be cross-pressured by his base to pull to the right on economic issues?  On some social issues?  It seems to be more of a recipe for stagnation and deadlock than a path to move Howard County forward.

By labeling Kittleman a “relatively liberal Republican” and Watson a “relatively conservative Democrat,” the Sun missed two critical points:

First, both are running as progressives.  The key distinction is that Watson is closer to being a true progressive while Kittleman is highlighting certain policy stances in an effort to position himself as one…when he is really fairly conservative on a host of issues (Right to Work, education funding and assault weapons leap to mind).  Second, one can infer from their description of her that Watson is a different kind of Democrat.  Perhaps distinct enough from Mr. Ulman to provide a “fresh approach to leadership of the county?”  I believe so.

The Sun seems to accept the belief that Ken Ulman will be viewed as a good County Executive, “whose legacy will ultimately be seen as having left the county better than he found it.”

And then they use language that might be found in a classic political science tome.  They state that Kittleman isn’t running “as a repudiation of the incumbent.”  Maybe, maybe not.  The point is that if you believe that Ulman’s legacy should be built upon, why would you endorse someone from the opposing political party?  That invites the politics of “preemption,” to use Professor Skowronek’s typology.  If you want to extend his legacy, it makes far more sense to practice the “politics of articulation” and elect someone distinct from, yet affiliated with, the identity of the incumbent. 

The good news is that there is such a candidate.  Her name is Courtney Watson.

In short, I suggest that the Sun editorial board re-read their own endorsement.  Perhaps they should re-think their conclusion.  A careful review of their own editorial might prompt a new one beginning with the phrase: “On second thought….”

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Breaking Campaign News: Oops Indeed!

Looks like the so-called "disputed" Allan Kittleman quote in the Team Howard Slate mailer was, in fact, properly sourced and completely accurate.  

In short, Kittleman said it.  Moreover, the Watson campaign and allies - contrary to claims otherwise - used the corrected story.

Based on the original Baltimore Examiner print article (dated 10/7/2006), it appears as though the Kittleman quote used in the now famous mailer (a JPG of which can be found here) was indeed 100% on point.  The quote language from both the original print article and the corrected article, which can be found online, is identical.  

The quote, as written by the Examiner Staff Writer, reads:

“ ‘I think that allowing people who are responsible, like teachers and principals, to carry concealed weapons would make individuals think twice about attacking someone,’ said Howard County state Senator Allan Kittleman, R-District 9.”

That sentence appears verbatim on one of the KittlemanFacts.com mailers, the one with the quote from a mother from Ellicott City who asked: "What was Allan Kittleman thinking?”  A picture of the piece appears at the end of this post.

The only difference between the original print article and the corrected online article exists not with Kittleman’s quote, but with the preamble leading into his remarks.  The mailer uses the language found in the online, corrected article that was published on October 7, 2006:

“At least one state senator said arming educators with guns in response to a string of national deadly school shootings is an idea worth considering.”

[Source: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/senator-open-to-weapons-for-administrators/article/55189]

The original print article features a harder-charging lead-in paragraph:

“At least one state senator said teachers should start arming themselves with guns in schools to protect themselves and others from violent acts.”

The key point here is that, in both versions of the article, original and corrected, the Kittleman quote is the exact same.  And yes, the mailer used the corrected version.

This raises several questions…

1. Did the Kittleman campaign know that his quote was, in fact, accurate?  If so, when did they know this?  If they didn’t know, that is poor due diligence on their part.  If they did know, then why did they falsely accuse the Team Howard Slate of putting out misleading information? 

2. Does Kittleman still stand by his quote? If yes, why? If not, why not?

3.  Does Kittleman also stand by the position, appearing later in the same article, where he states that, “I am currently a supporter of reducing the restrictions on people who carry concealed weapons.” If yes, why? If not, why not?

4. Will the Kittleman campaign apologize to the voters of Howard County and/or the Team Howard Slate for stating, non-factually, that the quote in the mailer was inaccurate?

 

So there you have it.  The quote stands as yet another example of Senator Kittleman’s more conservative stances.  One that I am certain his campaign would rather not discuss, as it would add to the perception that some of his beliefs are out-of-step with the majority of Howard County voters.  Definitely not a topic they would like to touch during the same week fellow Republican and current GOP gubernatorial nominee Larry Hogan received the endorsement of the National Rifle Association.

A JPG version of the original print article can be found here: 

The quote from the corrected article can be found here, on the mailer:

 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

So What is New? (Post Sun CE Debate Edition)

It has been a hectic and (potentially) extremely productive 24+ hours.

I couldn't attend the most recent Howard County Executive forum in person, but I followed it via live stream.  The feed was a little choppy and there were some shampoo commercials interspersed between the back-and-forth (frankly, the candidates should have done live reads, Allan Kittleman pitching Prell in front of an audience - in the middle of his remarks - would have been a hoot).  But here are my primary takeaways:

1) I can't speak to the atmosphere in the room, but the debate sounded mostly positive and issue-focused.  While some have been decrying the supposed horrific negativity of this campaign, I heard a forum that was largely civil and focused on substantive matters.  I can't recall any low blows or mudslinging. It was a fact-driven discussion.  Sure, there was some comparative activity occurring, but nothing under-handed. Just a frank exchange of ideas on two governing visions by two candidates.

2) Who won?  Strictly in terms of such esoteric debate criteria as controlling the space, rhetorical abilities, and appearing confident vs. defensive (going to the "strong leader" attribute), I believe there was a winner.  In my estimation, of the two, Courtney Watson came across as the more serious, policy-driven, collected, and better prepared to take on the challenges of the position. In short, Watson won the forum.  By contrast, I thought that Kittleman sounded a little thin-skinned when answering certain questions (this was particularly apparent during the assault weapon discussion, he might have been going for "emphatic" but i think he veered closer to "aggravated" than he intended during the course of his reply).

Further, I think he lapsed a bit into Annapolis-speak (similar to Beltwayese) during his education response.

3) Kittleman made the biggest unforced error of the night, one that undermines his argument about his ability to work across party lines.  During the re-zoning/referendum conversation (this occurred around the 18-minute mark of the forum), he drifted into a discussion about how Maryland has a "one-party system" in Annapolis and how if his name had been off a bill that he sponsored, it probably would have passed instead of stalling in the House of Delegates, which is what happened.

So if he faces these obstacles as a Senator, who serves in Annapolis, won't these same obstacles exist for him if he was elected as our next County Executive? How would these political realities impact his ability to represent our citizens? To work for our interests? I think these are legitimate concerns.

This opened the door for Watson, in her closing remarks, to point to her 93% success rate with her primary sponsored bills passing the Howard County Council, compared to Kittleman's 8% success rate with his primary sponsored bills passing the General Assembly.

Building consensus is important in representative government.  Ideas don't become policy by themselves, it takes skillful collaboration to shape them into legislation that can win the votes necessary to take effect.  Watson has a much stronger record of achievement in this regard.  And this skill-set matters - it impacts the ability to craft effective solutions on education policy, on public safety, on job creation, on environmental concerns, and a host of other policy matters. 

I believe Watson demonstrated, once again, her readiness to work for Howard County.

I hope undecided voters have the opportunity to watch the debate, as well as the League of Women Voters forums, as they make their choices in the days ahead.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Reviewing Two Resumes

For the sake of today’s entry, let us re-conceptualize the campaign season as an extended job interview process.  Albeit one with slightly more hand shaking, parade marching and door knocking compared to the amount of each undertaken by your average applicant for a corporate gig.

Howard County has the opportunity to hire a new County Executive this year.  With that in mind, the electorate – as the hiring authority – may wish to consider one question above all others:  “Of the two candidates for the position, who is best equipped to move Howard County forward over the next four years?”

In my estimation, the answer is Courtney Watson.  Here is why:

1) Her background is much stronger for the County Executive position. 

Given the specific responsibilities of the office, her experience on the Board of Education and her long – and ongoing – service on the County Council have provided her with the expertise that Howard County needs when Ken Ulman leaves the post.  It is my belief that her knowledge of, and involvement with, the issues and solutions that directly impact the lives of Howard County citizens are considerably more extensive compared to her opponent, Senator Allan Kittleman.  I am not calling the Senator a slouch.  I am simply articulating my perspective that Watson’s record of relevant accomplishments is quite impressive.  Our schools and our county are widely respected, and that isn’t by accident.  It takes brainpower, hard work and resolve.  Watson has all of those attributes.   Of course, one can neither credit – nor blame – the state of the County on any one individual.  But when it comes time for our next County Executive to sit at the table, tackling serious challenges with community members, business owners, government officials, and others, I have a great deal of confidence in Watson’s ability to find solutions that improve our quality of life in Howard County. 

2) Her vision for the County is thoughtful and well attuned to the needs of our residents. 

I have read through both of their platforms.  Watson’s successes and proposals underscore her readiness for the County Executive post.  For example, education is an enormously important matter, and Watson’s ideas on enhanced technology utilization in the schools, support for an International Baccalaureate program, and combatting funding inequities are bold yet realistic…and demonstrate that she fully understands the need to address current challenges while keeping an eye on future. 

By comparison (since competitive elections, by their nature, compel them), Kittleman articulates some decent suggestions.  However, I wonder about his ability to accomplish what he says he wants to achieve.  I think Watson is better positioned to turn her ideas into actual programs and services that benefit Howard County residents.  Moreover, he champions a couple of activities on his website that strike me as being a little…off.  For example, he mentions his sponsorship of “Right to Work” legislation.  I can see that playing better in other parts of Maryland, but not so much in Howard County.    

Winding back to the original metaphor, I believe Watson delivers a better answer to the key question, “If hired, what do you want to accomplish?”  If I had to grade their replies to that query based on the body of work presented thus far, I would likely assign Kittleman a B or B- with Watson receiving an A (sorry, I don’t give out A+s). 

And this is Howard County…why not choose excellent when excellent is an option? 

So, I would extend the job offer to Ms. Watson via my vote for her for County Executive.  It is my hope that a majority of Howard County voters will do likewise. 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Elections and Consequences

I, for one, am elated that Election Day is fast approaching.  I am looking forward to a respite from campaign analysis; and a shift to writing about other topics of interest. So stay tuned as more will….not so fast.

This one is for progressive-minded Democrats, Republicans and unaffiliated HoCo voters who are undecided or possibly Kittleman-leaning in the Howard County Executive race.  Let’s play a game of “What If?”

Let’s assume the following scenario:  Larry Hogan – a B-tier GOP gubernatorial candidate - loses to LG Anthony Brown in November, by a single-digit margin, while Senator Allan Kittleman manages to pull off an upset and is elected the next Howard County Executive. 

Given this set of circumstances, Kittleman immediately becomes the R-to-watch and the front-runner for the Republican nomination for Governor in 2018.  Moreover, he would have a genuine shot at winning, as he is clearly more serious than Hogan (who isn't a slouch, but still...).

So by voting for Kittleman this November, you are helping to position a surprisingly conservative Republican for statewide office…someone who received a failing grade from the Maryland State Education Association while obtaining an “A” from the National Rifle Association and possessing a 100% rating from Maryland Right-to-Life.

Neither a moderate temperament nor a centrist voting record on a couple of issues can obscure the reality that Kittleman is not the progressive choice in the race for Howard County Executive.  So my advice, not that you asked for it, is to take a careful look at the totality of his voting history and issue stances and ask yourself, is this someone who will be the best advocate for families and communities like mine or is there a better choice? 

And will a vote for him now help elect a rather conservative Republican Governor in Maryland in 2018?  Just something to consider.

Oh yes...stay tuned, as more will follow.   

The Curious Case of Allan Kittleman’s Campaign

First, I have no personal animus toward Senator Kittleman.  He and I have only spoken in-person on one occasion and he was quite pleasant.  He seems reasonably thoughtful.  Moreover, and this is pure speculation-on-stilts, I assume he makes a fine neighbor.  Need to borrow a snow-shovel to get your car out of the driveway?  I am guessing he has a spare and would be glad to help you out.  Anyway, that is how he comes across.

Even if all of this is true, none of it is a reason to vote for him for Howard County Executive. 

He is running a new set of ads that impart the message: vote for the person, not the party.  I don’t buy into that line of thinking. The party to which a person belongs should tell you quite a bit about him or her.  We aren’t born hard-wired as a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Green or other.  We choose our partisan affiliation.  Sometimes, over the course of our lives, we re-visit our decisions because we evolve and/or the party changes.  For whatever reason(s), Allan Kittleman decided to stick with the GOP, even in its most recent incarnation – with so much energy coming from its Tea Party wing.

So why did he stay?  Well, this is why I encourage my fellow HoCo denizens to check out the website: www.kittlemanfacts.com.  The reader can see that the reality of his voting record in Annapolis does not exactly square with the moderate image many folks have of Senator Kittleman.  Sure, he tends to adopt more centrist positions on some issues compared to his hard-right colleagues…but take a look at his votes on guns, on education, on the minimum wage, on women’s health issues, and on the environment and one can see that the Senator is actually quite conservative on several important public policy matters.

In addition, he seemed to imply at a candidate forum a few weeks back that a vote for him was a vote to pull the Republican Party in the right (read: correct) direction.  If he really wanted to continue fighting that fight (and again, his voting record will demonstrate that he was aligned with less-than-progressive members of the GOP at least on the issues outlined in the previous paragraph), then why not stay in the State Senate and use that as a forum?  Why not run for re-election instead of seeking another office?    I suppose Kittleman and perhaps his Inner Circle know the answers to those questions.  In any event, that goes to his personal motivations, which need to be distinguished from what he would do in the public sphere, if elected. 

And how can we predict what he might do?  By looking at the choices he has made in the past.  Personally, I believe his decision to remain with the Republican Party and a thorough look at his surprisingly conservative voting record on certain issues are what some like to call “telling facts.”  And while mud can be washed off, facts cling for a very long time. 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

 

Battle of the Network Stars - HoCo Style

Thoughts on the Watson ad, further reflections on the Kittleman ad.  All can be found here:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onO9PzNtxTg

And So It Begins: TV Ads and the County Exec Race

As was covered here, Republican State Senator & County Executive candidate Allan Kittleman launched his air game this week.

I believe this represents the first major strategic mistake by his campaign.

I don’t believe a critical mass of voters, a number likely to comprise a sizable portion of the November 2014 electorate, are paying attention to political news in late July.  Some voters are keyed in, but not enough to warrant a significant television ad buy in the post-primary/pre-Labor Day weekend timeframe.

From a strictly technical perspective, the “[select] person-on-the-street” approach of the 30-second spot I viewed last night makes sense.  Third party validation by a few Independent and Democratic voters is smart, in light of the HoCo party affiliation numbers.  The production quality of the ad was…OK.  Not polished, not terrible. Somewhere between Steven Spielberg and Mark Borchardt.  The messaging construct was straightforward “I am a [D/I] but I am voting for Kittleman...” About what one would expect from this sort of commercial.

Personally, I think he is flushing cash.  These spots are what you run in September… with a heavier, more concentrated, advertising buy.  I am assuming the Kittleman high command discussed the timing and the explored the merits of an early launch. There is a legitimate case to be made: frame the narrative of the fall campaign now, save some funds by going up when it is less expensive, maybe/hopefully get a spike with Name ID and a more favorable ballot test to help improve fundraising sooner than later, etc…

Note that I said that there is a legitimate case, but not a compelling one.  There are other, better ways to spend time and resources in July and August...especially when:

a) Funds are limited (Watson enjoys a substantial fundraising advantage over Kittleman) and 

b) When the ad is not a game-changer.  The ad I watched did not fall into that category.   

The bottom line: if too few people are watching, what impact are the TV ads really having?   

By October, the Kittleman campaign is going to wish they didn’t go up on the air so early.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.      

Watson - Kittleman and General Election Forum I

From the east, I rolled into the parking lot adjacent to the Owen Brown Interfaith Center, just ahead of what looked like a derecho tumbling in from the west.  The skies, like the two McDonald’s cheeseburgers I ruefully scarfed down for my dinner-in-a-Honda, added to a sense of foreboding.   Would the power go out at my destination, the aforementioned Center that, at that very evening, was hosting the PFLAG-sponsored Howard County Executive Candidate Forum?  Was my last-minute gastronomical choice something I would regret?  Too many questions, too many onions.

Once safely inside the building, I chatted with some friends, old and new, and after hearing about the transcendence of basil ice cream at Baltimore’s Woodberry Kitchen (note: must return there soon), I took my seat.   The Forum, featuring Democratic County Council Member Courtney Watson and Republican State Senator Allan Kittleman, was about to begin.

   

Let’s skip to the key take-away for a moment. Fundamentally, I think both candidates had good nights.   Technically, they both performed at a high level. But this is America and we like winners and losers, victors and vanquished.   Ties are for the World Cup.

So, I thought, if I was a candidate for County Executive, whose evening would I have rather had.  If ties go to the runner, in Howard County, they go to the Democrat.  And I think Watson beat Kittleman by half-a-step, so she would be the winner.  Here is why:

But first, before I get into any specific hits or misses, it is noteworthy that the very first question dealt with development and the Inner Arbor and both candidates voiced support for the Inner Arbor Plan.  According to my hand-written notes, Kittleman said that the Plan would be “a good thing for Howard County” while Watson indicated that she was “excited about the Inner Arbor Plan.”  There you have it, bipartisan support for the Inner Arbor.  Both candidates expressed hope for a productive implementation process moving forward. Let’s hope that everyone is listening on that point.

Rather than do a topic-by-topic summary/analysis, which Amanda Yeager did with her usual skill and panache (the article can be found right here), I will focus on some of the prevailing themes and other notable moments.

Watson’s responses to the moderator’s questions tended to follow a logical progression: respond directly to the query posed, lay out the facts (and figures) as well as the relevant history on the issue, shift to the future by talking about a path forward with specific programs and policy proposals.  Very rational, very efficient.  The message is clear: Watson has a serious command of the issues facing Howard County and the knowledge to work out practical solutions to these challenges.

Kittleman’s replies tended to be broader, with more of an emphasis on a combination of general principles (including “predictability for businesses,” “we need people to have a seat at the table,” and we must “live within our means”) with anecdotal information/mini-vignettes to illustrate/support a larger narrative.  He would frequently pivot to his experience working at both the county and state levels and talk about working across party lines.  Overall, it made for an effective, more story-driven, presentation.

But now we come to the central dilemma facing the Kittleman campaign, in stressing his independence, he is highlighting that from which he is running away – an increasingly conservative Republican Party, a party to which he still belongs, a party that is out-of-touch with the values of many Howard County voters.  To listen to him speak is to hear a voice from the past…a reminder that once-upon-a-time there was a Ford/Rockefeller wing of the GOP.  He states he is running to reclaim the party, but why should the electorate get involved in his realignment efforts? Voters already have a progressive choice in Courtney Watson and the Democratic Party.  Why vote Republican in light of the GOP's platform and priorities?  I don’t believe that Kittleman has a compelling answer to that query, so he triangulates, hoping that his identification with, and advocacy for, certain progressive causes will peel away just enough votes in November. 

Ultimately, I believe Kittleman is asking for voters to take one leap too many, and in the wrong direction.  I understand the frustration he is experiencing with today’s GOP and commend him for wanting to bring the party back from the brink.  But given a choice between a candidate representing a progressive party; and a candidate from a conservative party, who is more likely to be cross-pressured by a right-wing base of supporters, I think the vast majority of Democrats, most independent-minded moderates, and even some Republicans, will choose Courtney Watson.  At least this is where I believe we are headed.  Kittleman has approximately 118 days to shake things up and, personally, I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes.

Highlights for both candidates:

I thought Watson showed some passion when talking about mental health as a public crisis in “Howard County and beyond.”  The listener came away with the impression that she really wanted to work on this challenge, and that same determination carried over to her response on the next question, which focused on LGBTQ homelessness.

Apparently some in the audience came away with a different perception of Kittleman’s closing remarks.  They thought he sounded too strident, too defensive, and/or talked too much about himself.  I get where they are coming from, but I thought he demonstrated genuine passion (there is that word again) when he discussed equal rights and the importance of those values and his fight to defend such principles (with his support for Maryland’s Question 6 being the focus of his statement).  

I believe the highlights of both candidates elevated the discourse.  Kudos to both.  

  

Question from the mailbox: “So did anyone go negative?”

Not too many elbows were thrown.  Kittleman was the first to venture in what could be described as comparative campaigning.  In response to a question that centered about how best to preserve the character of our communities, in light of development in certain areas, and what would the candidates do in terms of housing options, he basically said that the County’s plan regarding housing “is not working.”

Watson decided to shine the spotlight on some votes that Kittleman took; votes against funding a local public safety training center and against a police helicopter.  Kittleman’s response came across as just a little defensive, just a bit shaky. 

Both statements were well within the bounds of fair play.  No low blows. The exchanges allowed the voters to learn a little more about the two candidates.

Overall, it was a well-organized event that covered a wide range of important issues and those in attendance heard some substantive responses.  Both candidates probably walked away feeling as though they largely accomplished what they set out to achieve. It marked a strong start to the General Election Forum season.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

  

The Forum (Part Two) - A County in Bloom

One of the recurring themes at the League of Women Voters of Howard County's candidate forum was how best to manage growth.

Having conducted research on behalf of economic development organizations in regions that are trying to rebound after years of decline, I know of many municipal and county officials who would love to swap their problems for ours.

I've spoken with residents in areas facing truly tough times: dwindling populations, tighter budgets, higher crime rates, crumbling roads, major employers shutting down or cutting back...leading to diminished job opportunities.  They love their communities too, but many are debating the wisdom of staying.  They want to be part of a turn-around story but they have kids to raise or they simply want to be able to walk around their neighborhood without tensing up when they hear footfalls on the sidewalk behind them.

They want a quality of life similar to what we have in Howard County.

So the questions posed to the County Executive candidates dealt with such matters as the impact of growth on transportation and our infrastructure, on our school system, on housing.

[Before I go any further, I feel the need to disclose that I support Courtney Watson for County Executive.  So if you are expecting a consistently impartial, non-partisan analysis, you are in the wrong place.]

But back to the thread.   

First, the County Executive race. Strictly from the vantage point of performance: both County Council member Watson and State Senator Allan Kittleman did well. I would have been stunned otherwise. Both are smart, capable public officials.

It really comes down to who has the best experience for the position and best vision for the County.  This is where Watson's service as a member of the County Board of Education is hugely important.  Howard County public schools have a reputation for excellence and there is a concern that growth will put pressures on our education system.  As the Republican candidates for County Council (District One) noted during their panel discussion, our schools attract families and businesses, this drives economic growth and helps create the highly desirable communities that we have in Howard County.  Thus, having the in-depth understanding that Watson possesses on educational matters is an incredibly important attribute and a key point of differentiation between her and Senator Kittleman.

Moreover, when given the opportunity to make closing statements, Sen. Kittleman chose to talk about his father's work on civil rights, which was both commendable and courageous.  Again, putting on my political consultant hat, voters generally prefer to hear about the future than the past.  Tell us what you plan on doing. So when Watson spoke about keeping Howard County a "great place to live, work and play" and how she was poised to "help solve the challenges of the future" - I believe her forward-looking orientation is more aligned with voter concerns.  Kittleman should have pivoted from talking about the past to his vision for the future, but he did not do so.  At least I don't see anything like that in my notes.

I really wanted to cover the County Council - District One discussion in this post, but it looks like we are going to have a trilogy.   

Stay tuned, as more will follow.
  

Clash of the Titans

Every so often, it is important to get the adrenaline riled.  Otherwise, the tedium sets in.  Once that happens, sloth and melancholia tend to lurk about, shambling listlessly through dimly lit alleyways. No sense inviting them over.  

For the politically-attuned, General Election Day offers the prospect of serious action, excitement of the first order.  In 2014 anno Domini, in our corner of the known universe, the marquee countywide general election matchup will be County Council member Courtney Watson (D) vs. State Senator Allan Kittleman (R) in the race to succeed the outgoing County Executive, Ken Ulman.   

This is our Ali – Frazier.

Even with historical trends favoring the hypothesis that 2014 will be a decent Republican year, Howard County Democrats outnumber Republicans by more than a 3 to 2 margin (93,354 registered Ds as compared to 56,285 registered Rs).

The Watson campaign, adopting the structures proposed in Professor Stephen Skowronek’s seminal work, The Politics Presidents Make, is practicing the politics of Articulation.  She is assuming that the current County Executive’s regime is resilient, and will be viewed as such through November.  In which case, affiliating with the current Administration makes the most sense.  Her campaign’s messaging reflects a theme of continuity (“continuing the progress in Howard County”).  Watson’s promise is that she will use her expertise to move the County forward, charting her own course yet following a path not too dissimilar from the one chosen by Ulman.

Her challenge is establishing her own brand in the minds of voters.  At the presidential level, sometimes those who adopt the politics of articulation (“orthodox-innovators” to use Skowronek’s descriptor) fare quite well (Theodore Roosevelt) while others have more difficulty adapting to changing circumstances (George H.W. Bush).  The good news for Watson is that she is a known entity with her own record of accomplishments and that, as of this writing, Howard County voters are less likely to be disenchanted with the state of the county as compared to the state of the state, or the state of the nation. 

Meanwhile, the Kittleman campaign is banking on the politics of Pre-emption.  They recognize that the party affiliation numbers are not in their favor and are downplaying the Republican label, at least outside of Western HoCo.  Their theme is that Kittleman is a “proven Independent leader.” He is promoting his support for marriage equality and reminding voters about his family’s long-standing commitment to civil rights.  In short, he is not running as a conservative Republican.  He has little choice. His electoral predicament is not dissimilar from the one facing Nixon in '68, or Clinton in '92...both of whom were candidates belonging to the non-dominant order of their time.  

The Kittleman strategy is to work for a heavy Republican turnout in County Council District Five and hope for a depressed Democratic turnout countywide.   Unfortunately for his campaign, the one true swing district in the County – Council District One – is held by one Courtney Watson, who has represented Eastern Howard County on the Council since 2006.   If Kittleman can’t win in the First, he is, in all probability, doomed. 

So who will win?  The smart money is on Courtney Watson.   If Democratic turnout is 60% or higher, Watson should win.  60,000 votes should be sufficient for victory this time around, and Ulman garnered 66,121 four years ago in his rout of Trent Kittleman…in what was, nationally, a Republican election cycle.  Sixty percent of 93,354 registered Democrats works out to 56,012 votes…that means that Watson would only need 4,000 votes among Republicans, unaffiliated and “other” voters to reach the 60,000 figure.  Even assuming a two percent under-vote for that particular office, 60% Democratic turnout overall should elect Watson as our next County Executive.

With 60% Democratic turnout, Kittleman will have a tough time cobbling together a coalition that would approach 50% plus one.  His hope rests in a Democratic turnout at or below 50%.  If that occurs, and if Republicans follow the party-line and turn out in sufficient numbers (65%+ GOP turnout; 90% - 10% for the Senator) and if Independents account for approximately 25% of the electorate and if they break 8 – 5 for Kittleman, and if he pulls a slightly higher percentage of Democratic voters into his column (15%) than Watson does among Republicans (10%), then yes, Kittleman could emerge with between 50.1% and 51.5%, with 52% most likely being his hard ceiling.

Notice the number of “ifs” in that paragraph?

Watson’s ceiling is closer to 60%.... and consists of far fewer ifs.  She needs to energize the base.  Turning to elements beyond the direct control of her campaign, it would be helpful to her efforts if the best Democratic candidates emerged victorious in the swing districts in the June primary elections…nominees who can motivate Democrats to cast their ballots in the General Election while also appealing to Independent voters.  Specifically, I am thinking about Howard County Council District One as well as the State House of Delegates District 9B.  I have some thoughts as to the ideal Democratic nominees for both of those races.  I will share them in a later post.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.