Tag Archives: politics

Maryland’s Demeaning ‘Begathon’ Continues

By Barry Rascovar

Jan. 9, 2017— Here we go again. In a few weeks, school superintendents will trek, en masse, to the second floor of the Maryland State House to grovel before the Board of Public Works for additional school construction funds.

It is a demeaning “begathon” that long ago outlived its usefulness and turned into a political circus allowing the governor and comptroller to praise, and reward, their friends in the counties and humiliate their enemies.

This time, the target for Gov. Larry Hogan, Jr. and Comptroller Peter Franchot is Baltimore County Executive Kevin Kamenetz – a man who has signaled a desire to run for statewide office next year.

Anything Hogan and Franchot can do to undercut Kamenetz’ credibility helps their reelection chances.

That explains the consistent animosity by this tag-team tandem toward Kamenetz’ requests.

Comptroller’s Crusade

Franchot has conducted a consistent crusade to force the county to install portable, temporary air-conditioners in all schools lacking central cooling units.

Former Baltimore County executives bear the brunt of the blame for leaving too many school kids in overheated classrooms during the early fall and early summer.

Kamenetz, on the other hand, has been making up for lost time with a $1.3 billion program to get students into air-conditioned schools. But his expensive plan is phased in due to fiscal constraints.

Maryland's Demeaning 'Begathon' Continues

School Construction in Montgomery County

Franchot has persisted in pummeling Baltimore County’s leader for not following his insistence that Kamenetz buy window A/C units.

Each has a point: Kids should not swelter on extremely hot days, yet it makes little sense to spend millions for a short-term fix when a long-term fix is in the works.

The ideal solution is for the state to forward-fund the money Baltimore County needs to finish the job ASAP through a combination of costly upgrades and replacement buildings.

Embarrass Kamenetz

However, neither Franchot nor Hogan has lifted a finger to support the county’s efforts. They could have designated a pot of school construction money for jurisdictions needing window-unit air-conditioners. Instead, they remained silent.

Their goal is to publicly embarrass Kamenetz. Thus, the dynamic duo voted last May to punish Baltimore County (and its school kids) by withholding $10 million in state funds for county school construction – thus delaying portions of the work on air-conditioning classrooms.

The two also withheld $5 million in badly needed construction dollars from Baltimore City, which also is in the process of getting all schools air-conditioned.

They demanded that the two jurisdictions air-condition all classrooms in a matter of months – an impossibility for any number of legal and practical reasons.

The two Annapolis politicos apparently think the city and county can simply wave a wand and, voila! they’ll reverse a situation that’s been festering for two decades.

The reality is that it will take a number of years – and billions – to correct this situation.

Political Favoritism

When the “begathon” parade shamelessly takes place on Jan. 25, it is likely Hogan in particular will look kindly upon Baltimore City’s requests, including the withheld $5 million, as a goodwill gesture toward the city’s new mayor, Catherine Pugh.

He and Franchot will save their contempt for Baltimore County School Superintendent Dallas Dance and, indirectly, Kamenetz. There could well be “plants” in the room to demonstrate Hogan and Franchot are supported by county residents in their harsh criticisms.

It’s all part of the set-piece melodrama the “begathon” has become.

In most cases, conservative, Republican-leaning counties will be treated with kid-gloves by the Republican governor while Democratic strongholds get a cold reception.

It’s quite a distasteful scene, one that is as unbecoming for the governor and comptroller as it is for the school chiefs forced to grovel before them.

Trump & Hogan Agree: Corporate Welfare Works

By Barry Rascovar

Dec. 5, 2016 – Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, Jr. may not have supported or voted for President-elect Donald Trump but they agree on one thing: Corporate welfare works.

Throwing money and tax breaks at Northrop Grumman, Marriott International and United Technologies did the trick this past week – along with a good deal of loud, Trumpian threats in the case of UT’s subsidiary, Carrier Corp., in Indiana.

Trump, Hogan Agree

President-elect Trump celebrating deal to keep Carrier manufacturing plant open in Indiana.

To prevent Carrier from moving 1,400 jobs to Mexico, Trump used heavy-handed insinuation of future punishment to deliver a largely symbolic message that he’ll stop at nothing to save American manufacturing jobs.

Hogan’s task was somewhat different and involved persuasion rather than threats – backed by wads of cash.

A $57.5 million five-year package of “loans” and tax credits eventually persuaded Northrop Grumman to keep its 10,280 employees in Maryland – including the 6,800 who work at the massive former Westinghouse electronics complex near BWI Airport in Linthicum.

Meanwhile, a state-county incentive package of some $60 million was needed to keep Marriott’s headquarters in Montgomery County instead of shifting to Northern Virginia.

The bonus here is that Marriott intends to erect a $600 million complex in downtown Bethesda for its 3,500 HQ employees. That number should expand due to Marriott’s recent $13 billion acquisition of Starwood International.

Democratic Roadblock

The two Maryland deals have been in limbo for months due to high-risk brinkmanship by legislative leaders. The idea was to squeeze money out of Republican Hogan for other purposes dear to the hearts of Democrats in exchange for approval of the Northrop Grumman package.Trump, Hogan Agree

That gambit, which was poorly conceived from the get-go, fell apart when the state’s tax collections underperformed, leaving a gaping hole in Hogan’s budget.

Hogan had always balked at legislators’ extortion effort to hold the Northrop Grumman package hostage until local school funds and other goodies were released.

Lawmakers didn’t seemed to care that reneging on the business deal would have sent a terrible message about Maryland’s business climate to corporations thinking about relocating operations.

But the weak revenue figures this fall put an end to this embarrassing folly. There was no money to make the lawmakers’ strong-arm deal work.

Miller-Hogan Find Middle Ground

Hogan, though, still needed to gain the support of legislative leaders not only on the Northrop Grumman economic-development package but also the Marriott headquarters proposal.Trump,Hogan Agree

He and Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller finally came up with a workable compromise involving $20 million in school pension funds for localities in next year’s budget.

Now it is up to Miller and House Speaker Mike Busch to complete their end of the bargain by winning approval for the two business-assistance packages from a legislative panel they control.

There’s plenty of irony here.

Had a Democrat been in the governor’s office, there’s no question Busch and Miller would have rushed to support these economic-development packages, just as they did under former Gov. Martin O’Malley.

But with a Republican in the governor’s mansion, Busch and Miller suddenly found problems with these deals.

Demands to Stay In-State

Liberal Democrats, in particular, blanch at the thought of giving away millions in business-retention packages, labeling it “corporate welfare.”

It’s become customary for large companies to demand payments from local and state governments if those governments want to prevent these businesses from moving elsewhere. Democrats fear that more companies will use the same tactic to pry millions from the state, money Democrats want spent on social programs.

Rigidly ideological Republican conservatives also rail against giveaways to corporations, complaining about government interference with the free-market system. (Over the weekend, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin called the Carrier deal “crony capitalism.”)

The thinking goes that if Carrier wants to move its furnace plant to Mexico or to another state to cut costs, the company should have the freedom to do so. That’s how the free market works, fiscal conservatives say.

Yet Trump intervened to make political hay and win cheers from Carrier workers in Indiana.

At the same time, he did nothing to stop United Technologies from closing another Indiana plant, costing 700 workers their jobs.

Nor did he lift a finger to halt Rexnord from shuttering a factory just a mile away from the Carrier building. The job loss there is 300. Rexnord is moving its manufacturing business to Mexico.

A third company, CTS, is also shutting down an electronics manufacturing facility in Indiana, creating unemployment for 200 more workers.

On top of that Carrier is continuing with plans to downsize its Indiana plant, laying off 600 union workers at the furnace factory. Also, despite Trump’s plea Carrier is moving its fan coil-making business to Monterrey, Mexico.

So while Trump can crow about the one plant he pressured to remain open, saving by his count 1,000 U.S. jobs (the actual jobs preserved: 730), he hasn’t done a thing about the other 1,800 manufacturing jobs being lost in Indiana.

Choosing Winners

The downside of corporate bailouts (Carrier is getting $7 million in tax breaks from Indiana to remain there) is that these small triumphs fail to address the larger problem:  U.S. manufacturing plants increasingly find they are unable to compete against low-cost overseas competitions.

Here’s a hint why moving production abroad is happening: The average salary for a unionized Carrier plant worker in Indiana is $30.90 an hour.

Choosing winners and losers, as Trump did in Indiana, solves little and provides job solace for just a fraction of the manufacturing workforce at risk of losing their source of income. A more comprehensive approach is needed.

Since the beginning of 2015, 1,600 American companies have shifted production overseas. In November alone, the U.S. lost 10,000 manufacturing jobs.

Clearly, Trump has a gargantuan task ahead of him in which a partial victory at Carrier’s Indiana plant doesn’t put a dent in the problem.

At the same time, Hogan is having more success keeping large corporations content with their Maryland digs. All it takes is persistent negotiations, expressions of good will and a basketful of state and county tax breaks, job-training grants and forgivable loans.

It’s worked most of the time for both Democratic and Republican governors in Maryland.

Hogan’s job is far easier because he’s only competing against other U.S. states, not Third World, low-wage countries.

Trump has a much more difficult field to plough.

###

Trump Adopts Hogan’s Campaign Strategies

By Barry Rascovar

Nov. 21, 2016 – We should have seen Donald Trump’s huge upset victory coming: He used many of the same tactics and strategies as Gov. Larry Hogan, Jr. when the Annapolis real estate developer shocked everyone with his big upset in Maryland two years ago.

The similarities are striking.

  • Hogan brilliantly used social media as a rallying point for conservatives and disaffected voters of all stripes. So did Trump.
  • Hogan was outspent 2-to-1 in TV advertising but easily offset that through free advertising via Facebook with his news-making statements that TV stations and newspapers picked up. So did Trump.
  • Hogan was the “change agent” in a year when Maryland voters dearly wanted something different in the Annapolis State House. This year, Trump was the “change agent.”
  • Hogan capitalized on the economic pain many people have been suffering since the Great Recession. Trump doubled-down on that one.
  • Hogan made himself the focal point for people fed up with in-grown establishment politicians who offered trite, tired and shopworn solutions. Ditto for Trump.
  • Hogan’s opponent was uninspiring, lacking in new ideas and tied at the hip to a disliked incumbent. That pretty much described Hillary Clinton, too.
  • Hogan was an outsider who had never held elective office. Trump followed suit on that one.
  • Hogan pounded away mercilessly on the incumbent’s unpopular policy of raising taxes and fees. Trump never relented in tearing down everything the incumbent president stood for.
  • Hogan promised to bring jobs to Maryland. Trump promised to bring jobs to America.
  • Hogan voiced people’s anger and dissatisfaction with the status quo. So did Trump, but in a much louder and far more outspoken way.

No wonder Larry Hogan, a conservative Republican in a very Democratic state, won in a rout. He crushed Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown in all but the big three Democratic strongholds of Montgomery and Prince George’s counties and Baltimore City, plus Charles County in Southern Maryland.

Trump Adopts Hogan's Camapign Strategies

Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, Jr. (right) and Lt. Gov. Boyd Rutherford

Hogan’s victory signaled a new day for angry white voters, especially those living in rural and exurban areas and on the outskirts of suburbia. Donald Trump followed a very similar formula. It worked for him in 2016 just as it did for Hogan in 2014.

Hogan’s use of Facebook as a key communications and news-making tool was novel at the time. He created his Change Maryland page nearly four years before the election. Back then, he told Len Lazarick of MarylandReporter the page was “born out of frustration.”

Hogan had nothing to lose. He was the longest of longshots, similar to Trump’s status at about the same time.

Voters Wanted Change

“A lot of people are not happy with the direction of this state,” Hogan told Lazarick in a column published on MarylandReporter June 13, 2011. “Some businesses have closed and left the state. Others have just given up.”

In another interview back then, Hogan said, “We need a voice for people who don’t seem to have one” – almost exactly what Trump expressed over and over in his presidential campaign.

Hogan excoriated Gov. Martin O’Malley for his tendency to solve Maryland’s post-recession problems by raising an array of taxes and fees. Hogan said enough, already – let’s head in a new direction.

That’s what Trump promised voters, too.

By the time Hogan won his election, he had 120,000 Facebook followers – twice the number O’Malley had after eight years in office. Today, Change Maryland has 269,000 likes and the governor counts 7,431 Twitter followers.

Trump had astronomical success following the identical approach.

Trump Adopts Hogan's Campaign Strategies

President -elect Donald J. Trump

So clearly Trump, either directly or indirectly, learned from Larry Hogan’s trail-blazing 2014 gubernatorial campaign.

Ironically, Hogan refused to support Trump as a candidate or as the GOP nominee for president. Not my cup of tea, the governor said, recognizing The Donald’s unpopularity with Democrats in Maryland (he gained less than 35 percent of the Free State’s vote on Nov. 8).

Yet the similarities in the Hogan and Trump campaign approaches are stunning – and so were the results.

###

Barry Rascovar’s blog is www.politicalmaryland.com. He can be reached at brascovar@hotmail.com.

 

Fear ‘The Donald’!

By Barry Rascovar

July 25, 2016 – “Fear the Turtle” is the University of Maryland’s slogan for rallying support at Terrapin sports events. In Philadelphia this week, Maryland delegates to the Democratic National Convention will be using a different slogan to get them energized: “Fear The Donald!”

Fear 'The Donald'!

Donald J. Trump, Republican presidential nominee

What draws Democrats together faster than anything – be they Bernie Sanders delegates or Hillary Clinton supporters – is the pit-in-the-stomach fear Republican nominee Donald Trump, whose over-the-top rants have made him a lightning rod of controversy, will somehow win the November presidential election.

Trump’s bleak, scary and angry rhetoric was on full display when he delivered his 75-minute acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention last week.

His deep pessimism and loud, sweeping denunciations of President Obama and presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton for everything that has gone wrong in the world made it clear that in Trump’s mind, only he can act as this country’s savior.

That ought to be more than enough to end internal Democratic divisions. It won’t, though, because the liberal vs. pragmatic split within the party remains as deep as ever.

Philadelphia Divide

Sanders devotees have plenty of misgivings and wounded pride to prompt unruly demonstrations, bitter floor debates and pandemonium in the streets. They may not be content to leave Philadelphia united behind Clinton.

Still, the Trump factor could override all other Democratic concerns once the general election campaign heats up after Labor Day.

By then, this week’s spat over dismissive party e-mails about Bernie Sanders and party donors will be ancient history; controversial party chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz will be long gone.

There are more important thing to worry about than liberal Democrats’ misgivings about Clinton’s middle-road approach and her middle-road running mate, Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine.

As Sanders put it on Sunday, “To my mind, what is most important now is the defeat of the worst candidate for president that I have seen in my lifetime, Donald Trump, who is not qualified to be president by temperament, not qualified to be president by the ideas that he has brought forth.”

Bernie on ‘The Donald’

For Sanders, “Fear The Donald” is real and paramount.

As Trump was delivering his long acceptance speech last week, the Vermont senator tweeted a series of zingers:

Those who voted for me will not support Trump who has made bigotry and divisiveness the cornerstone of his campaign.

Trump: “I alone can fix this.” Is this guy running for president or dictator?

What a hypocrite! If Trump wants to “fix” trade he can start by making his products in the US, not low-wage countries abroad.

Trump’s economic plan: $3.2 trillion in tax breaks for millionaires, cut programs for low-income Americans.

What psychiatrist Sigmund Freud referred to as “transference” is going on. Sanders no longer directs his ire and outrage at fellow Democrat Clinton or the DNC but at Republican Trump.

You can expect a lot of re-directed anger in Philadelphia, kicking off Monday night with kicking off with Sanders, Sen. Elizabeth Warren and First Lady Michelle Obama through Thursday night’s acceptance speech.

Dominating News Coverage

Donald Trump is the perfect target. Indeed, Trump relishes being in the Democrats’ bull’s eye. Why? Because it keeps him in the spotlight.

A long time ago a veteran Maryland campaign warrior, George P. Mahoney, pulled me aside after I had written a critical article about his manipulative actions chairing the new State Lottery Commission. He wasn’t mad at all, Mahoney said. “I don’t care what you write about me as long as you spell my name right.”

That, in a nutshell, is Donald Trump’s approach to politics.

Any publicity, in his eyes, is good. He monopolizes the 24/7 news cycle of this Internet Age by posting outrageous tweets and Facebook screeds day and night.

It worked in the Republican primaries. Trump firmly believes in this precedent-setting method of communicating with voters.

Still, Trump will be a hard sell in heavily Democratic Maryland, though Republicans in Cleveland came away thinking otherwise.

GOP Optimism in Maryland

Kendel Ehrlich, wife of former GOP Gov. Bob Ehrlich, saw Trump as a “change agent” in this election versus Clinton representing the status quo. That, she feels, could determine the outcome.

Other delegates said Trump appeals to blue-collar Democrats – the sort of (D) voters who helped elect Ronald Reagan.

Still, the situation in Maryland is daunting for Trump.

State Republicans already are split in their loyalty to the GOP nominee, with Gov. Larry Hogan and Lt. Gov. Boyd Rutherford opposed to Trump. That will hurt statewide organizing and fund-raising efforts.

Meanwhile, the state Democratic Party under former Del. Bruce Poole has had a resurgence in preparing a well-orchestrated get-out-the-vote effort.

The Republicans’ nearly 2-1 voter registration deficit hurts badly, too.

Democrats’ Challenges

So while Trump is expected to do well in underpopulated, rural Maryland and in outlying suburbs, Clinton should have a lock on Maryland’s major population centers, especially in Baltimore City and the Washington suburbs.

The big challenges for Democrats lie in two areas:

1.) Leaving Philadelphia determined to make sure Trump gets trumped in Maryland, and

2.) Ensuring a large, perhaps record-breaking, turnout of Democrats in Central Maryland. That’s where elections are won or lost in the Free State.

Eight years ago, Republican John McCain got less than 37 percent of the Maryland vote. Four years later, Republican Mitt Romney’s vote total dropped below 36 percent.

November’s election looks like a steep, uphill climb for Maryland Republicans. But their candidate is sui generis – a unique, charismatic populist willing to break the mold in presidential politics.

That poses a unique challenge for Maryland Democrats, a point that will be hammered home repeatedly in Philadelphia this week.

###

Hogan’s Trump Baggage

By Barry Rascovar

Hogan has a problem

His name is Donald Trump.

Everywhere that Hogan goes,

The Donald trails behind him.

Poor Gov. Larry Hogan, Jr. He’s tried like the dickens to separate himself from controversial Republican presidential contender Donald Trump.

He’s said how disgusted he is with national politics – an indirect slam at Trump.

He’s noted he won’t be going to the Republican National Convention in Cleveland next month, anyway.

He has said he’s no fan of Trump and that the combustible New York developer ought not be the Republican nominee.

He endorsed and campaigned for a Trump rival, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

He says he’s not part of the presidential discussion and doesn’t want to talk about Trump any more.

When pressed further by reporters, Hogan said he was “speechless.”

But, the questioner continued, would he campaign for Republican Trump in Maryland? That, Hogan said was “a stupid” question.

Hogan’s ‘Not Involved’

In exasperation, Hogan nearly mimicked a statement to reporters made by the late Gov. Marvin Mandel in denying any role in an enrichment scheme by his friends. Hogan’s version: He’s not involved and doesn’t plan to be involved in anything having to do with any aspect of Trumpian presidential politics.

None of these quasi-, semi- or circuitous denials seemed to work. Hogan’s Trump baggage keeps weighing him down.

Reporters still are badgering him. Does he support the new leader of his party? Does he agree with the almost daily conspiracy allegations and undocumented bombshells coming from Trump’s tweets?

He’s tried dodging reporters, cutting off his responses, walking away from the podium or rushing into his waiting vehicle.

He even made the claim, “I have nothing to do with Donald Trump” – as though the man about to become titular head of the GOP is an alien to Maryland’s Republican governor.

Finally, Hogan tried a more direct response: He’s not going to vote for Trump in the November election.

Clinton, Johnson or a Write-in?

Does that mean he intends to vote for Democrat Hillary Clinton or Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, the former New Mexico governor? Or will it be a write-in presidential name?

Hogan says he’ll make up his mind when he casts his ballot.

Maryland Democrats are gleeful watching the Republican governor twist like a pretzel attempting to half-divorce himself from Trump.

Both Baltimore County Executive Kevin Kamenetz and U.S. Rep. John Delaney –potential Democratic opponents in 2018 – have tweaked Hogan for his intransigence in separating himself from Trump.

Delaney even paid for a truck to haul a billboard around the State House questioning Hogan’s silence.

Callers to right-wing talk shows indicated a mixed verdict on Hogan’s “I won’t vote for Trump” statement. Some applauded him for taking a principled stand. Others condemned him for what they consider a turncoat action.

Campaigning for Szeliga

Hogan’s position may anger many staunch conservative Republicans in the short run but over the long term the discontented are likely to stick by Hogan when he runs for a second term in two years.

Those who doubt Hogan’s loyalty to the GOP will see the governor campaigning for Republican Del. Kathy Szeliga of Baltimore County, who is running for U.S. Senate in November. Szeliga has denounced some of Trump’s comments as racist and discriminatory, yet she has not gone as far as Hogan in her separation from the presidential candidate.

Questions will keep coming Hogan’s way, though. He has yet to condemn any of Trump’s beyond-the-pale accusations or indicated whether he agrees or disagrees with what Trump alleges.

Questions also will start coming about Hogan’s position on presidential issues that impact Maryland, such as the need, or lack of a need, for more gun-control legislation in light of the slaughter in Orlando.

The next four-plus months could be quite uncomfortable for Governor Hogan as he continues to try to tiptoe around the presidential conundrum Trump is creating for Republican leaders.

###

After Iowa

By Barry Rascovar

After Iowa

Feb. 2, 2016 — ITEM: Now that Martin O’Malley is an ex-presidential candidate, he still has time to file for the Democratic mayoral primary in Baltimore.

Why not? None of the current candidates for mayor is catching fire in the polls, O’Malley loved the job when he had it, and he was a successful mayor. Even the New York Times liked his performance in Baltimore.

And he still lives in a big house in Homeland.

ITEM: Three out of four Iowa Republican caucus-goers voted for someone other than Donald Trump.

Yet you’d never have guessed that listening to the unprecedented media hype given The Donald.

ITEM: Someone ought to remind Florida Sen. Marco Rubio that finishing a third still means you lost to two other candidates.

ITEM: As for retired Hopkins neurosurgeon Ben Carson, he did worse in Iowa than the 2015 Orioles in the American League East. The Os disappointed fans by barely finishing third. Carson disappointed his supporters by finishing a distant fourth.

ITEM: Carson’s efforts gained him 17,395 votes — about half the size of an Orioles-Yankees crowd at Camden Yards.

ITEM: Is winning the Iowa Republican caucus a jinx?

Is it the bad-luck equivalent of a team pictured on the pre-season cover of Sports Illustrated to win the World Series or Super Bowl?

It sure was for Mike Huckabee (2008) and Rick Santorum (2012). Et tu, Ted Cruz?

ITEM: When the media proclaims a “record” turnout in Iowa for the caucuses, better take that with a grain of salt. The GOP turnout was under 30 percent and the Democratic total made it just over the 30 percent mark.

ITEM: If you thought O’Malley got wiped out in Iowa (not a single delegate), what about former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore? A grand total of 12 Republicans voted for him in Iowa.

ITEM: Bernie Sanders’ big day is coming!

He came so-o-o close in Iowa, but he should romp in New Hampshire, the Vermont senator’s New England neighbor. He’s leading big-time in nearly every poll over Hillary Clinton.

But then reality starts to sink in. The next two primaries are in Clinton Country — Nevada and South Carolina, states with large minority voting blocs that adore the Clintons. Those states could be momentum shifters.

###

Not Picking a President

By Barry Rascovar

Feb. 1, 2016 — Here’s the good news for former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley: Iowa is not America in miniature. Neither is New Hampshire. Each state has an abysmal record for picking the next president.

Not Picking a President

Former MD Gov. Martin O’Malley campaigning

Getting humiliated in the first two primary states – which seems highly likely for O’Malley starting tonight—may not signal the demise of his 2016 quest. His carefully packaged liberal message is pegged to appeal to the broad Democratic Party base, which is not well represented in either Iowa or New Hampshire.

On the other hand, miracles can happen in these early primaries. Long-odds challengers have emerged victorious more often than not. Indeed, two times out of three, the Iowa winner is usually the underdog. It happens even more often in New Hampshire.

That’s a positive for O’Malley, though he’s so far back in the polls it is difficult to see him emerging out front.

No Bump in Recent Polls

The Des Moines Register-Bloomberg poll on Sunday gave O’Malley 3 percent of the Iowa vote. Other recent polls gave him 5 percent and 7 percent. Meanwhile, O’Malley is polling 2 percent in New Hampshire. In the next primary state, South Carolina, O’Malley also is running at 2 percent.

Even in neighboring Pennsylvania, where the ex-Maryland governor should be better known and respected by Democratic voters, he’s getting just 2 percent in a recent poll.

O’Malley can take modest comfort from a New York Times editorial endorsing Hillary Clinton for the Iowa primary caucus. In the editorial, the Time editors call him “a personable and reasonable liberal.”

Unfortunately, the rest of that sentence indicates how far he has to go to be taken seriously on the national stage. The Times editorial concludes O’Malley “seems more suited for the jobs he has already had – governor of Maryland and mayor of Baltimore – than for president.”

Translation: Martin O’Malley isn’t even close to being ready for nationwide, prime time politics.

Polls and Endorsements

Newspaper endorsements and polls can be misleading, though.

An editorial-page backing doesn’t carry the weight with voters it once did.

And polls can prove highly deceptive in a caucus state like Iowa.

Voter sentiment in a telephone poll becomes meaningless in Iowa unless the voter is determined enough to attend one of 1,681 precinct caucuses this evening that could last for hours.

In Iowa, it will be candidates with the most hard-core followers who have the best shot at pulling a surprise. Precinct-level organizing is absolutely essential, too. The Iowa event is long, drawn-out and a test on voters’ patience and commitment to a candidate.

That’s why Hillary Clinton may have a decided edge over Bernie Sanders and O’Malley. The depth of Sanders’ enthusiastic support among college-age students and disenchanted Democrats is one of the great unknowns.

GOP Surprise?

Grass-roots organizing and caucus-level attendance could be key on the Republican side, too. That’s where Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas could surprise front-runner billionaire Donald Trump.

The same holds for Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, whose organizational strength and quiet determination to challenge Cruz among Iowa’s large bloc of evangelical Republicans could lead to a larger-than-expected showing.

As for retired Hopkins pediatric neurosurgeon Ben Carson, his meteoric rise in the polls has been eclipsed by his meteoric fall. His off-point remarks in the last Republican debate in Iowa emphasized how unready he is to live in the White House. Voters in polls seem to sense that, too.

Misleading Indicators

Regardless of the outcome, losing candidates can take solace from the fact that Iowa and New Hampshire are hardly indicators of the eventual outcome.

If those two state primaries were true stepping stones to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the list of presidents by now would include Iowa and New Hampshire winners such as Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, Paul Tsongas, Gary Hart, Tom Harkin and Richard Gephardt.

The media has made a BIG DEAL of these two early primary states. Inflating the importance of Iowa and New Hampshire has been great for TV ratings and created a surprise bonanza of advertising dollars.

Yet the truth is that this is deceptive reporting by the media. Television commentators are vastly overstating the role the two states play in the nominating process.

In the larger presidential election picture, Iowa and New Hampshire are minor starting points. We’ve got a long way to go.

###

Emily’s Mistake?

By Barry Rascovar

Dec. 7, 2015 – What in the world was Emily’ List thinking when it threw $1 million into the Maryland Senate primary race for a candidate who could be an easy mark for Republicans next November?

Why would the women’s political empowerment group try to defeat a much stronger Democratic candidate who has an unblemished pro-choice record and strong support from elected female leaders in Maryland and women’s rights advocates?Emily's Mistake

It’s a baffling call, especially in an election season where a $1 million advertising blitz could make a huge difference in a number of pivotal general election Senate races around the country involving other Democratic, pro-choice, female candidates.

Emily’s List early on endorsed Rep. Donna Edwards of Prince George’s County for the Senate seat held by Sen. Barbara Mikulski, who is retiring after next year’s election.

Edwards is running against Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Montgomery County, who has a big lead in the most recent poll, the vast majority of endorsements from elected Democratic officials and a solid corps of female supporters, including the former national board chair of NARAL, a leading pro-choice advocacy group.

Million Dollar Blitz

Yet Emily’s List insisted not only on snubbing Van Hollen’s two decades of solid pro-choice support but then decided to become an issue in the Democratic primary race with its $1 million Edwards ad campaign.

It’s an independent expenditure committee ad campaign, which by law means Emily’s List cannot coordinate its activities with the Edwards camp. But the obvious similarities of Edwards’ campaign pitch and the Emily’s List ad is striking and raises concerns.

Even more troubling is Emily’s List’s attempt to target its ad to an African-American audience, with an obvious African-American narrator proclaiming Edwards will “work for us.”

If the same language had been used in support of a white candidate, there would be hell to pay – and rightly so.

What’s so odd about Emily’s List’s love affair with Edwards is that her victory in the April 26 Democratic primary would be a gift from heaven for Republicans.

While Edwards has a legitimate shot at winning on April 26, in the general election she might not be the favorite, even in heavily Democratic Maryland.

Wider Support

That’s not the case with Van Hollen, who enjoys far broader statewide support than Edwards.

Republicans are hoping for a repeat of Larry Hogan’s upset win in the governor’s race last year. He defeated Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown, who lacked broad statewide support among Democrats, independents and elected officials.

If either of the two GOP front-runners, Del. Kathy Szeliga or Harford County Executive Barry Glassman is nominated, they could duplicate Hogan’s success if Edwards is the Senate opponent.

Both are good campaigners who want to come across as smiling, Hogan-esque figures.

Edwards, on the other hand, is a lightning rod for controversy. Her hard-edge political approach is far to the left of the Democratic center, she does not work well with her fellow politicians and she often has forgotten to tend to the services demanded by constituents.

In contrast, Van Hollen has spent two decades networking within Maryland’s political establishment. He’s popular with his colleagues and has worked relentlessly to pass meaningful legislation rather than showboat on behalf of liberal causes.

Choice Supporters

The ultimate irony is that Van Hollen and Edwards are on the same page when it comes to defending abortion rights. There’s no difference in their level of support.

That’s why Emily’s List’s $1 million worth of aid for Edwards is so puzzling.

It may not have much of an impact, though.

Far more valuable may be Van Hollen’s endorsement by a key labor union, SEIU, which redrew its prior support for Edwards in previous elections.

One SEIU official said Edwards had turned her back on the labor movement after SEIU helped get her elected in 2008.

Union Strength

SEIU brings considerable on-the-ground organizational muscle to Van Hollen’s campaign.

The labor union works hard to get out the vote for its endorsed candidates. Moreover, the core of SEIU’s 40,000 members live in areas of the state Edwards needs to win big-time: Baltimore City, Baltimore County and Prince George’s County.

That’s one reason SEIU’s endorsement of Van Hollen is so meaningful.

It’s surprising that Emily’s List didn’t look at the bigger picture, both in Maryland and nationally, before tossing $1 million into its Edwards advertising effort.

The group’s decision could turn out to be a very costly Pyrrhic victory.

###

GOP-style Campaign Entertainment

By Barry Rascovar

October 29, 2015 – Yikes! This is how Republicans are going to pick a presidential nominee?

The Reality TV Circus – also known as the GOP presidential debates – continued in Colorado Wednesday night and it was rip-roaring fun to watch.

Campaign Entertainment

Republican presidential debate in Boulder, Colorado

Not that we learned very much about the candidates’ abilities to lead the nation. Heck, no one got to speak for more than 10 minutes during the two-hour performance.

Even then, what we heard were wise-cracking broadsides, accusations against other contenders, shouting matches, sweeping promises of revolutionary change (with no detail) and denunciations of the media.

The youthful, Republican audience loved it. They’re mad as hell and they’re not going to take it anymore. The candidates played to the audience’s prejudices.

What a bizarre scene. Imagine what viewers in other parts of the world thought.

Fantasyland

Give Ohio Gov. John Kasich credit for beginning this comedic romp through Politics, GOP-style by angrily shouting that what other candidates were offering America is “just fantasy, folks. We’ve got to wake up.”

Some of the gibberish espoused by Ben Carson & Co. is “a joke” and “empty promises,” Kasich said. He clearly believes experience in government actually counts, that rank amateurs cannot simply walk into the White House and magically turn everything around.

Those trying to talk common sense were drowned out or given little or no time for detailed explanations. If you’re not a loud, angry and skilled 30-second debater, you don’t stand a chance in this venue. Jeb Bush, an accomplished Florida governor, is the prime example.

The night belonged to the slick and quick-witted. Ted Cruz, a champion college debater and darling of the tea party, shined. Marco Rubio had rehearsed his lines extremely well and delivered them in machine-gun rapidity. Chris Christie, when he could get a word in, showed he will tell it like it is.

Was any of this presidential? Not by a long shot.

Inept Questions

That includes the terribly inept work of the CNBC questioners, who had been primed to stir controversies and high ratings, but instead ended up as targets of hostile responses from the candidates.

Beating up on the press proved popular Wednesday night, so many of the candidates chimed in, drawing loud cheers from the audience.

At times it felt more like a televised, staged wrestling match than a presidential debate.

Serious voters in early primary states must be perplexed.

They’re being asked to vote for a man who wants Mexico to pay to build a 2,000-mile wall on the U.S. border (fat chance), another who wants to abolish the Internal Revenue Service (do we pay our taxes on the honor system?), another who wants a flat income tax rate that leaves a trillion-dollar deficit, another who wants to eliminate practically the entire federal government, etc., etc.

No Time for Explanations

When are we going to give candidates the time to set forth concrete, detailed explanations of their domestic and foreign policies?

Or are Republicans supposed to vote on the basis of who gives the best one-liners, who comes up with the most outrageously appealing schemes or who can get the loudest audience cheers?

The media insists on turning this presidential campaign into a televised horse race filled with colorful and captivating moments sure to draw high ratings. They don’t want a discussion of issues. That’s too dull. It’s not entertaining.

When it comes time to vote next year, though, that’s not good enough.

American voters need to hear informed, intelligent discussions from the candidates, not insults and shouting matches.

Otherwise, the Republican Party could be heading toward an epic train wreck. That’s not good for democracy, the country and especially for those who care about the GOP.

###

Void in Baltimore

By Barry Rascovar

Sept. 14, 2015 — Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake’s retirement announcement last week turns next April’s election into a free-for-all among a group of imperfect, little-known or inexperienced candidates.

Void in Baltimore

Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake

It reveals the reality of Baltimore’s sorry class of politicians. There are no lions in this crowd, no movers-and-shakers.

Few have much elective experience. Few possess proven management skills to run a complex, $2 billion organization.

So far, no one in the list of putative or announced candidates has shown the sort of leadership charisma Baltimore sorely needs.

Rawlings-Blake will be remembered more positively by historians than she is today. Her once bright political future lies in shambles, the result of a series of poor decisions and her laid-back demeanor during April’s civil unrest.

Burned Out

She’s not the first Baltimore mayor to lose her appetite for Baltimore’s top elective office following days of destructive rioting, looting and arson.

Thomas J. D’Alesandro III, from an illustrious political family, gave up a bright future after one term as mayor. He was burned out emotionally and physically by the strains of the 1968 conflagration after the assassination of Martin Luther King — and the massive effort required to restore order, rebuild and convince citizens that Baltimore had a bright future.

It was left to William Donald Schaefer to take on that monumental task, which he did brilliantly.

Rawlings-Blake was too cerebral (much like former Mayor Kurt Schmoke) and too deliberative to deal effectively with a terrible crime wave and civil unrest that required quick, firm decisions and public assertiveness.

She botched one key element of her job, public safety, by forcing into retirement a popular and successful police commissioner (Fred Bealefeld), replacing him with a West Coast outsider who never hit it off with the community or rank-and-file, and then turning Anthony Batts into a scapegoat following her administration’s botched handling of disorder in West Baltimore.

She trusted only a handful of intimates with policy decisions, blocking the kind of broad networking and communications good CEOs need.

She exhibited a coolness and unapproachability for a job requiring just the opposite. Her calm, dispassionate demeanor came across as uncaring. She never struck the right chord with Baltimore’s citizens or with the business community.

She lacked outward warmth, humor and emotion — three essential elements for successful leadership.

Keen Eye for Budgets

Nevertheless, she was an excellent fiscal steward for Baltimore. Much like her father, Rawlings-Blake knows how to dissect a budget and take steps to get government’s financial house in order.

She negotiated a long-term deal with the state to embark on a $1 billion, long-overdue school-building and renovation program. She sharply lowered teen pregnancies and recruited a highly regarded health officer.

She had the guts to implement pension reforms that threatened to bankrupt the city. She cut property taxes. She halved the city’s structural deficit.

Rawlings-Blake made the right choice in declaring she will not run for reelection. Restoring Baltimore’s equilibrium between now and the time she leaves office late in 2016 won’t be easy, especially with more unrest looming if the results of police jury trials displease local hotheads.

America’s Curse

Concentrating on getting reelected instead of the nitty-gritty of governing would have been irresponsible.

It is one of the curses of America’s electoral system that incumbents are asked to do the impossible — govern and campaign simultaneously. You can do one or the other well, but not both.

Rawlings-Blake now can focus her undivided attention on the needs of Baltimore as it tries to pick up the shattered pieces of progress after April’s disturbances.

It was a logical and thoughtful move that placed her personal political desires on the shelf.  The mayor deserves applause: The city will have a full-time mayor for the next 15 months.

Baltimore is the winner.

Who’s Next?

But who will succeed Rawlings-Blake? So far, the list of candidates and potential candidates is depressingly unimpressive.

Former Mayor Sheila Dixon has the management experience to run the city in a highly effective manner. She is dogged, though, by her theft conviction of gift cards for the poor and homeless. Still, she is one of the few people in the race who has run citywide, has a broad-based organization and name recognition.

Carl Stokes is a seasoned city councilman who has run for mayor before, but his too-obvious ambition may turn off voters.

Cathy Pugh is a shy state senator and former councilwoman who has done solid work in Annapolis but lacks an appealing, outgoing personality.

Nick Mosby is only in his freshman term as a councilman and is married to the most polarizing figure in Baltimore.

There’s not a bona fide lion in the bunch.

Baltimore used to have plenty of political heavyweights but these days the list has dwindled. Barbara Mikulski is retiring. Martin O’Malley is quixotically running for president. Elijah Cummings is ensconced as a powerful voice for African Americans on Capitol Hill. Kweisi Mfume, the former congressman, hasn’t shown any previous interest in becoming mayor.

Uphill Challenge

Perhaps someone will emerge with strong backing from the legal or business community, much as Schmoke did when he came out of nowhere to defeat an incumbent state’s attorney.

Perhaps Mfume will look seriously at running for mayor this time.

The next mayor faces a daunting challenge. Baltimore is a poor city with huge, unmet needs. It is the last refuge for the region’s underclass — the homeless, the unemployed, the dispossessed. Much of the city’s former middle class now lives in the suburbs. A conservative governor in Annapolis shows little desire to make Baltimore’s needs his priority.

It’s a bleak picture. Whichever candidate voters select had better be up to this Herculean task.

###