Palace Intrigue in Columbia?

Watching the Squirrels of Greater Mischievousness sprint across Faulkner Ridge this morning.   So much motion; yet what purpose is being served?

A recent Howard County Times letter to the editor with the title, “Gag effort toward Alan Klein cannot be ‘anonymous’” distracted me from my rodent-focused observations.  The third paragraph, in particular, deserves a bit of attention. 

Stepping back for a moment, a re-cap of the specific allegations can be found here: 

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/howard/columbia/ph-ho-cf-ca-ethics-0108-20150107-story.html.

Now, returning to the letter, the author claims that this action against Mr. Klein is an “effort to disenfranchise his constituents.”  Given the scope of the Columbia Association’s authority, and the process whereby the Board Members are elected, this assertion, even if it had an ounce of merit, is either a finely crafted piece of satire or a shockingly egregious example of hyperbole.

From my perspective, which is admittedly that of an outsider, it appears as though the Board is undertaking a procedure designed to ensure the integrity of the Columbia Association in general and the Board, as the governing body, specifically.  Further, it seems as though they are investigating this matter in the proper, legally prescribed manner.  I would think Columbia residents, particularly those who dwell in Harper’s Choice, would respect a “by the book” approach in the handling of this complaint.

The author of the letter states that this is a “staff-instigated” effort.  Oh?  So then he knows the identity of the individual who filed the complaint?  I thought he was concerned about the anonymity of the complainant.  If he doesn’t possess this information, it would appear that he is making a fairly grand leap to the conclusion that this is some sort of staff conspiracy.  Has palace intrigue become the parlor game of choice at the Wincopin HQ?  

The author, of course, is free to exercise his First Amendment rights.  It is my belief that his not-so-subtle depiction of Board Members as so many CA staff puppets is unfair, ill-founded and disrespectful.  It is arguments such as this that undermine confidence in the work of the Columbia Association.  That is the pathway to estrangement, disillusion, and ultimately the sort of disenfranchisement that he claims to working against.

I look forward to the resolution of the Klein matter, although I am certain the debate will merely take another form, because why resolve something when one can continue running about in circles, chasing after elusive acorns.       

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

And Then There Were 23

Pardon the brief hiatus dear readers. 

You see, my compadre Slats was mistaken for being a man of confidence by a handful of local officials in a small fishing village in Guatemala, about 10 kilometers outside of Champerico.  So that took a bit of time to sort out.  Two tips: taking the 14 out of Escuintla is not a “short cut” and there is no Yelp for locating top-notch English-to-Spanish-to K’iche’ translators.  Lessons learned. Crisis resolved.  Situation = Askew.  Back to “Normal.”

Oh such flights.

As the calendar pages hurtle (of their own accord??) off the wall, we find ourselves slightly less than six months away from the Ames Straw Poll.  With the Iowa Republican Party deciding (unsurprisingly) to retain the event for the current presidential cycle, this means it is quite likely that at least one GOP presidential candidate, someone who hasn't even officially announced yet, will see their electoral ambitions dashed on a hot August night, somewhere in the general vicinity of Pearson Hall, on the Iowa State University campus.  Home of the Tusslin’ Cyclones.      

The thrilling element here, and there is one, is that I count 23 potential serious or semi-serious Republican candidates who might jump into the fray.  I anticipate that that number will dwindle down to 14 by August 2015, but the prospect of such a crowded field should tantalize any self-respecting political junkie. 

Consider this:  from 1980 to 2012, in the election cycles when there was a legitimate contest for the GOP nomination, the fields included 10 to 13 candidates.  Now, I am including some, let us call them lesser lights, in those tallies.  For example, Fred Karger in ’12, Alan Keyes in ’08, Herman Cain in ’00 (yes 2000, but he didn’t get past the exploratory stage),  Morry “The Grizz” Taylor in ’96, as well as Ambassador Ben Fernandez and future Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld…a couple of times. Not to disparage any of these individuals, but they either exited the process very early (as in the year before the Election) or they performed miserably once the caucuses and primaries got underway.  As was expected of them.

In this cycle, there are fewer apparent “longest of long-shots” in the race.  Are there favorites and relative heavies? Absolutely.  Moderate long-shots?  Sure. But complete non-starters?  Not so much.  Even some of the non-traditional candidates are interesting from an electoral perspective.   Consider Dr. Ben Carson.  Some are quick to dismiss him out of hand.  Will he emerge as this cycle’s Santorum 2012?  Doubtful, but he has a personal narrative and a bit of a nascent constituency.   I think he ends up somewhere between Bauer 2000 and Gingrich 2012.  The presence of other, better-known, social conservatives in the field will block his path to the nomination, but I predict he will run a credible campaign.

With six (yes six), occasionally over-lapping, significant voting blocs in today’s Republican Party, potential candidates are envisioning multiple paths to victory, based on the coalitions they believe they could forge…with the right financial resources, talent, communications, calendar, fortune, intervention by Providence, etc….I will elaborate on this in future posts but the six are, in no particular order:  Social Conservatives, Libertarians, Establishment Center/Right, Tea Party-Aligned, Working Class Cultural Conservatives, and the small number of remaining GOP Moderates & “Liberals.”      

Examining each of those blocs, with the recent decision of Senator Bob Corker to take a mighty pass this time around, are 23 likely candidates. 

I believe that at least seven and possibly all nine of the following group will announce that they are running for President this year:

Paul, Carson, Cruz, Perry, Santorum, Bush, Huckabee, Walker, and Christie. 

With the exception of Carson, all are Governors or Senators or former Governors and Senators.  All have appeal within multiple GOP constituencies (some more pronounced than others).  This is the single strongest Republican field since ’80.  Frankly, it is probably deeper based on this tier alone.

Beyond that first grouping, I anticipate that at least half of the following will enter the race:

Jindal, Fiorina, Graham, and Rubio.  

No slouches here.  I think Graham’s entry, if it transpires, could diminish the perceived value that South Carolina primary generally enjoys. It could be akin to Harkin ’92 when other Democratic candidates avoiding competing on the Senator’s home turf, which inflated the importance of the New Hampshire primary, which helped Clinton and his “Comeback Kid” narrative and the rest is history.  Fiorina, despite her 42% performance against Senator Boxer in 2010, should not be underestimated.  With her business credentials and (potentially) being the only woman on many Republican presidential primary ballots, she could catch fire and go deeper into the calendar than most of the other contenders.

Many within the third group will ultimately decide to forego being a presidential candidate in 2016, but I project at least a couple will mount challenges:

Bolton, Pence, Gilmore, Ehrlich, Pete King, Pataki, Kasich, Snyder, Palin, and Trump.

OK, Trump is a non-starter, but his celebrity (read: notoriety, apparent lack of filter, and not inconsiderable wealth) will generate some buzz…if he gets in (I don’t believe he will).  Governor Mike Pence is serious, as is John Kasich, but they will have to ramp up their efforts, soon, if they want to compete in the Not-so Invisible Primary.  Especially with fellow Midwestern Governor Scott Walker garnering attention and making interesting staff hires. 

Sarah Palin.  She has indicated interest.  Ignore that.  If she runs, it will be an attempt to prop up the Brand.  Based on her public statements, I generously estimate a 9% chance that she gives it a shot in 2016.  In reality, it is most likely under five percent.

Beyond these 23, are there others?  Why yes, I am glad you asked.

My long list has 67 Republicans.  Don’t worry, I won’t run through them all, I will just mention one more worth noting:

Mitt Romney.  Yes, I know he just bowed out.  I peruse Le Monde like you do.  But let’s assume, for a moment, that it is late August 2015.  The Bush campaign is hobbling along. His controversial positions on Common Core and immigration, in conjunction with some gaffes, lower-than-expected fundraising totals, declining poll numbers, and various miscues make him look vulnerable.   Christie acts like Christie and is on the brink of imploding after yelling at some Iowa farmers. Pence and Kasich decided to stay home, so Walker is left standing as the top choice of the Establishment Right…barely.  Would Mitt see himself as the only one standing in the way of a Cruz or Santorum or Huckabee nomination?  He is probably the only one who could jump-start a campaign around Labor Day and pull a serious organization together.  In short, keep glancing over at Romney.  It might not be over for him. And if he is a candidate by September 15, 2015, you read it here first!

A long post?  Absolutely.  Yet the primary season itself is long and full of wonder.  Savor it.  I mean it, commence with the savoring already!

Now if I can only find that luggage.  Waiting for a call from La Aurora International Airport…

Stay tuned, as more will follow.  Count on it.

Opportunities

“Yeah there’s a storm on the loose, sirens in my head

I’m wrapped up in silence, all circuits are dead

I cannot decode, my whole life spins into a frenzy...”

Rumor has it that Mitt Romney was in his study, listening intently to this classic blaring out of his Klipsch speakers when he made his presumably final, final decision to not enter the ’16 presidential campaign.   Then, without warning, he hurled the caffeine-free Diet Coke clutched in his right hand into the fireplace…the crystal goblet shattering upon impact…and he screamed, “You can have Jeb!” 

Of course some sources are more reliable than others.  Personally, I believe he was quaffing chocolate milk.  Let the historians sort out that enigma.

For the true political aficionado, there is nothing quite like an election cycle with vigorously contested Democratic and Republican presidential nominating processes.  In the modern era, that means ’76, ’80, ’88 (more or less), ’00 (barely), and ’08.  Even then, 2000 just made the cut as Al Gore won every primary, with Bill Bradley’s high-water mark being a narrow defeat in New Hampshire.  He was done five weeks later.

[Side note: Pat Buchanan’s 37.4% showing in New Hampshire in ’92 against incumbent President George H.W. Bush made the GOP race interesting…for about two weeks.  Was it a serious challenge? No.]

With the latest reporting indicating that Hillary Clinton may push a formal announcement back to July, she is effectively freezing the field.  Oh sure, Bernie Sanders can keep living the Vermont Dream…and Jim Webb may find a way to run a campaign that won’t have the word “quixotic” permanently affixed to it (although his exploratory effort, to date, has been lackluster).  I have a hard time seeing Martin O’Malley make an aggressive push to secure the Big Chair, even if he decides to enter the fray.  Would he go negative on Hillary, knowing that it might cost him a spot on the VP short list or a Cabinet post?     

Will there even be any Democratic primary debates?  Clinton probably couldn’t avoid some forums if Biden jumped in, but why would he challenge Hillary?  His moment has passed.

So perhaps the tempest will be limited to the GOP contest.  Even with Romney out, two dozen legitimate potential Republican candidates remain, a figure that will probably settle down to closer to 10 – 12 by Ames, with a couple exiting shortly thereafter.   There will be action on that side of the aisle.

Still, it would be a shame for history to record 2015 – 2016 as a lost opportunity for Democrats to have a candid and thorough dialogue on the future of the Party and, more importantly, of America.  While a national conversation can take place without candidates, it is easier to promote an agenda when one is an announced candidate for the highest office in the land.  Can a debate be influenced from the Senate Floor?  Sure.  That said, a robust discussion of differing visions of government would be facilitated by a truly competitive nominating contest.  Obama was able to advance and refine his governing philosophy during the 2007 – 2008 forums and debates, as Bill Clinton did in ’92 when he faced off against Brown, Tsongas and the other Democratic hopefuls.  In both cases, it should be noted, the Democratic nominee went on to win the White House. 

And somewhere, far away from the spotlight, Mitt will ponder Whittier…

“For of all sad words of tongue and pen,

The saddest are these: ‘It might have been!’”

It would be unfortunate if there were prominent Democrats contemplating the meaning of those exact words in November, 2016.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Let Us Cancel the "Mad Men"

Grandiloquence has a time and place; yet this is neither the hour nor the location for ornate language.

My message to the Maryland General Assembly  - frankly to every elected and appointed policymaker in this state and beyond – is simple:  Do Your Job and Treat People with Respect.

Always act as though your entire family is standing right beside you, and behave like a professional, and think about Kant and a categorical imperative…or whatever is necessary to prevent one from acting like a libidinous buffoon, sexist dolt and/or generally despicable human being.

Obviously, I am referring to the recent Kurtz article.  While not astonished by the content, I was nonetheless disheartened to read that such abhorrent behavior persists among some of those who hold positions of public trust. 

Such abuses occur in many places where political power concentrates.  They should never have occurred and they need to end now.

Of course not every lawmaker is guilty of such reprehensible deeds, but there are malefactors.  They need to be punished.

Turning to our state government, Annapolis must take steps to eradicate the culture of sexism.  Those who violate the sacred trust that must exist between those who govern and the governed must face swift and severe penalties.  Moreover, the healing light of truth should shine down upon those who engage in predatory behavior….their constituents need to know about such matters.  Institutional reforms might prove necessary, and should be welcomed in the cause of good government…and the elevation of humanity.     

My apologies to my readers… I dislike writing while infuriated.  That said, sometimes, jeremiads are necessary.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

False Start (with an Update)

So much for the “new spirit of bipartisan cooperation,” a platitudinous phrase delivered, apparently bereft of sincerity, by Maryland’s new Governor, Lawrence Joseph Hogan, Jr.

As my policy and media-attentive readers are all too aware, within hours of launching his Administration, the One-Term Express, Hogan:

- Withdrew regulations that protect Maryland citizens from discrimination, based on sexual orientation and gender identity...

- Failed, in his first Executive Order, to include gender identity “as a grounds for equal opportunity.” [Source: http://equalitymaryland.org/governor-hogans-first-24-hours-start-on-the-wrong-foot-for-lgbt-maryland/]

- And, on another matter, while his move on pulling regulations having to do with phosphorous output was well-received by at least one Democratic State Senator (pump the brakes a little, Senator Mathias), the potential impact of his decision on the health of the Chesapeake Bay and other rivers is not sitting well with environmentally-minded Marylanders.

In short, within days of taking office, Hogan is veering hard right.   This shift is neither promising nor unexpected.

In his Inaugural Address, Hogan stated that we must “set the bar higher.”  Thus far, he is failing in the pursuit of that objective.  Moreover, when he said “Marylanders are hard-wired for inclusiveness,” he is not yet exhibiting evidence of that virtue.  And I would have to imagine that he decided against an appeal to the “better angels of our nature” by his decision to not protect the rights of all of our citizens in his first Executive Order.

Hopefully, others within Hogan’s party will call upon the Governor to live up to the moderate-sounding words he uttered recently in Annapolis.  Perhaps Howard County Executive Allan Kittleman has some thoughts he would like to share on this topic.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Update (1/23/15) from Equality Maryland's FB status update:  "Governor Hogan's office has reached out to Equality Maryland to tell us he has re-issued the Executive Order to include gender identity. It should be publicly available by Monday."

Judgment of Solomon

It is always a joyous occasion when local elected bodies are called upon to debate and decide issues that relate to religious beliefs and practices.

Such was the case recently when the Howard County Board of Education voted on the listing of religious holidays on the date boxes on the HCPSS school calendar.

Setting aside, for a moment, the decidedly Abrahamic focus (with the exception of dharma-oriented Sikhism and, arguably, the syncretic Bahá'í faith) of the officially recognized religious holidays, one should not confuse the debate itself as another front in the so-called War on Religion.

The inclusion or exclusion of the holidays from a calendar would have zero impact on the right of Howard County families to worship, or not, in the manner of their choosing.  The right of private individuals to express publically their faiths and belief systems remains unchanged by the Board’s decision.

In any event, the majority (correctly in my estimation), recognized that excluding certain holidays from the calendar could be deemed insensitive and othering in our culturally heterogeneous County.  This leaves two obvious equitable solutions – either including all holidays on the date boxes or removing all of them from the date boxes. 

So the Board threaded the needle with a third, design-centric, approach; with their solution calling for the creation of a “separate box” that names the holidays  “alongside the month in which they fall.” 

This action will, in all likelihood, not satisfy advocates of a strict separation of church and state; nor will it placate those who believe the removal of the holidays from the date boxes constitutes an insult to their chosen religion. 

However, it is a good and fair compromise.  Importantly, the discussion could have descended quickly into extreme rancor but it did not.   The sentiments expressed in the Baltimore Sun article were thoughtful and free from divisive language…which is encouraging in light of some recent BoE debates.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

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.