Future: Override

So the veto came, to the shock of none.

Assuming the four Council-members hold the line and no one "evolves" (or "flip-flops," depending on your point-of-view) on the issue, the Howard County Council appears set to override County Executive Kittleman's veto of the Nutritional Standards bill later on this month.

Policy considerations aside (although I tend to favor the compromise bill that the Council developed), I've gone back and forth on the wisdom of Kittleman's move from a political perspective. Ultimately, i think he is making a mistake.  But is it a good or bad kind of mistake for him?

I listened to his rationale for his veto, which can be found here, frankly it sounded like a boilerplate GOP play - perhaps principled but a little tired, mostly uninspiring and a bit platitudinous.  Yet another variation on "Get the government out of our lives! (except on the following 50 issues but let's not discuss those right now)."

So his veto helps him with his HoCo base, although I am not sure he needed that (or is he fearing a contested primary in 2018?!).  Perhaps he thinks a more confrontational posture will help him in future negotiations with the Council on other issues.  He has demonstrated that he can throw an elbow, OK..so what comes next?  Maybe he is looking at his future and sees a shift to the right as necessary if he wants to hold a political office that represents more than Howard County.  Does that mean the end of "Mr. Nice Guy?"  Perhaps the Kittleman brand is going to take another turn.  Maybe "Mr. No!"  That doesn't exactly radiate the sort of optimism one might expect from a "different kind of Republican." Let me use more "quote" marks.

Bottom line in this hastily written post - this is probably smart politics for Kittleman over the long-haul, assuming he has aspirations that require being nominated by a Republican party that is drifting ever right-ward.  But it is bad policymaking.  Moreover, he better get ready for life after the override because there is a fine line between "principled" and "ineffectual" - especially if he finds himself standing alone (or only with Mr. Fox) one too many times. There is a Howard County mainstream and right now, he is squarely to the right of it.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Direct Mail Call

Enjoy hearing about D12? Direct mail?  This post is for you...

Yes, a video clip!

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Contingency, Community and Waffles

Claiming “Otherness” is a useful thing in political campaign.  It helps establish the perception of a moral center around which one’s allies can rally.  It assists in the creation of an antagonist to further a narrative. “They” are not “of us.”  “Their” preferences are alien to ours.  “Ours” is the authentic vox populi.

While it is within the bounds of fair play to have a civil discussion, where debates among reasonable people are grounded in reality, it is quite another case to insist that one’s opinions are true simply because…well…one believes them to be true.  “Your plan cuts down more trees than our plan.  Why?  Because it is your plan and therefore it must lead to bad things!” When one side adopts a “final vocabulary,” as Richard Rorty might say, it inhibits the ability of such a population to consider the validity of different perspectives.  It is a signifier of a closed mind.

Political language is meant to persuade.  Words and numbers are combined to develop the most compelling argument for (or against) one particular position or cause.  Rhetoric is employed to communicate that argument to an audience.  It is hoped that the language will move that audience to make a decision and take an action.  That said, when language is twisted and debased... or when the “others” are termed “enemies,” that coarsens the discussion and weakens the foundations of democratic governance.

Imagine if two groups were discussing waffles.  One group describes a waffle as “leavened batter or dough cooked between two plates, patterned to give a characteristic size, shape and surface impression" (source: Wikipedia).  Another group describes them as flattened disks of steaming evil and those who consume them are bad, ill-intentioned people.  Where is the ability to find common ground?  How can productive communication occur?

Of course that is what former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and certain GOP operatives did in the 1980s and 1990s when they sought to turn the word “liberal” into a vicious epithet.  Sully the group and make their ideas unpalatable.  In the short term, it might have given Gingrich and his coterie some victories….but it helped usher in an era of distrust, of hyper-partisanship, of gridlock and bitterness.

I have no hopes that his legacy will yield in favor of a newfound spirit of respect and cooperation anytime soon, not in DC.  That said, I hope in our corner of the universe, in Howard County, we can find ways to talk with each other civilly, and not at each other angrily.  

At least we should be able to agree on the definition of a waffle.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

  

     

2014 Columbia Village Elections Re-Cap (with Suggestions)

While not always the case, participating in Columbia Association politics is akin to playing soccer with a satchel full of anvils.  Progress may be slow, it may hurt a bit, but grit will get you where you need to go…eventually.  And even then, sometimes you score an own goal.

This past weekend’s village election outcomes were disappointing, but not entirely unexpected, at least in two out of the three contested CA races.  Based on the resident votes (excluding the CA votes), Fontaine and Schwarz kept it close.  Klein’s machine – more Rube Goldberg than Tammany Hall – managed a narrow 52% - 48% victory once the parcel votes are removed from the equation.  No one will be calling him Landslide Alan anytime soon.  Schwarz obtained 44% of the vote in Hickory Ridge, that is a respectable showing in any book.  The Waller defeat was a bit of an upset, particularly in light of her record of community service in Town Center.  Well Ms. Ketley, check your calendar because it is time to govern like it is 2014.

A good friend (and future Delegate) penned some thoughts on increasing voter turnout in these elections.  The post can be found right here.

  

I thought I would offer up some suggestions of my own:

“Vote Columbia” community gatherings, held in the Village Centers in April, one week before Election Day.  Candidate forums are great but they tend to occur on weekday evenings and they can be sparsely attended.  Hosting Election Day community gatherings is fine, but I think such events – ideally - should launch a week of reflection and discussion of relevant CA and village issues.  So I would have them occur on the Saturday before the traditional Election Day.

Why not host a family-friendly event in each village, with food and entertainment, where residents can visit with their neighbors and receive information about the candidates…prior to Election Day itself.  Frankly, and this is very important, they should be able to vote at such events too, which leads me to:

Early/extended voting periods.  Beyond the mail-in ballots, it would be helpful to have more than just one formal window of opportunity to cast one’s ballot in-person.  Kings Contrivance allows residents to vote on Friday evening as well as Saturday.  I recommend formally opening the polls at the aforementioned “Vote Columbia” event….and then either keeping them open for a full week, or at least for the kick-off event as well as Thursday and Friday in addition to Election Day Saturday.  And advertise this expanded window.  Yes, voters can walk-in with mail-in ballots, but how many are aware that this is an option?  How many know where to go?    

An incentive.  While participation in the electoral process is its own reward, voting in village elections is slightly different than casting a ballot for a state or federal office.  In Wilde Lake, and I assume other villages, we receive a slip of paper with a number on it that identifies our specific ballot.  What if a drawing was held where the holder of that number received a discount on a CA program or service?  Nothing too extravagant of course, but enough to encourage more residents to take more of an interest in village elections.  I hear some villages hold raffles, so this suggestion is a variation on that theme…and it should be done in all of the Villages and Town Center.

Electronic voting options. This should absolutely be explored.

Design changes with the mail-in ballots. I think they can resemble junk mail.  Perhaps another look should be taken at them…to consider how to make them more eye-catching, more likely to be opened and read, and acted upon by the recipients.

Anyway, this is a start.  Although the ground is wet and I am sans cleats, I am just trying to kick this ball down the field a bit. 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

A Baker's Dozen (Minus One) - Endorsement Edition

Time to engage in some Right Mindfulness.  The four-mile jog this morning definitely helped reframe my thinking…a pouring of a fresh, hot cup o’ perspective.

So let us focus on Maryland's District 12 today, my home district.  But first some quick thoughts:

Yesterday, I attended the Thurgood Marshall Democratic Club of Howard County candidate forum/endorsement meeting.  It was an absolutely gorgeous April morning and, although woefully bereft of my coffee, spirits were high.  Prime parking near the hotel that was hosting the gathering was tight…but another driver waved me into a spot, although we arrived at roughly the same time.  As she drove past, I realized the driver was a candidate.  We briefly exchanged pleasantries.  Total class act.

This positive energy continued through TMDC President Ethel Hill’s opening remarks and County Council member Courtney Watson’s statement.  The peaceful easy feeling ended abruptly…like a car door being slammed on the third phalange…when Lisa Markovitz (County Council District 1 candidate) stated: “village centers should be retained, if possible.”  [Emphasis mine]. Cue record screech sound effect.  This is where the reasonable-seeming mask, and it is a mask, is coming off that campaign.   Maybe it was a verbal gaffe on her part…but I think it reveals a window into a “let’s go back to the past” mentality that is bad for area merchants, bad for local shoppers and bad for Howard County as we seek to support existing residents and businesses…and attract new ones…to help keep our communities vital.     

Let us return to District 12. No sense in allowing the ill humors to gain a foothold.  Here are my endorsements for the Democratic Primary Election.  There are three of them (the 12^th is a multi-member state legislative House District that elects three Delegates).

There is a question that pollsters ask, there are a few variations but it boils down to: “Does Candidate X understand the problems of people like me?”  I believe that Brian Bailey not only gets the challenges that families deal with in our district, but that he will be a capable advocate for our families in Annapolis.  I’ve been to multiple forums and he consistently presents a thoughtful plan for addressing some of the most pressing concerns facing Howard and Baltimore counties…ranging from education to job creation to transportation to environmental issues.  I hope that voters in our district take a good look at Mr. Bailey’s platform and consider the wide range of support that he is receiving from several progressive organizations. I’ve been around candidates long enough to sort the wheat from the chaff, the sincere from the phony, and the workhorses from the showhorses…I believe that Brian Bailey is the real-deal, ready to roll up his sleeves, and toil for the 12^th. I stand four-square behind Mr. Bailey and I hope he is nominated in June and elected in November.

Several months ago, I would have thought it unlikely that I would write the following words, but I am supporting Clarence Lam as well.  I had some early concerns about his positioning, but he has proven to be a formidable candidate. He must have a teleporter because he is all over the District.  He is smart, hard-working and has an impressive background as a health care practitioner (Dr. Lam is a “board-certified physician in preventative medicine at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health”) and as a public policy expert, having worked at the federal and state levels.  He is also active in the local community through multiple organizations.  The potential is there for a distinguished career in public service and that is why I support Clarence Lam for Delegate.

I wanted to endorse Dr. Terri Hill earlier, but something held me back. Perhaps some reflexive contrarian impulse kicked in when the Democratic establishment lined up in support of her candidacy (author’s note: I have a general predisposition in favor of insurgent campaigns).  That said, focusing on her stellar qualifications, her broad and deep knowledge about health care, and her commitment to social justice, I am convinced that Dr. Hill would be a great state legislator.  Harvard smart with an easy-going personality and accessible communications style, Terri Hill is ready, from “Day One” as the saying goes, to be an excellent representative for the 12^th District.

If I had a fourth vote, it would be for Adam Sachs.  A low-key fellow with some bold progressive ideas…with the moxie to quote Lou Reed as he did at a recent forum…it would be interesting to see what someone like him could do in Annapolis. 

In the interest of riding this endorphin wave for as long as possible, I am not going to comment at length on the other six Democratic candidates at this time. I have already written about disbarred attorney Michael Gisriel.  I think Cohen is a complete non-starter. The others (Ebersole, Stewart, Dongarra and McGuirk-Spence) all have positives and negatives, some have more of the latter than the former.  But that is a discussion for another day, if necessary.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

         

Promise in the Ninth

Last night, I was bombing down Centennial Lane at a rate of speed that would be considered inoffensive to all but the most by-the-book Maryland State Troopers.  A perfect early evening for driving…yet something was out of sync. Here it was, mid-seguing-into-late April, yet it felt autumnal with the chill biting through the air.  The newly installed candidate yard signs added to the early October-vibe that permeated the scene. 

The atmospherics of the election calendar brought me back to present moment.  It was that sense of promise; a feeling that is abundant this time of year, that convinced me that the bittersweet landscape of the fall was months away…that Yeats’ “nine-and-fifty swans” had not yet landed on a cold, leaf-strewn lake.

Promise is a good starting point for a discussion of Ryan Frederic’s State Senate campaign (Maryland – District Nine). 

I had not met him previously, but have some friends who spoke highly of him.  So I took the long, harrowing trip from Wilde Lake (“The Land of Dreams”) to the Howard County Conservancy in Woodstock, Maryland…the gateway to Western Howard County.

Gathered there, in the Conservancy’s Gudelsky Center, were a few dozen Democrats, ready to get down for a classic meet-and-greet candidate reception.

It is important to note at this point that candidate remarks at such events generally range from dreadful to uninspired.  Too long, too short, too self-involved, too minutiae-centric, too boring…the spectrum of sins is long and oft well-covered.

I was thus pleasantly surprised that Frederic’s stump speech was…quite good.  His presentation was concise and focused. He related his impressive business experience and background in community service to tangible issues that voters care about (growing the economy, creating jobs, etc…).  In the parlance of the political industry, he pivoted very well from biographical information to voter concerns and policy positions.  Although a new candidate, he showed a level of seasoning and maturity that is generally only found among those who have served in office for many years.  So that is a big plus.

More importantly, he is the one Democrat running in the primary who embraces – and will fight for – Democratic values.  He is pro-choice; his primary opponent is pro-life.  He is pro-marriage equality; I do not believe his primary opponent is (if I am wrong on this, feel free to comment below).  In Frederic, voters in the 9^th have a genuine progressive with a strong record of job creation.  His Democratic opponent lacks these credentials.

Some say that his primary opponent (Daniel Medinger), as a pro-life Democrat, is better situated to defeat a pro-life Republican (Gail Bates) in the fall.  No.  Pro-choice Republicans, faced with making a decision between two pro-life candidates, are highly likely to stay with their party.  Pro-choice Republicans, given the option of voting for a Pro-life Republican and a Pro-choice Democrat, are at least cross-pressured.  Yes, Republicans in Western Howard County tend to be conservative, but if Frederic picks up a respectable percentage of pro-choice and/or moderate Republicans – and manages to capture a 6 – 5 majority among unaffiliated voters (aka Independents), he has a shot at putting together a winning coalition. A much better shot than Medinger.

Combine that with his demonstrated ability to fund a campaign, you have to say that Ryan Frederic has promise. 

Considering all of these factors together, I am endorsing Frederic for the Democratic nomination for the Ninth Senate District.

With the election of candidates in the 9^th such as Frederic and Tom Coale (in 9B), voters can send a new generation of thoughtful, energetic progressives to represent us in Annapolis.  And that is good news in any season. 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Gisriel Gets…What Exactly?

A one-time lawmaker should be expected to know and follow the law.  That is a reasonable enough starting-point.

Meet Michael Gisriel, disbarred attorney, long-time lobbyist and (relatively) new resident of Maryland's 12^th State House of Delegates District.  A completely unremarkable fellow, except for the fact that he wants to be one of the three Delegates elected from the 12^th.  Pump your brakes, Mike.

You might have seen his signs around town…or received one of his direct mail pieces featuring what appear to be photographs of the candidate from the ‘90s.  His slogan is “Gisriel Gets It Done!”

So what has Mr. Gisriel gotten done lately?

“The respondent, Michael Gisriel, having been found in violation of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.15, 3.1, and 8.4, was disbarred.”*

“Gisriel’s conduct, which constituted violations of many of the Rules of Professional Conduct, exacerbated by his hubris in the handling of the $1,000 check, warrants disbarment.” (5 – 2 majority, filed on June 18, 2009)

Source: http://mdcourts.gov/opinions/coa/2009/3a08ag.pdf

*[Rule 1.1 (Competence), Rule 1.3 (Diligence), Rule 1.4 (Communication), Rule 1.15 (Safeguarding Property), Rule 3.1 (Meritorious Claims and Contentions) and Rule 8.4 (Misconduct)]

His direct mail piece, presented as a “Report from Annapolis!,” is further evidence that Mr. Gisriel has lost the plot.  Running as an uber-insider, especially when one is a non-incumbent, is rarely a sound idea. His listed accomplishments involve such action verbs as “attended…spoke…spoke….and met.”  These are typical hallmarks of success for a lobbyist…. at least good for billable hours.  (possible new slogan: “Gisriel Gets Paid in Full"?)

His January 15, 2014 campaign finance report shows a number of contributions from individuals and organizations outside of the 12^th District.  His is not a grass-roots campaign.  It barely even qualifies as Astroturf. 

The only upside to his highly improbable nomination and election would be the joy I would experience calling my local friends on Wednesday, November 5, 2014 to see who among them wants to run for his seat in 2018.

Welcome to the 12th, Mr. Gisriel.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

The Reagan

Being fond of parody and political satire from days of yore, I present...The Reagan (1989):

Once upon an Inauguration Day dreary,
while George (HW) Bush pondered weak, but not wimpy,
over America's staggering deficits galore -
While he nodded, nearly napping, suddenly,
there came a tapping,
As of some staff member gently rapping, rapping
at the Oval Office door.
"Tis Dan Quayle," he muttered, "thinking it the
bathroom door,
Only this, and nothing more."

Ah distinctly,  he remembered, it was three months ere November
And Mike Dukakis was the ghost of the dying ember
upon the floor.
Eagerly, he feared the morrow, vainly he sought to borrow
From the taxpayers funds (not by taxes) by the score
Yet the promise he had made, "new taxes are no more."
Nameless here, for evermore.

Open here he flung the door, when amazed at who stood before
In there stepped a stately Reagan, as from the olden days
of yore.
Not in the least pleasantry made he, not a
minute stopped or stayed he
But, with the mien of a dictator of Haiti
walked through Bush's office door.
Sat upon his chair, near the chamber door.
Perched, and sat, and nothing more.

Then this stately Californian caused Bush to smile
By his whimsical and fatherly decorum of the countenance
he wore -
"Ronnie, my friend," he said, "surely you
know of my troubles by the score.
Advise me, how do I increase government revenue when
'No new taxes' I swore?"
Quoth the Reagan: "Promise Nevermore."

Startled at the silliness of the reply the actor had spoken
"Ah, Ron, you know that you are President no more
If it weren't for the Twenty-Second Amendment, you would
probably serve two terms more.  Yet if I don't lessen
the deficit, four years from now, the voters
would throw me out through the White House door."
Quoth the Reagan: "Tax the poor."

"My image is bad enough," said Bush, "the public
thinks that the Vice President is a moron to the core.
Congress chooses my Flexible Freeze plan to ignore
The Press believes that the 'thousand points of light'
refers to my millionaire friends galore
What do I do?
Tell me, tell me the answers I implore."
Quoth the Reagan not a word
Only a gentle snore.

- Jason Booms, 1989 (English, "5th hour").

*Irony alert:  Ten years after this poem was scribbled onto a piece of paper, I worked on Vice President Dan Quayle's Presidential campaign.  Life truly does follow some unexpected paths.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

The Forum (Part III) – And the First shall be last.

Dawn.  Kowloon.  The Walled City.  The first rays of sunlight meandered between the tenement houses and gently alit upon a window looking out upon a caged balcony.  That window…and the figure talking into a telephone behind it…were visible from the rooftop of the apartment across the alleyway.  The sole human presence on that rooftop was a sniper, who was too pre-occupied focusing the sights on his Vapensmia NM149 to notice…

…Is how this post would begin if it were a Robert Ludlum novel.  Alas, it is instead about the League of Women Voters of Howard County Candidate Forum, specifically the panel discussion among the six candidates for Howard County Council (District One).

Perhaps it would be better crafted as a Ludlum work.  It could be titled The Elkridge Gambit.   But such thoughts had not yet entered my mind as I was scribbling away in that dark auditorium, watching four Democratic and two Republican candidates sitting onstage behind a rectangular table.  Each had the opportunity to deliver very brief opening and closing statements…and field questions from the Moderator.

Before I launch into a brief analysis of the candidate performances that specific evening, it should be noted that I, and some friends of mine, support one of them: Jon Weinstein (D).  I have other friends who support another, Wendy Royalty (D).  Regarding the other two Democratic candidates, I don’t believe I have ever met Dave Grabowski and my contact with Lisa Markovitz was limited to a brief exchange after the Forum.  I have not made the acquaintance of the two Republican candidates: Kevin Forrest Schmidt and David Blake Melton.    

My interest thus declared, here we go:

I believe Weinstein had the best night.  An experienced campaigner, he seemed comfortable with the format. He delivered answers that provided the audience members with insights into his perspective on governing: which includes a recognition of the interdependent nature of multiple issues (education, economic growth, transportation, etc…) and the importance of working collaboratively to find “balanced,” thoughtful solutions to the challenges facing Howard County.

Weinstein is a small businessman who has experience working with government agencies to promote “efficiency, accountability and transparency.”  He ran a good race in a tough seat (House District 9A) four year ago and enjoys some residual Name ID from that effort. I think his small business background, his service in the U.S. Army Reserves, and his community activism make him an excellent candidate for the General Election.  The First is a swing district, the only one of the five, and I believe that Weinstein can hold the Democratic base while pulling in a good number of Independent voters and perhaps a decent percentage of progressive-minded Republicans.  In my opinion, he is Democratic Party’s best bet to hold the seat and allow Democrats to maintain their 4 to 1 advantage on the County Council.

Royalty turned in the second best performance of the evening.  Having served as a pollster to dozens of national, state and local campaigns over the past 24 years, it is relatively easy to identify those who are new to the campaign trail as a candidate.  Royalty sounded like a candidate who is still working to find her voice.  Her late entry is not helping her (she filed in February and it appears as though she didn’t begin exploring the possibility of running for that Council seat until January…according to this article).

Make no mistake; Royalty is qualified to hold the office.  One of my higher compliments about someone is that they are serious, and she is serious.

She had a solid response to the question about support for the non-profit arts community when she remarked how “non-profits save millions of taxpayer dollars.”  This reinforces her platform calling for fiscal soundness.   She provided thoughtful insights on education and teacher morale (note: the Howard County Education Association endorsed Weinstein).  She offered up a vision of greater walkability around, on a better mix of businesses along, Route 40 (I believe it behooves candidates to spend more time talking about the future than the past, so this was a plus).

I really wish she chose to run for a different office.  She is the kind of candidate I like to support. She would make a great candidate for the state legislature (frankly her public policy background seems better suited for Annapolis) or a fine countywide candidate for the Board of Education, given her experience with various education-related organizations.  If Weinstein weren’t running, I would be advocating for her nomination in June and election in November. But that’s the problem, he is. I think he brings a unique skill-set and perspective to the Council. Moreover, I believe Weinstein, not Royalty, is the candidate best positioned to hold the Council seat in what could be a tough election cycle for the Democratic Party nationally.

Markovitz offers a different vision of Howard County.  Frankly, I had a tough time hearing her.  Perhaps it was the acoustics of the auditorium or the placement of the microphone but I missed out on approximately 20% of what she said, so I had to visit her website to fill in some blanks. I am not a particular fan of the organizations with which she is affiliated.  She has a Weltanschauung regarding land use planning, but one that seems out of step with most of the other Council members.  Is she qualified? Probably.  But she seems like the kind of candidate who, if elected, might adopt obstructionist tactics.  Ultimately, I don't think such a worldview or approach is beneficial for District One or the County as a whole.

One of Grabowski’s rationales for running seems to be that this represents the next logical step in his community involvement.  That is a terrible reason to seek public office. It sounds more than a little self-involved.  As a message, it doesn’t say anything about what he would do, if elected, for the citizenry of the First.  Over the course of the forum, he proceeded to sketch out something resembling a nascent platform, which is not encouraging since he has been in the race since June 2013, so he has had plenty of time to develop a more compelling and coherent rationale for his candidacy.  Is he qualified?  On paper, most likely.  In reality? He seems more public access than prime time.

In the interest of wrapping this long post up, I am not going to spend much time talking about the two Republican candidates: Schmidt and Melton.  Of the two, the former is stronger than the latter and will probably emerge as the Republican nominee.   Could either win?  It would take a certain confluence of events (heavy GOP turnout combined with light Democratic turnout in the First and/or the nomination of a weak Democratic candidate).  That said, demographics and party affiliation numbers give the Republican a fair shot at a pick-up. 

Next up…a return to Kowloon?  

Stay tuned, as more will follow.   

 

The Forum (Part One) - Law and Order

“I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe... Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those... moments... will be lost in time, like tears... in... rain. Time... to die...” – Roy Batty, Bladerunner

When you have been in and around political campaigns long enough, you will have seen some remarkable things.  Last night, the c-beams were, at best, glowing dimly at the Peter and Elizabeth Horowitz Visual and Performing Arts Center on the campus of Howard Community College.  For at that location, at that time, several public office-holders and seekers took to the stage for a League of Women Voters of Howard County-sponsored candidate forum.

I will focus on the highlights and the lowlights.  Moreover, I will discuss things that voters care about, for better or worse, so I will talk about both substance and – when necessary – style.

First up were the two Democratic candidates for State’s Attorney, Howard County: the incumbent Dario Broccolino and challenger Rich Gibson.  The former focused on discussing specific achievements and a turnaround narrative while the latter spoke of the importance of community outreach.  Frankly, both candidates appeared qualified.

Our Register of Wills, Byron Macfarlane (D), is running unopposed for re-election.  His brief statement was solid and accessible. He talked about his efforts to humanize and modernize the office.  He made the work of his rather arcane office sound interesting, which is not an easy communications task.  He is another very-well qualified public servant.

Four Democratic candidates running for Judge of the Ophans’ Court came next.  The primary election will winnow the field down to three Democratic nominees, and they will face off against two Republican candidates in November.  Neither GOP candidate appeared at the forum.  A total of three judges will be elected for this Court.    Two of the four present at the forum (Anne Dodd and Leslie Smith Turner) are incumbents while the other two (Nicole Bormel Miller and Shari Lynne Chase) are challengers.

Oh where to begin, perhaps more importantly, where to end?

Based solely on performance alone, Anne Dodd and Leslie Smith Turner finished in the top tier.  Judge Dodd was a bit more polished/comfortable with the format while Judge Turner did well talking about her priorities, her experience and commitment to public service. 

Nicole Bormel Miller is obviously very smart and is qualified to be a judge on the Orphans’ Court.  Putting my political strategist hat on for a moment, I would counsel her to not talk about her combination of “youth and experience” as a key point of differentiation.  I am in my 40s and most of the audience members were Baby Boomers or of an older generation.  I don’t think she won many points with that line.

I can feel my blood pressure spiking as I begin this paragraph.  Although we live in a relatively free and open society where people with minimal qualifications can seek public office, based on what I witnessed last night, Shari Lynne Chase has no business running for Judge of the Orphans’ Court.  I did not hear her articulate any legal credentials.  I did hear her utter banal sentiments about treating people fairly.  Most worrisome, if elected to the office, she seems to want to strike a balance between her personal notion of a “humanistic” perspective and the letter of the law.  No Ms. Chase, that is not how judges, or our courts, operate.  In fact, the application of such personal beliefs, in matters of law, can undermine our system of jurisprudence.          

This is why it is important for voters to pay attention to all of the races, even the down-ballot ones.  It would be truly unfortunate for Howard County for a candidate such as Ms. Chase to be elected simply because of her easy-to-pronounce name or the placement of her name on the ballot.  The Orphans’ Court handles very serious matters.   Ms. Chase is not a serious candidate and I hope Democratic primary voters understand and remember her lack of qualifications when they enter the voting booth.

Following the Orphans’ Court discussion, the three candidates for Howard County Sheriff gathered on the stage. Rather, two assembled while one fell apart.  The two Democratic candidates – current Sheriff James Fitzgerald and Captain John Newnan, appear qualified to hold the position.  They covered substantive matters, ranging from collective bargaining to the need for greater diversity within the Howard County sheriff’s department. 

Meanwhile the Republican candidate, John Francis McMahon, described himself as a retired, reluctant candidate who admits to being “less qualified” than the others.  He said he would not be a captive of “special interests.” Overall, he seemed a bit less than present for the proceedings. I think that is all that needs to be said.

Coming up…Part Two (County Executive and County Council races).

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

You’ll Never Find…Anarchy, State and Utopia

It is Saturday, at the noon hour.  I was supposed to be writing this blog post from a hotel room in lovely downtown Salisbury, Maryland….a mere 45-minutes from the gentle salt water breezes that, at this very moment, are failing to dissipate the heavy fog enveloping Ocean City.

Alas, a confederacy of circumstances is keeping me holed up at the Home Office, well to the west of the Bay Bridge.

I have been thinking about Rawls lately, not the singer (Lou) but the political philosopher (John).  A true heavy-hitter in the field, his thoughts on justice and governance were, and continue to be, enormously influential.  Some of his key constructs, such as the “original position” and the “veil of ignorance” require a bit of explanation:

“The original position is a central feature of John Rawls's social contract account of justice, “justice as fairness,” set forth in A Theory of Justice (TJ). It is designed to be a fair and impartial point of view that is to be adopted in our reasoning about fundamental principles of justice. In taking up this point of view, we are to imagine ourselves in the position of free and equal persons who jointly agree upon and commit themselves to principles of social and political justice.

The main distinguishing feature of the original position is “the veil of ignorance”: to insure impartiality of judgment, the parties are deprived of all knowledge of their personal characteristics and social and historical circumstances. They do know of certain fundamental interests they all have, plus general facts about psychology, economics, biology, and other social and natural sciences.

The parties in the original position are presented with a list of the main conceptions of justice drawn from the tradition of social and political philosophy, and are assigned the task of choosing from among these alternatives the conception of justice that best advances their interests in establishing conditions that enable them to effectively pursue their final ends and fundamental interests.

Rawls contends that the most rational choice for the parties in the original position are the two principles of justice. The first principle guarantees the equal basic rights and liberties needed to secure the fundamental interests of free and equal citizens and to pursue a wide range of conceptions of the good. The second principle provides fair equality of educational and employment opportunities enabling all to fairly compete for powers and prerogatives of office; and it secures for all a guaranteed minimum of the all-purpose means (including income and wealth) that individuals need to pursue their interests and to maintain their self-respect as free and equal persons.” [Source: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

So what does this mean? In simple terms, this thought exercise should remove one from their personal notions of self-interest.  If you didn’t know who you might be, or where you might end up in a society, you are less likely to design a society whereby the rights of the have-nots or of particular minorities receive a lesser degree of protection compared to the haves or of any particular majority.  It is intended to promote a rational discussion of fairness, and how such principles could be used to inform and undergird a fair system of government.

It is also an excellent and practical means for detecting hypocrisy (or other defects) among political candidates.  All you need to do is ask yourself, or them directly:

“Would you hold the same position if [Population X] constituted a majority in the United States?”  Or, even more to the point, “Would you espouse such beliefs if you, yourself had Characteristic Y and not Z?”

His ideas can be employed to help provide another way of viewing those who seek public office, and of evaluating the platforms for which they advocate.  This approach offers another way of cutting through the rhetorical mists, to go deeper than a surface examination of the Issue Stances to ascertain the true beliefs (or lack thereof) of a political candidate.

If nothing else, asking such questions might enliven some candidate forums.  Lord knows they can be dreary affairs.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Road to the White House 2016: Manilow, Mistakes and Mandates

Déjà Vu

Could you be the dream that I once knew
Is it you
Déjà Vu
Could you be the dream that might come true
Shining through
I keep remembering me
I keep remembering you

Déjà Vu

            - Lyrics by Isaac Hayes and Adrienne Anderson. Performed by Dionne Warwick. Produced by B. Manilow

What concerns me most about the most recent, incarnation of the Hillary Clinton for President movement is captured succinctly by the name of the highly visible Super PAC extolling her virtues, Ready for Hillary.

It all feels oddly familiar.  A campaign, or in this case, a proto-campaign, that seems more focused on the candidate than on what she or he might deliver.

Of course this is a grotesquely unfair criticism.  Hillary Clinton is not a candidate, at least not yet. 

The problem is her past.  In 2007 - 2008, she ran largely on a solid resume and the perceived strength of her brand.  She trusted that those elements, along with a top-flight campaign team and oodles of ready money, would be sufficient to clinch a first ballot nomination.

Depending on your perspective, a tragic or a fortunate (and possibly hilarious) thing happened next.  Some member or members of her quite well-paid campaign team - reportedly - forgot how delegates are allocated in Democratic primaries and caucuses.  This is important as delegates ultimately determine who receives the nomination.  They were playing for high stakes and some key person or people (who shall not be named here) couldn't be bothered to thumb through a rulebook.  Figuratively speaking, of course. At least that is how the story was covered.  In the fog of the fight, who knows where the truth resides?

She did catch a run of bad luck.  The American electorate was looking for a clean break from the Bush years…and her candidacy represented not so much a fresh start but a risorgimento of the previous Administration, one that still elicited mixed emotions, even from a fair number of Democrats.

Enter then-Senator Barack Obama and the Politics of Change.  He seized a moment, in part because he had a theme larger than himself – while still amplifying his biography – and because voters trusted that he would deliver on that promise.

Even then-Governor Clinton knew, in 1992, that he needed something beyond his record.  His campaign famously employed a compelling messaging troika: “Change versus more of the same,” “It’s the economy stupid,” and “Don’t forget health care.”

Fast forward to the present day.   Some heavy-hitting Clinton backers decide to launch a vehicle promoting Hillary Clinton as a potential presidential candidate.   Instead of linking it something actual voters care about or even a broad theme that suggests the outlines of a vision, they opt for “Ready for Hillary.”

When I first head that name, I thought: Are they criticizing voters for, presumably, not being ready for Hillary in 2008? Are they saying, in so many words, you were children but now it’s time to grow up?  Are they mocking us?  Hardly the inspirational stuff of “Yes We Can.”  More akin to “Why Didn’t You Before?”

I know, I know.  A Super PAC is not a presidential campaign.  But if you look at the roster of folks associated with Ready for Hillary, it is enough to give one pause.  If she runs, will she be a better candidate this time around?  Will she make the campaign about something larger than her admittedly impressive credentials?  How will she Connect?     

Or will we see an imitation of Clinton 2008?  She could probably get away with it, minus the ridiculous unforced errors, at least in the Democratic nominating process.  Democrats are so concerned about locking in the accomplishments of the Obama Administration, they want as close to a sure-fire winner as possible.  There is a measure of risk aversion and, on paper, Hillary Clinton offers the best path to 270 electoral votes…. possibly even a mandate in 2016, depending on how the next two years shape up.

In any event, I hope that the brain trust advising Team Hillary is smart enough to learn from the past, but not dwell in it.  

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Choice, Doom and Grilling Season

You have to have a certain admiration for the well intentioned doomed. 

A candidate for public office showed up at my door the other day.  I wasn't expecting company, so I peered out from an upstairs window moments after I heard the knock.  Safety first.  No sense being taken by surprise in these troubled times. 

It took me a few seconds, sufficient time to decide that my freshly brewed Café Pilon was scalding enough to blind any would-be assailant, at least long enough for me to introduce him to the concussive possibilities of the Club Steering Wheel Lock nesting in my umbrella stand, but I recognized the fellow standing on my welcome mat. 

I ran downstairs and flung the door open, which startled him.  He greeted me with a wan smile.  There was a mixture of nervousness and hope frozen on his face…an expression that would not be out of place on the countenance of an inexperienced and introverted missionary. 

He started winding up, about to launch into his elevator pitch, when I told him that I had seen him speak a couple of times and was familiar with his platform.  That seemed to drop his anxiety level down a notch.   However, his visage sagged when I told him I wouldn’t be voting for him in the June primary election.  Nothing personal, strictly the business of democracy.  

We exchanged thoughts on the campaign for a moment and I wished him well with his door-to-door efforts.  He flashed a seemingly sincere grin, waved goodbye and began the trudge over to the neighbor’s house.

He was not a natural candidate by any means.  There was little sign of the “Hail fellow well met” spirit in him…that sense that he enjoys the campaign process: talking with strangers, listening to their hopes and fears, and asking them for their support.  Perhaps he did, but if so, he hid it well. And if he was hiding it…why choose that mask?

Of course that is exactly the point.   It wasn’t a mask. It was, or appeared to be, his authentic self.  He was running for the cause, not for self-aggrandizement, not as a stepping-stone to even higher office.  That last point is key because he has almost no chance of winning.    Importantly, I believe he knows that too.

Yet in the face of that, and despite lacking the “practiced voice of the seasoned campaigner” (see: Monty Python, Whicker Island sketch), he chose to subject himself to the rigors of electioneering.  He chose to give up his weekends and evenings to lurch from one doorstep to the next, gripping and grinning, probably risking exposure to a norovirus infection every 50^th handshake.  All because he wants to advocate for a set of public policy solutions that fit with his conception of how best to promote the common good.

The good news is that such people choose to seek elective office.  He isn’t alone – which also bodes well for the health of the Republic.  In Howard County, there are other candidates who are running for one public office or another…candidates who are in it for the right reasons (or at least something adjacent to them).  Some will win, he won’t. 

As I look back on that conversation, as we stood there, 20 feet away from a grill unlikely to host a hot charcoal briquette for several weeks, I believe what impressed me most was his respect for the democratic process.  He was willing to endure the discomfort of campaigning and the near-certainty of defeat because of his belief that reform is possible through our system of government.  It may not happen soon, but perhaps in the future.  And that is enough for him to knock on doors today, tomorrow, and all through the election.

You have to respect that.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind - Maryland Politics Edition

The boffins call it crepuscularity, being active during twilight.   Alert drivers know that deer are more likely to amble near the roads at those hours. 

The opportunities of the day seem most promising at dawn; the possibilities of the night appear greatest at dusk.  At those times of transition, the mind is open to considering multiple riffs in response to the question: “What if?”

Even veteran politicos occasionally ask questions or hold positions that, on their surface, might appear silly or otherwise off base. At times, they are.  Other times, they are plugging into their life experiences and, knowing that the world can be very odd indeed, they speculate out loud on the possible…and realize that even the highly improbable can become Reality. They have seen it happen before.

It is with these thoughts as a prologue that I turn my attention to the Maryland gubernatorial campaign – specifically the Democratic primary.

Using Professor Skowronek’s classification system, the front-runner, Lt. Governor Anthony Brown, would probably best be described as an “orthodox innovator.”  Elect the ticket of Brown and his running mate, Howard County Executive Ken Ulman, and you can expect an Administration that builds upon the work of the outgoing Governor, Martin O’Malley.  Two smart, competent public servants who are pledging the equivalent of Keeping Maryland Moving.

The Brown/Ulman campaign is leading in the polls, has considerable establishment support, and is raising steaming heaps of cash.  

Unfortunately, the talent-heavy combo is running a bit too cautious.  Their new ad “Trusted” is a well-produced bio spot but it feels like a safe move to reinforce the brand.  This happens to front-runners.  Muskie ’72 took a similar path and that campaign found itself on the wrong end of a boot stomping…and when the electability argument falters, there had better be something to replace it. 

Perhaps their records are strong enough, and their vision will be clear enough, to surmount the inevitable challenges that will arise between now and the June primary, but I don’t think the duo is quite there yet.

If the Brown/Ulman ticket is Coca-Cola, the Gansler-Ivey team is Royal Crown.  Had Congressman Delaney or Congressman Ruppersberger…or Comptroller Franchot…entered the fray, the conversation right now would be focused on how Attorney General Gansler can break the 10% barrier and if he could pay his staffers their gas reimbursements in anything other than IOUs for bitcoins.

His “For Us” ad is not bad. It connects to voter concerns and hopes.  This is smart politics but also – in his case – necessary.  His Party Selfie Shown Round the World and allegations of being a bit less than levelheaded require him to shift the focus from “the man” to “our cause.”  While he can raise some funds, he feels too close to his ceiling (despite current polls showing him only in the 14% - 15% range).  With luck, his campaign would finish with 28% of the vote but I would wager that is the high-water mark for that ticket.  He probably ends up with closer to 24%.  By July, his running mate, Delegate Jolene Ivey, will have a much brighter political future than Gansler.

Delegate Heather Mizeur has embraced the insurgent, issue-oriented, progressive positioning.  As a general rule, such campaigns are fun to watch.  Also as a general rule, they usually don’t win (at the presidential level, Dean 2004 leaps to mind…interestingly, the organization that he founded, Democracy for America, is backing Mizeur).

Her selection of Reverend Delman Coates, much like then-Governor Clinton’s pick of then-Senator Al Gore as his running mate, represents a decision to double down on a narrative.  In the case of Mizeur-Coates: an Outsider/Anti-Establishment theme.

Which may be smart politics in 2014.  Voter anxiety levels are revved up.  As it is a non-presidential election year, turnout is unlikely to be high…with the more ideologically driven voters constituting a larger part of the electorate.  Frustration is not limited to Republicans and Independents.  There are Democrats who feel alienated from their government, from politicians who they believe do not listen, or truly understand, their problems.  If they are looking to send a message of change instead of continuity, a vote for Heather Mizeur for Governor would send such a message.

The challenge for Mizeur is to ramp up her profile to the point where voters can make the connection that her candidacy is the best vehicle for change.  Not just intellectually, but viscerally.  That requires some heavy lifting in a relatively short period of time.

And perhaps the majority of Maryland Democrats favor some version of the status quo. However, her campaign is based on the animating principle that the voters want a new choice and a different direction.   Is she right? It remains to be seen.

Which brings me back to where I started.  Although she is running third in the polls, and contrary to what passes for conventional wisdom these days, I believe that Delegate Mizeur might just pull off the upset and win the primary.  If so, it will be by the narrowest of margins over Brown.  More likely, she runs a very respectable second and becomes the instant-front runner for another public office in a not-too-distant election cycle….but there is a path to victory for her in 2014.

I may be wrong and events may follow a different course, but I am open to the idea of that improbability becoming a reality…and the sun is high overhead.

 Stay tuned, as more will follow.