Tag Archives: politics

Endorsements: Not What They Used To Be

 

By Barry Rascovar

Nov. 6, 2017 – Once upon a time, campaign endorsements mattered. Some of those nods of approval even tilted elections. That’s no longer the case in Maryland.

The power of an endorsement is waning as the communications revolution provides multiple sources of information about candidates running for office. Millions are spent on advertising in every media format to be sure voters hear from candidates directly.

That wasn’t true years ago, when the main form of getting your political message to voters was by mail and through the newspaper. Televised debates sometimes gave you a brief glimpse into the thinking of contenders for the top office.

Back then, an endorsement by a trusted group gave a voter reassurance and direction.

Today’s gubernatorial race on the Democratic side so far has been a rush by some candidates to gain endorsements. They seem transfixed on what may turn out to be a desert mirage.

Brief Notice

This summer, Benjamin Jealous grabbed TV face-time and news stories with endorsements from Sen. Bernie Sanders and Sen. Corey Booker. That gained Jealous brief public notice 10 months before the Democratic primary. But little beyond that.

Booker is a popular though second-tier New Jersey senator whose backing for Jealous has even less weight in the Democratic primary for governor than his support from the militant National Nurses United and Maryland Working Families.

Jealous also has the ringing endorsement of the hero of far-left Democrats, Bernie Sanders. That is to be expected since Jealous toured the country as a Sanders surrogate in the 2016 Democratic presidential primaries.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (left) and Benjamin Jealous

Bernie’s support does help Jealous identify himself as a Sanders acolyte but remember, Sanders got just 34 percent of the Maryland primary vote. Still, in a crowded campaign that slice of the party vote could prove important.

Yet there’s no assurance Sanders backers will flock to Jealous’ side just because the failed presidential candidate supports him. It doesn’t work that way in this era. In the top races, today’s voters don’t like being told what to do.

Endorsements from labor unions used to be a potent force. For instance, what the AFL-CIO or the United Auto Workers union said mattered to members. No longer. Donald Trump gained few labor endorsements yet blue-collar workers strongly backed him.

Jealous’ endorsement from the service workers’ union, SEIU, could help produce volunteers for his campaign, especially in parts of Baltimore City. Yet the impact of that endorsement could prove modest statewide.

Similar Views on Education

Similarly, the backing of the Maryland State Education Association – a coveted honor contenders for governor badly want – will provide the honoree with some manpower and organizational help, but the vast majority of teachers will make up their own minds. They aren’t going to be dictated to by their union, especially since all the Democratic candidates have quite similar pro-education and pro-teacher positions.

The primary is still eight months away yet the cycle of endorsements began last summer – way, way before voters start contemplating the party’s gubernatorial candidates.

Even worse, the primary campaign could change dramatically before the filing deadline in late January, leaving early endorsers in a bind.

For instance, Emily’s List last week gave an early endorsement to a little-known candidate with zero elective experience, Maya Rockeymoore Cummings. This was more a function of the candidate’s inside-the-beltway networking skills than anything having to do with the Maryland governor’s race.

Emily’s List can provide a chunk of money for the endorsee, which will be helpful. But what if the campaign landscape takes an unexpected twist before the filing deadline?

Perhaps former Rep. Donna Edwards decides to switch races and files for governor rather than run for Prince George’s County Executive.

What if former Sen. Barbara Mikulski, an icon among feminist groups, finds retirement boring and runs for governor?

What if former Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings Blake takes a look at the gubernatorial field and jumps in?

What does Emily’s List do then?

Early endorsements can backfire. They also have little influence if announced hundreds of days before the actual balloting.

Taking a Chance

One endorsement that could continue to hold weight is Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen’s public backing for Prince George’s County Executive Rushern Baker.

Van Hollen and Baker have worked together politically for decades. Baker took a risky step by endorsing Van Hollen over Edwards in the 2016 Democratic Senate primary. (He won by 14 percentage points).

Now the senator is returning the favor.

Here’s the real significance: Van Hollen is a respected and popular officeholder, especially in his longtime home, Montgomery County, which is a key jurisdiction in the Democratic primary.

His support of Baker will matter there, especially if Van Hollen campaigns for Baker in the Washington suburbs, where the party’s political fulcrum now rests.

Harry Who?

Newspaper endorsements used play a pivotal part in elections. Having the backing of the Baltimore Sun or Washington Post was BIG news. One Baltimore politician once told me that gaining The Sun’s endorsement in his legislative district could mean as much as 10,000 extra votes. Now that’s power.

Dwindling newspaper readership, though, has altered that perspective. No longer are newspapers the main source of campaign information. Nor do voters trust newspapers the way they did in past decades.

Even in the case of Maryland’s most famous newspaper endorsement – the Baltimore Sun’s surprise backing of Harry Hughes for governor in 1978 – the potency of that front-page editorial turned out to be more legend than fact.

No, The Sun and The Evening Sun didn’t “elect” Harry Hughes. The endorsement wasn’t the difference-maker (he won by nearly 4 percentage points).

It did, though, add to the momentum for Hughes, a trend that had started weeks earlier. It gave him credibility.

Endorsements: Not What They Used To Be

News-American story, by David Ahearn, on Harry Hughes’ surprise victory in 1978 Democratic primary for governor.

A post-election analysis by a respected pollster concluded, “The newspaper endorsement made Hughes a plausible candidate and the voters did the rest.”

So take this round of 21st century Maryland gubernatorial endorsements with a healthy dose of skepticism.

They aren’t what they used to be. In some elections, endorsements may not matter much at all.

###

Hogan’s Off-Message Moments

By Barry Rascovar

Oct. 23, 2017 – Gov. Larry Hogan is riding high with strong poll numbers, low unemployment and ambitious plans to turn Maryland into a cutting-edge economic-development state.

Yet amid these positives, Hogan has a tendency to veer into a form of pettiness and vindictiveness that to some degree mirrors Donald Trump’s off-message moments.

Hogan at times gets testy when his decisions are challenged. It’s as though he cannot stand even the mildest of criticisms.

A week ago, he briefly turned nasty after an event honoring his efforts as governor to support causes dear to the Jewish community of suburban Washington.

A handful of people told Hogan how disappointed they were he had mandated a post-Labor Day start to the school year because it could lead to the elimination of days offs in Montgomery County schools for the Jewish high holidays. (The same situation is cropping in Baltimore County schools).

Hogan’s glad-handing, smiling demeanor changed. He said he was “outraged” by even the suggestion his move would result in no days off for those two sacred Jewish holidays.

“That’s nonsense,” he said, then suggested angrily that the entire Montgomery County school board should be defeated at the next election.

Sounds like one of Trump’s tantrums in which the president responds to the slightest critique with searing criticism of the speaker and urges his defeat on Election Day.

Tag-Team Nastiness

A few days later, Hogan displayed moments of ill temper at a Board of Public Works meeting in which he laced into the interim school chief of Baltimore County for failing to have all county schools air-conditioned immediately.

This is an old tale, one Hogan and state Comptroller Peter Franchot have used yearly to vilify Baltimore County officials. The county has embarked on a billion-dollar system-wide renovation to solve this decades-old problem but it cannot happen overnight – though the tag-team of Hogan and Franchot imply that it can.

To conclude his week, Hogan assailed a federal appeals court for daring to conclude a giant, 40-foot cross-shaped war monument on government property violates the U.S. Constitution’s separation of church and state.

An “outrageous . . . overreach,” Hogan wrote. The court’s conclusion, he concluded, is un-American. “Enough is enough.”

He also vowed to fight the court decision – though the state does not own the land where the “Peace Cross” sits at a busy intersection in Bladensburg and thus is not a party in the lawsuit.

Hogan's Off-Message Moments

Bladensburg Peace Cross

This is the kind of social issue Hogan avoided during his campaign for governor in 2014 so as not to inflame a sensitive issue that might hurt him with voters.

Yet defending a Christian symbol erected on government land plays well with Hogan’s conservative Republican base.

That minorities might find a 40-foot Latin cross objectionable doesn’t seem to enter the governor’ calculations.

Unpleasant Parallel

Hogan’s stance on the Peace Cross has similarities to Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore’s revisionist approach to constitutional provisions regarding church and state.

Moore was removed as his state’s top judge for installing a two-and-a-half-ton monument of the Ten Commandments in the state Supreme Court building’s rotunda and then refusing to remove it when this was deemed unconstitutional.

Moore, like Anne Arundel County Councilman Michael Peroutka, is a zealous believer in Christian “moral law” superseding constitutional law. The two men would concur with Hogan’s stance on the Bladensburg Peace Cross.

The irony is that earlier this year Hogan removed a statue from the State House grounds due to its inflammatory, racist implications. He respected the sensitivity of offended minority groups.

Yet in the case of the Peace Cross and the possible elimination of school days off for Jewish holidays, Hogan appears not to care about offending minority groups.

He seems oblivious to the fact a giant Latin cross on public land might offend non-Christians, or that this imposing religious symbol at a busy intersection gives the impression that government is endorsing Christianity.

What if a similar-sized Latin cross dedicated to soldiers were placed on the grounds of the Maryland State House? Would Hogan see anything wrong with that?

There’s really no difference between that hypothetical and the Bladensburg situation.

The Peace Cross issue could be resolved by moving the monument to a private location or urging the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission to turn the land and monument over to a non-profit group, such as the American Legion.

That would be a common sense answer, but Hogan is more interested in reaping political points with his conservative voters, not in solving a problem that has deep constitutional overtones.

Political Danger?

As for school days off for Jewish holidays, Hogan’s criticism may strike some supporters the wrong way.

The governor has captivated many Jewish voters by giving scholarships to parochial schools, increasing ties to Israel and increasing aid to Jewish social agencies.

But his post-Labor Day school commencement edict is creating problems. In some years, local school boards may not be able to schedule 180 days of classes and also give days off for the most sacred days of the Jewish calendar.

If that happens, there could be a political reaction against Hogan’s stance.

There is a middle-ground, common-sense way out for the governor that avoids offending Jewish voters: Make it clear that the state school board has the authority under his executive order to grant a waiver to local school systems if such a bind crops up when creating future school calendars.

That would be more of an on-message approach Hogan could take to would avoid making issues like these a point of contention in the upcoming gubernatorial campaign.

##

Mission Impossible: Non-political Redistricting

 

By Barry Rascovar

June 12, 2017 – Holy mackerel! Can you believe this? Former Gov. Martin O’Malley has admitted politics played a big role in re-drawing Maryland’s congressional districts after the 2010 Census.

The state’s major newspapers and good-government groups went bananas. Editorial writers had a field day denouncing O’Malley and other Democratic leaders for this dastardly admission.

Politics determining the shape of new congressional districts?

What is this state coming to? Why it’s almost un-American!

Exactly which alternative universe are these people living in?

Politics and re-districting have been wrapped tightly together since the nation’s formative years.

Changing Legislative Boundaries

Remember Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry? (He pronounced his last name with a hard “G” but today everyone makes it sound like a “J.”)

In 1812, Gerry so badly contorted state Senate districts in the Boston area to benefit his Jeffersonian Republican-Democratic Party that the map resembled a mythological salamander. Thus, Gerry’s salamander-looking re-districting map, and today’s distorted district lines, became known as “gerrymanders.”

Mission Impossible: Non-political Redistricting

Famous redistricting map from 1812 newspaper resembling a salamander.

Political manipulation of legislative boundaries has been embedded in our history ever since – and for good reason. Once a political party seizes control, it wants to retain or enlarge that control through any legitimate means.

As New York Sen. William Marcy explained after Andrew Jackson’s 1828 victory led to massive patronage appointments by the new Democratic president, “To the victor belong the spoils” – including the ability to engage in partisan re-districting every 10 years.

Both major political parties do it.

In Maryland with its lopsided Democratic dominance that means Democratic gerrymandering.

Doing in Bartlett

Thus, Republican Congressman Roscoe Bartlett of Western Maryland found himself unable to win re-election after Democrats re-drew his rural, heavily Republican district following the 2010 Census, adding a vast swath of populous – and Democratic – Montgomery County.

In Republican states like Texas and North Carolina, GOP leaders have been even more brazen in their gerrymandering, earning rebukes from the Supreme Court for unconstitutionally discriminating against African Americans and Hispanics in re-drawing congressional and state legislative lines.

Maryland’s congressional maps may not be unconstitutional (so far) but they sure are bizarre.

Democratic Congressman John Sarbanes’ district resembles a winged, prehistoric dinosaur, according to one federal judge. Sarbanes should be embarrassed he pressed for those wildly distorted boundary lines. A number of other districts are highly unorthodox, or illogical, as well.

It wasn’t always like this in Maryland.

Ernie Kent, who drew the redistricting maps after the 1970 Census for Gov. Marvin Mandel, said the “overriding concern” in 1971 was “numerical equality” dictated by the Supreme Court’s one-man, one-vote ruling that called for equally sized districts with just 1% deviation.

Mandel’s one request of his “redistricting queen:” Protect the state’s first African-American congressman by keeping Parren Mitchell’s district totally within Baltimore City. This required juggling Congressman Paul Sarbanes’ district and swapping precincts [with] Congressman Clarence Long. “The rest was mostly determined by geography,” Kent recalls.

It helped that these incumbents were Democrats with the only Republican strongholds isolated in rural portions of the state.

Glendening’s Revenge

Kent says “the convoluted gerrymandering started with [Gov. Parris] Glendening . . . when he tried to punish Ben Cardin for having considered running against him for governor.” Cardin’s old district – coherent and compact – suddenly took on a grotesque U-shape, so much so “it became known as the ‘toilet seat.’ “

Note that Democrat Glendening’s boundary manipulation was designed to punish a Democratic congressman – intra-party gerrymandering. It failed miserably. Cardin kept winning re-election with ease in the “toilet seat.” He’s now a U.S. senator.

Kent sees no reason for Maryland to abandon the traditional method of re-districting “as long as so many other states controlled by the GOP gerrymander in their favor.”

Mission Impossible: Non-political Redistricting

Maryland’s Current Congressional Districts

In other words, “politics ain’t beanbag,” as the late U.S. House Speaker Tip O’Neill repeatedly said. (The original quotation comes from writer Finley Peter Dunne in an 1895 newspaper column, mouthed by his fictitious character, “Mr. Dooley”: “ ’Tis a man’s game, an’ women, childer, cripple an’ prhybitionists ‘d do well to keep out iv it.”).

Politics is a hardball profession in which the two parties engage in mano a mano contests for power. Unless both sides agree to support a nationwide, non-partisan redistricting system, there’s little chance for the kind of reform championed by idealists.

Republicans in Maryland are trying to persuade the federal courts that the gerrymandered Bartlett district amounts to unconstitutional discrimination against them.

There’s no question one political party is trying to disadvantage the other. But that’s the underlying basis of this nation’s two-party system.

A Supreme Court ruling to the contrary opens a Pandora’s box of unsolvable conundrums for the justices.

“Discriminated minority political parties” – Libertarians, the Green Party, the Constitution Party, the Americans Elect Party, the Independent Party and unaffiliated voters – all would demand that same recognition in re-drawing Maryland’s political boundaries.

If Maryland’s re-districting maps are unconstitutional because one political party gained a huge edge over other parties in re-drawing the lines, ipso facto, nearly every state in the union would find itself in the same boat. Sheer chaos.

Nine Supreme Court justices wouldn’t be enough to determine the new rules of the road for every congressional seat, every state legislative seat and every county council, city council and town council seat in all the states.

Far better for the high court to reverse its ill-considered determination to withdraw from redistricting disputes, except in cases of extreme discrimination against minority African American and Hispanic populations.

The Supreme Court could simply restore its earlier redistricting rules, which Maryland placed in its constitution for state legislative races in 1972: “Each legislative district shall consist of adjoining territory, be compact in form, and of substantially equal population. Due regard shall be given to natural boundaries and the boundaries of political subdivisions.”

Then everyone would know the perimeters for re-districting – compact, adjoining areas of equal population size that make every effort to respect natural and subdivision demarcations.

Asking for non-partisan panels to draw the boundary lines just isn’t going to happen in Maryland, Texas, North Carolina or most other states.

If there is to be a fairer system of re-drafting political boundaries, the high court needs to apply the same, basic guidelines it foolishly abandoned. That’s the best way to restore a semblance of fairness to what is inherently a political process.

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

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.

###