Education Reformation

Some issues simply require additional time for sober reflection.

When Delegate Vanessa Atterbeary and Councilman Jon Weinstein announced their collaboration on a bill that would turn the “all at large” seven member Howard County Board of Education into a body that would feature five district and two at-large seats, my visceral response was that it sounded like a smart reform measure. 

But distracted by all of the glitz and glam that the Metro Center area has to offer, I found myself lacking the time to give an appropriate level of thought to the proposal. 

Two months later, I think their bill makes a great deal of sense.  First, it promotes awareness and accountability.  Having one person serving as one’s district-based Board of Education member, along with two at-large members for everyone, makes it easier for people to get to know their school board member.  It makes individual advocacy efforts by parents, students, and other stakeholders easier.  Have an issue with a school in, for example, Elkridge? If the Atterbeary/Weinstein (Weinstein/Atterbeary?) legislation were to be enacted, a neighborhood-based board member becomes the logical point of contact.  This should also promote geographic diversity among the board membership and, hopefully, a greater familiarity with the unique opportunities and challenges facing all of the schools across our growing County.

Frankly, the same rationale applies to shifting from multi-member state delegate districts to single-member districts, but I will revisit that issue on another day.

Back to my main point, there are many entities that exercise policy-making functions whereby the individual members are elected by a smaller constituency to represent a larger interest.  This is how every state legislature works.  This is how Congress works.  This is how our County Council works. [Note: an earlier version of this post incorrectly cited MoCo's BoE as an example here.  Are there elected Boards of Education with similar arrangements? I am going to go with almost certainly.  Do I have time to look them up? No, but feel free to do so]. [Second note: thinking about local examples, I believe that at least some of the Harford County Board of Education seats are district-based.  I think they have a hybrid that includes elected and appointed as well as at-large and district board members.  Again, you may want to check on that.].

My contention is this: the partial reorganization of the Howard County Board of Education would not invite an epoch of rampant provincialism.   Everyone who holds the office would know that their duty is to act in the best interests of the County as a whole.  Moreover, as is frequently pointed out, majorities are required for the Board to act.  Thus, it is difficult to make a compelling argument that having multiple district-based seats would lead to a “less equitable” distribution of resources anymore than saying that the current arrangement, with representation from only three of the five Council Districts, leads to such inequities.  

Bottom line:  as a measure designed to promote the connection between the public and the policy-setting body, the Atterbeary-Weinstein plan is the right move for Howard County’s public education system.  If you haven’t already, let your elected representatives know.  Tell ‘em Sparty sent you.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

On Poverty, Progress, and the CAC

There has been much discussion in recent days on the fundamental question, “What does it mean to be American?” 

Personally, I believe one hallmark of the American character is a certain generosity of spirit that stems from a recognition that we are all imperfect yet we want to improve not only our lot, but the well-being of those we call our neighbors.

Those of us in Howard County are fortunate insofar as many of our neighbors, from a pocketbook perspective, are not struggling.   But “many” is not all, and when it comes to poverty, some is too many.

Hunger is non-partisan, as is poverty.  The eradication of both, in a county of plenty, can and should be a top-of-mind issue, and goal, for 2016. 

In terms of numbers, 5.3% of Howard County’s population live in poverty, this translates to thousands of our fellow denizens.  Moreover, almost one in four (22.5%) single women who are the head of their household and who have children under five live below the poverty line.

As careful readers will recall from early 2015, before my new position brought me to the functional equivalent of a literary Elba, I wanted to spend more time talking about organizations doing good and important work in our communities.  With that, along with the aforementioned challenges foremost in mind, I want to spend a minute talking about the Community Action Council of Howard County (http://www.cac-hc.org/get-involved/).  

Feel free to click on that link.  I can wait a moment... 

Back?  Excellent.  The Community Action Council (CAC for short) has been on the frontlines of “helping people help themselves” as their President, Bita Dayhoff, describes in a letter outlining the mission of the organization.  This is key.  The CAC is focused not only on helping out those most in need of help, in terms of such needs as housing, energy, childhood education, and food, but also assisting them on the road to self-sufficiency.  And this is not a seasonal focus, but one that is addressed “24/7/365” as the saying goes.  Moreover, they help literally thousands of people, every single year.

The spectrum of services offered by the Community Action Council is broad yet bound by the common thread of helping those of us who are in a tough spot.  The dedication of this organization, their staff, volunteers, and partners, deserves recognition.  Beyond that, the questions must be raised, what systems can be put into place to help groups like the CAC achieve their mission?  What can be done, by the private and public sectors alike, to help ensure that all of our neighbors have full access to the promise of Howard County?

As long as poverty and hunger (and related issues) afflict our fellow residents, I plan on revisiting these topics throughout the New Year. I am hopeful that our collective can-do spirit, another American hallmark, will help yield creative and practical solutions to these challenges.  By building on the work of groups like the Community Action Council, I am optimistic that we can find novel ways to help our neighbors.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Pandemonium-upon-Stilts

That sums up the past several months.  There is no doubt a book there, but binding Confidentiality Agreements most likely make that a non-starter.  

I have just enough time to offer up some brief thoughts on the likely contours of the 2016 GOP presidential campaign.    

The campaigns most likely to fold up their tents between now and Iowa:  With 15 heavies remaining (sorry Mark Everson), I believe that Senator Rand Paul (R/Lib – Au) and former Governor Jim Gilmore (R – No VA Car Tax!) are the most likely to quit the field between now and February 1, 2016 Iowa caucuses.  The latter might stick around until New Hampshire as his, let’s call it, “strategy” appears more focused on the Granite State.  That said, he might realize that a top 10 showing is not in the cards, and quietly withdraw at some point during the Holiday Season.  The former may decide to focus on his U.S. Senate seat, so keep a close eye on his early-state polling performances in November and December. If he can’t consistently cross the five percent threshold in the weeks prior to Iowa, expect a retreat to Kentucky.  One more to watch:  Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, wonk-turned-red meat hurler, the former Bayou Wunderkind needs to break out of the second tier.  He selected Iowa as the state that gives him just enough of a push to get past the carve-out states (Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada).  Unfortunately, for Gov. Jindal, he is facing off against Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX/The Second Choice), former Governor Mike Huckabee, Former Senator Rick Santorum, and Dr. Ben Carson for the social conservative vote. 

The campaigns most likely to be done after Iowa:  Jindal if he even makes it to February 1.  I believe that Santorum will lose in the Clash of the Most Recent Iowa Victors Match-up, with Huckabee being the better positioned of the two to do anything in South Carolina.  Santorum will wrap up his campaign on Groundhog Day.  Just in time for him to head home to check on Punxsutawney Phil.

The campaigns most likely to be finished after New Hampshire:  Gilmore if he is still in the race.  Former New York Governor George Pataki will likely receive his last hurrah of the primary season in NH.  Either former Governor Chris Christie or Governor John Kasich will be on life-support or decently positioned as the Bush/Rubio alternative after New Hampshire.  Senator Lindsey Graham may opt for a strategic withdrawal and endorsement of another hawk prior to his home-state primary.

So who is a lock to be an active candidate for the South Carolina primary?  Former Governor Jeb Bush, Carson, Cruz, business executive Carly Fiorina, probably Huckabee, either Christie or Kasich, Senator Marco Rubio, and businessman Donald Trump.

What about March?  I think the short-term calendar shapes up nicely for Cruz.  I expect a Huckabee exit as well as a slow Carson (and slower Trump) fade (all to the benefit of Cruz) and that Bush will struggle. 

Beyond that, I think Cruz and Rubio are well situated to go deep.  Trump and Carson could accrue a significant number of delegates, with Fiorina performing well enough to warrant serious consideration as a VP pick.  If this were a Democratic primary, I would give Kasich better odds as a dark-horse candidate.  As it is not, I think he might emerge as the primary Establishment alternative to Rubio, but will have neither the resources nor the skills to compete with either Senator Cruz or Senator Rubio.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.  

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.

Orchestral Manoeuvres in Nu Shooz

And it was June 1986. Da Nang.  No, wait.  It was definitely Lapeer, Michigan. We would walk to the convenience store.  At the base of the Thumb, we called them party stores.  Sometimes, I would carry a small bag of carrots so I could stop along the way and feed Mindy.  Mindy was a horse.  She lived on a small farm just off the main road.  She could probably hurdle the low and increasingly incomplete fence, but she appeared satisfied with her present location.  Besides, it was abnormally hot; the air too humid and the ground too dusty for anything more strenuous than a leisurely amble.   It was 29 years away from having to worry about compliance with a corporate social media guidelines policy regarding personal blogs.  I am referring to myself, of course.  Mindy didn’t care about such things – they weren’t small, crisp, orange, and delicious.  She knew what was important.

Slats, who I hadn’t met yet, would later claim that he spent that summer gearing up for the Babbitt for President campaign.  Somehow, that involved six weeks in a rented villa ten klicks outside of Saint Tropez.  Gearing up was different in the ‘80s.  In any event, he left that effort the following year…well before the cornstalks were hip-high.  “Strategic differences,” he would mutter. 

But this is neither the time nor place for that – Michigan ’86 is.  Was? No, it is.  So that is where we should begin.

Hiram Atus: Attorney At Law

"So then it was written: 'And amongst the poodles of the Serengeti, there emerged one so majestic that he became known to all as...'"

"Hold on," cautioned Slats.  "First, I think that might be a Far Side reference.  Second, did you read this Social Media Guidelines document?"

Nodding my head emphatically, I replied, "Yes. Of course not."

"Let's see, it appears as though you need to say: 'This [posting] is the personal [commentary] of [Name] and contains my personal views and opinions only.  It is not an official communication of or endorsed by [Company To Be Named Later].'"

"So does that apply even when the opinions I express are not my own?"

"Doubly so, I would imagine," responded Slats.

"Perfect."

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

A Preliminary (?) Report Card

While the situation in Baltimore remains fluid, a quick review of the performances (to date) of some of the key political figures involved is in order:

Mayor of Baltimore Stephanie Rawlings-Blake:  From a communications standpoint, some of her initial remarks (her comments on “space” as well as her use of the term “thugs”) were ill-phrased (or misinterpreted, depending on one’s perspective).  Her prior veto of a body camera bill seems to have been a governance misstep.  However, as of this writing, she has demonstrated considerable steadiness in the face of a perilous situation.  If she were another politician, she would be lauded for being a “calm, cool, and collected” leader.  However, she is not another politician.  Respected in many quarters, excoriated in several others, and beloved in perhaps a few…she might be the best person Baltimore could have had as Mayor during this crisis.  Depending on how it turns out, she will probably not receive the credit she deserves for resolving it.  Overall grade at this moment:  Solid B.

Maryland Governor Larry Hogan.  Again, there were some early miscues.  He was having a difficult time striking the proper balance between compassion for others and adopting a hardline “law and order” stance.  He possessed the proverbial dear-in-the-headlights look during his initial press conference, which was less than confidence-inspiring.  He was decisive when he signed the executive order to deploy the National Guard; but he should have resisted the urge to remark how he wished that the Mayor (a potential 2018 opponent) asked for the action sooner.  One wonders how he will address the root causes of the troubles in Baltimore, and other cities, in the days, weeks, and months ahead.  That said, he appears to be collaborating well with local officials and engaging in genuine dialogues with community leaders and others.  Overall grade at this moment:  B.

Congressman Elijah Cummings.  While Rawlings-Blake and Hogan are executives, Cummings is a legislator, which gives him a different set of official duties and responsibilities.  This is both limiting but also liberating.  This allows him to focus on exercising his moral leadership, speaking in the churches and on the streets to call for the justice that will lead to the restoration of peace.  Frankly, he has done an impressive job.  Being out there amongst the people – to an extent that some public figures were unable and/or unwilling to do – has made a positive difference.  Moreover, he has the gravitas to raise the debate; making it about an exploration of American values and the policies and behaviors that stem from them (the role of police in our society, how the legal system treats all of our citizens, etc…).  He says he is in his twilight days, but he is showing his mettle.  Putting on my political commentator hat, I would go as far to say that his recent words and deeds reveal someone who would be a fine U.S. Senator.   Overall grade at this moment:  A-.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.