The Truth behind Judd Legum's Fundraising

Liberal darling/mudslinger/trial lawyer/factually challenged blogger Judd Legum is telling anybody who will listen that he raised over $65,000 for his campaign for the House of Delegates in District 30. It's on his blog. There was a press release. It was tweeted. It's all over the place like he won an award or something.

Of course, what do the numbers actually mean....

For starters, let's take a look at this claim from Legum:

I was extremely pleased with all the early financial support to my campaign. Eighty-five percent of contributions were $100 or less and we didn’t accept a penny from special interest PACs.

Which of course depends on your definition of contribution. When you talk about the actual number of contributors, then yes of Legum's 538 total contributors, 459 of them made donations of $100.00 or less. That was a total amount, however, of $22,644.32. Of Legum's total dollars raised during the 2009 filing period, only barely one-third (34.6 percent) were raised from these "small" donors.

Except that's not really the case either. For example, an Emily Legum of Annapolis made seven different $50 contributions during the period, for an aggregate total of $350. Debbie Berger Fox of Washington, DC made two seperate $100 contributions. David Cho of New York City made 8 seperate contributions that total $220.47 in addition to a contribution of $250. Nancy Coley of Annapolis made three contributions under the $100 "limit" that aggregated $175. JoAnn Escobosa of Arnold made three $50 contributions. And it goes on like this. So while the number of "contributions" of less than $100 is accurate, the aggregated total comes from a smaller pool than Legum's press release would imply.

And speaking of contributions, where did these contributions come from? Glad you asked:

• Arizona: 3
• California: 38
• Colorado: 1
• District of Columbia: 111
• Florida: 4
• Georgia: 4
• Iowa: 1
• Illinois: 7
• Kansas: 1
• Kentucky: 1
• Louisiana: 2
• Maine: 1
  
• Maryland: 231
• Massachusetts: 13
• Michigan: 1
• Minnesota: 2
• Missouri: 2
• New Jersey: 7
• New York: 37
• North Carolina: 1
• Ohio: 4
• Oregon: 3
• Pennsylvania: 16
• Rhode Island: 1
• South Carolina: 3
• Texas: 5
• Virginia: 26
• Vermont: 1
• Washington: 9
• West Virgnia: 1
• Wisconsin: 1

So to try and make the point for you here, only 42.9% of Legum's contributors live in the state of Maryland. We're not even talking about his district. We're talking about the state of Maryland.

Which now leads the question of how much of Legum's money comes from Maryland and how much comes from out of state. Glad you asked, because of Legum's total amount raised only $18,908 comes from in state donors. That means that only 28.8 percent of Judd Legum's money has been donated by Marylanders. As a matter of fact a nearly equal amount of Legum's funds were raised from residents of the District of Columbia ($18,610).

And that leaves us with the question of the who is giving money to Judd Legum. Well, the list contains a who's who of federal lobbyists with ties to the Clintion Political Machine. You can corraborate the list here. Some of the "dignitaries" include:"

• Disgraced former Annapolis Mayoral Nominee Zina Pierre, whose campaign appartus donated $250 to Legum as the scandal around her campaign exploded, and then gave a personal $100 donation in November.
• Hillary Clinton apparatchik Howard Wolfson maxed out for a $4,000 donation.
  
• Bill Clinton flunky John Podesta, the former White House Chief of Staff who was instrumental in the Marc Rich pardon scandal and now spends qualtiy time as a UFO-truther.
• Patti Solis Doyle, another prominent Clintonista, donated $1,000.
• Former MoveOn.org Director Tom Mattize was another $1,000 donor.
  
• Former DNC Chair Terry McAuliffe donated $1,000 a few months after blowing his chance to be Governor of Virginia. You may also remember Mr. McAuliffe from his starring role in the Global Crossing scandal.

And our final question leads me to this: why would any out of state resident donate $4,000 to a political hack running for state office. Wjat's in for them. Well, four individuals donated the maximum to Legum's campaign account, accounting for nearly one-quarter of his total amount raised. One of them is Wolfson, but the other three donors have an interesting, albeit out of state connection.

Dr. Rose Thayaparan practices Cytopathology and Anatomic & Clinical Pathologyst St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital in New York City. Her husband, P.W. Tayaparan, also donated $4,000. He used to work at the META Group, an information technology consulting firm in Stamford, Conn that was purchased by the Gartner Group. The only other $4,000 was their daughter Beatrice Wilderman. Why these three individuals would invest $12,000 in a Maryland race is frankly beyond comprehension at this point.

Judd Legum will tell everybody he knows that he has raised $65,000. But elections such as this one cannot be bought. They certainly cannot be bought by funds rasied from out of state donors with no connection to District 30. Maryland Democrats should be ashamed of thesmelves for allowing a candidate with the ego the size of Legum to become the poster child for their fundraising excesses.....and Legum himself should be ashamed that Sam Arora who was lower on the total pole than Legum managed to outrasie him in Montgomery County.

The moral of the story is that Judd Legum is selling himself to the highest bidder, whether or not that bidder is even a resident of Maryland. I hope the people of District 30 truly understand what they are getting if they vote for them this November. They won't be getting a Delegate who is serving them; they will be getting a Delegate beholden to out of state financial interests and the Clinton political machine. That's something the residents of District 30 and the people of Maryland as a whole simply cannot afford...

One More for the Road

Spoke again to Maryland U.S. Senate Candidate Eric Wargotz from Massachusetts, and the news sounds promising. Wargotz and Don Murphy door-knocked today in Barney Frank's district, and Wargotz said that a large chunk of voters in the heavily Democratic district said they were voting for Brown. Combine that with an expected turnout around 50%, and things are looking up.

Here's hoping Scott Brown can make the drive over to help Maryland Republicans later this year...

News from the Front

Just got off the phone with Maryland U.S. Senate Candidate Eric Wargotz who is on the ground in Massachusetts helping out the Scott Brown campaign in the final hours of tomorrow's crucial U.S. Senate Special Election.

Wargotz described the mood on the ground as an "excited quiet" due to the snowstorm that hit the Bay State today. Wargotz and his field director, noted former Delegate Don Murphy, traveled up to Massachusetts over the weekend.

“Nothing we can do that is more important than supporting Scott Brown," Wargotz said. A brown victory "helps the country, helps the party, and helps campaigns like mine across the nation.”

Wargotz and Murphy met with the campaign leadership at the campaign headquarters in Needham Heights, went door-to-door in support of the candidate, and attended an impromptu rally in Brown's hometown of Wratham, where over 1,000 supporters gathered and Brown promised to shake everyone's hand before he left the site of the rally.

“The Brown race is a game breaker; it changes races such as Wargotz vs. Mikulski in Maryland," Wargotz said.

“Massachusetts woke up with the health care bill, and the country has woken up to see how important the 41st vote is in the Senate.”

The Five in 33

Surprisingly (at least to me) only five candidates applied to fill the State Senate vacancy created by the resignation of Janet Greenip in District 33. The candidates are:

• Tom Angelis: Baltimore City High School Teacher and Republican Candidate for County Executive in 2002 and 2006
  
• Dave Boschert: Former Delegate, Former County Councilman, Republican Candidate for County Executive in 2006 and Currently the Executive Director of the Maryland Classified Employees Association.
  
• Art Ebersberger: Insurance Broker, Member of the Anne Arundel County School Board Nominating Commission, Anne Arundel Medical Center Trustee and founder of Leadership Anne Arundel.
  
• James King: Current Delegate from District 33 A and owner of the Rockfish & Kaufmann's Tavern.
• Big Ed Reilly: Current County Councilman from District 7 and Insurance Agent

I'm somewhat surprised that County Councilwoman Cathy Vitale took a pass.

A special meeting/public hearing of the Anne Arundel Central Committee will be held on Tuesday, June 2 at 6 pm in room 180 of the Lowe House Office Building in Annapolis. The committee intends to conclucde the process on the 2nd but if necessary, the conclusion of the procedure and recording the vote will occur at the regularly scheduled Central Committee meeting on Wednesday, June 3 meeting at 7 pm at 15 West Street in Annapolis.

The Committee is allowing for public comment until June 1 by US mail to the RSCCAAC, ATTN: Chairman Rzepkowski, PO Box 127, Riva, MD 21140 or by e-mail to arzepkowski@aagop.org.

It will be interesting to see who winds up with the seat. Conventional wisdom says it's between King and Reilly, but I have heard rumblings that Boschert may have support on the Committee as well.

Since none of these five candidates come from the small government/low tax wing of the party, I would expect that there will be a challenger from the right in the 2010 Primary regardless of who gets selected.....

Judd Legum: On $ale Now

Well, if you had any preconceived notion that Judd Legum's campaign for the Maryland House of Delegates was about serving the people of District 30, you can forget about that. Looks like the truth-impaired Clintonista needs to go out of state to raise his money. Legum's ActBlue page (curiously and seemingly illegally still lacking an authority line) notes that his campaign is having his next fundraiser in Washington, DC, and it is being headlined by former White House Chief of Staff John Podesta.

The "host committee" contains a number of national Clintonistas, including Howard Wolfson and Patti Solis Doyle, plus former MoveOn.org Director Tom Mattize.

So, what we have here is a candidate for the Maryland House of Delegates who is more interested in hobnobbing with Washington Insiders and raising the money from Washington Special Interest Groups than in the people of District 30. Obvious, Judd Legum's political compass is pretty far askew if he thinks that the people of District 30 will be well served by his raising of dirty money from Washington lobbyists (funny considering he claims to be eschewing money from Maryland lobbyists).

Let's face it: Judd Legum is a joke and an embarrassment to the Maryland Democratic Party. The number of Democrats who have privately told me that they wish he would just go away is impressive. And anybody who thinks that the people of District 30 will be well served by a candidate bought and paid for by Washington lobbyists is seriously deluding themselves....

Do as I say, not as I do

The "Progressive" blogosphere is all a flutter about the fact that ThinkProgress founder and former Hillary Clinton research director Judd Legum is running for the House of Delegates in Maryland, targeting conservative Republican incumbent Delegate Ron George. This of course has the folks at Kos, MyDD, HuffPo and other places tripping all of themselves proclaiming Legum as the next big thing and the "first national blogger to run for office" (never mind the fact that RedState's own Erick Erickson ran for and was elected to the Macon City Council two years ago).

Like most activists on the fringe left, Judd Legum is a big believer in campaign finance reform and public financing of campaigns. This of course would require a whole new bureaucracy and funding source just to fund campaings out of the public trough here in Maryland. It would also require campaigns to follow to a T a whole slew of new filing and campaign finance requirements in order to comply with the public funding plan the Legum and his ilk want to see.

Which brings me back to Legum and his current campaign. Legum has already raised a decent sum from his campaign via ActBlue. But you see, in Maryland you are required to a do a few things before you can start organizing a political campaign and raising money. This includes filing a statement of organization and opening a dedicated bank account for campaign activities. However Maryland's online database of campaign finance entities does not contain any information about Legum filing the appropriate paperwork that would allow him to legally raise campaign contributions.

This is not the only issue that Legum has when it comes to campaign finance issues. Maryland law also requires that each item of campaign material must contain an authority line on it indicating who produced it. That authority line must contain the name or address of the individual producing the material unless an appropriate entity is on file with the State Board of Elections. Legum's website, on which he is soliciting donations for his campaign for the House of Delegates, contains no such authority line.

Both of these violations are pretty serious. Even the seemingly minor issue of an authority line is punishable by up to a $1,000 fine, up to one year in jail, and a prohibition from seeking public office for four years.

At issue of course is the holier than thou nature of progressives like Judd Legum. Legum and folks like him want to continue to regulate our campaigns, regulate our lives even, to the highest extent possible. And when the continual burden of over-regulation continues, everybody at some point seems to find themselves in violation of a law one way or another. Legum will probably cry foul and explain that these issues are merely "oversights" on his part, however the issues that we have here are very serious indeed.

Legum's problem is the same as the of many a progressive: do as I say, not as a I do. His seeming failure to follow even the most basic of Maryland campaign finance laws goes a long way towards proving that many on the fringe left believe in holding politicians to the fullest extent of the law only until the point in which it inconveniences them.....

Remember This

"I said, you know they are riding high right now but what's going to happen is we're going to come together and we're going to shoot 'em down. We're going to shoot 'em down and we're going to bury them face down, deep and far. So deep and far it's going to take 20 years for them to come out the other side. They'll see China from there. But I was wrong. It's going to take 40 years for them to recover from what we did to them in 2008."
- Senate President Mike Miller

This is the attitude that we're up against. Let's all get ready to do the work to make Miller eat his words in 2010....

Keep the Faith

Adam Pagnucco makes some very interesting comments regarding Marylanders and their taxes in light of the support for the Ficker Amendment in Montgomery County:

Free State conservatives may have experienced a miserable election night with the victory of Barack Obama and Democratic pickups in the House and Senate. But they should take comfort from one development in Maryland: voters have made clear their intolerance for new taxes....

....The most overused line by politicians during this campaign has been, "I'm not a fan of slots." Of course not. Few people are. But few voters are fans of taxes either. And slots proponents won because voters believed their core argument: slots are preferable to taxes. The regressive nature of the 2007 special session tax package undoubtedly brought that point home to a very large number of Marylanders.

Anti-tax sentiment extended even into the state's bluest Democratic strongholds. Prince George's County is infamous for its underachieving schools. Yet, voters rejected a mere $17 million tax hike targeted for the schools by a 71-29% margin. And Montgomery County, perhaps the most liberal place in the state, is on the verge of approving Robin Ficker's anti-tax charter amendment....

....Given the above developments, there is no safe place for a tax-hiking politician to hide in the Free State right about now.

Amen to that. Which means that the sentiment that conservatives have been talking about for the past year is, in effect, true. It means that the work that we have done to bring attention to the hypocrisy of O'Malley and legislative Democrats is working. It means that the people of Maryland realize that we cannot tax our way into prosperity. It means that our fellow citizens understand the economic calamities caused by raising taxes in the middle of the recession.

It means we can win in 2010. If that's not a silver lining, I don't know what is.

For no good reason, here's a musical interlude to drive the point home.

Bon Jovi |MTV Music

What We Learned

Well, I'm not sure how much we can legitimately learn from yesterday's election results. We got our butts kicked, and good (and that's to say nothing of the 1st District, which I'll speak to once we have a result). Here are some of the lessons learned from the 2008 Presidential Election.

• Democrat Light is no way to go: Unfortunately, it looks like a lot of the calls of the Anybody but McCain camp from 2006 looked increasingly prescient. McCain was never a darling of conservatives due to his generalized support of larger government. Sure, McCain always stood up for lower tax cuts and an end to pork-barrel spending, but his comments and support of the Wall Street Bailout were consistent with many big government positions that he has taken over the years.
  
  What the American public told Republicans yesterday was that when Republicans race toward the center in an effort to look like Democrats...voters select the genuine article.
  
  
• The Republican Brand Sucks: We have talked extensively about the branding of the Republican party over the years, and I'm pretty sure that the value of the brand has reached its post-Watergate era nadir. I said back in July:
  

  the problem with Republican politics in the 21st century is not the ideology of conservatism, but leadership that itself is not conservative. Once we figure out how to fix that, Republicans will reassume the mantle of ascendancy that we lost when Congressional leadership went native a few years back.

  And it's pretty clear that we didn't do a very good job of that recently. Just take a look at the results and you'll see that. How else can you explain losses in North Carolina, a near loss in Georgia, a razor thin win in Missouri. These are Republican strongholds in Presidential Elections, and we couldn't hold on to them. It's not because these voters aren't naturally conservatives, it's just that they could no longer tell the differences between the Democratic Party and their own.
  
  
• Sarah Palin saved the day: Anybody who thinks that Sarah Palin lost this election is out of their mind. This election was realistically over not too long after the convention, we can see from hindsight. And let's face it, can you look me in the eye and tell me Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney, or anybody else would have made a significant difference in the outcome, enough to tip the election? Of course not. People blaming this loss on Sarah Palin simply do not understand electoral politics.
  
  What Sarah Palin did do, however, is energize the conservative base. When conservatives are energized, they go to the polls, and take their friends and family to the polls with them. And what that did was get enough conservatives in the booth voting for downballot Republican candidates, particularly members of Congress. It seems pretty likely that the reason that we lost but 12 seats in the House of Representatives is squarely because of Sarah Palin.

Now, we put it all behind us, but we do not forget. It's our job to move forward, take what we have learned, and put the best foot forward for 2010 and beyond...

Friendly Fire

No matter how liberal Martin O'Malley is, he is never liberal enough for some people. Adam Pagnucco made a note today of something related to the story of Sean Malone leaving the O'Malley Administration. I thought it might be the O'Malley team cashing in, but Adam thinks it might be something else:

Sean Malone has been a close advisor to Martin O’Malley ever since O’Malley was a member of the Baltimore City Council. He rose with O’Malley through the city and state governments, becoming a legal counsel to the Baltimore police department, Baltimore's labor commissioner, and eventually the new Governor’s labor liaison. But Malone was even more than that – he was a member of the Governor’s tight, protective inner circle. That made Sean Malone a powerful figure in Annapolis.

Lisa Harris Jones is the owner of Harris Jones LLC, an Annapolis lobbying firm. Her client list includes the Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC), one of the most anti-union trade associations in the United States. As the above sources reported, Sean Malone is Harris Jones LLC’s newest employee.

Very interesting, particularly in that this is something that is really going to infuriate certain aspects of O'Malley's base. Given the fact that O'Malley regularly rolls over for his union and liberal allies, I find it hard to believe that the unions have that much of a problem with O'Malley, but still very interest.

And all of this brings me back to something I have been talking about for a year now: do stories like this make it likely that Peter Franchot will challenge O'Malley in the primary in 2010 (results of the slots referendum notwithstanding)?

Too Smart by Half

Eric Luedtke trots out a theory that Mike Miller is in all actuality going to retire, he's just not telling anybody at this point in order to keep the Senate together in one place.

Luedtke's thought process there is completely rational, and totally something that Mike Miller would do in order to continue being Master of the Senate. However, whee Luedtke's analysis goes wrong is right here:

Martin O'Malley's polling numbers have been, in the words of one West Wing character, 'Less than yeasty.' He needs to bring those poll numbers up to have a good shot at re-election. In order to bring up his poll numbers, the Governor is going to need the legislature to, you know, legislate. And not just normal naming of post office legislating, but big time get popular and ground-breaking stuff done legislating. Now, if Miller is retiring in 2010, and that fact is public knowledge, the State Senate's Democratic Caucus would spend the next two years splitting into factions as Senators Frosh and Middleton jockey for position.

And I don't think he could possibly be any more wrong here. The reason that O'Malley's poll numbers are less than yeasty has everything to do with what the Senate has done for O'Malley. Miller led the Senate towards higher taxes. Miller ensured the Senate didn't cut parts of the budget to make up the difference. Miller helped the Governor pass his ludicrous spending plans. Let's face it: Mike Miller being Mike Miller and helping out Governor O'Malley is exactly why the Goveror's poll numbers are in the tank. O'Malley got what he wanted, which is something that taxpayers are less than enthused about.

The funny thing is that if Miller had stayed retired, and Luedtke's "Lord of the Flies" scenario came to pass, the Senate would be virtually in a stand still. And that means that none of the Governor's out of the mainstream tax and spend proposals would ever see the light of day. In that scenario, the divided Senate protects O'Malley from O'Malley, with the only piece of legislation derailed that would hurt the poll numbers would be the likely temporary election year tax cut that Democrats always like to pass.

In Luedtke's analysis, he assumes of course that a Miller retirement would have been the end of the universe:

But as for the whole idea of keeping the Senate Democratic Caucus in line, here's something our Democratic State Senators need to remember - if O'Malley loses, all of us lose. Not just in the larger sense of getting stuck with another four years of Bob the Golfer. But also in two very serious ways: 1. A strong showing by a Republican gubernatorial candidate could increase Republican turnout and swamp some of our Senators in the more marginal districts, decreasing our advantage in the Senate, and 2. Whoever is elected Governor in 2010 will have significant power over the redistricting after the next census, and could create districts in such a way as to completely screw with Democrats, as happened with the Republican gerrymandering in Texas. Sitting Senators stuck in the same district. The map redrawn to create Republican districts in Democratic jurisdictions, such as northern Montgomery County. It. Would. Be. A. Disaster. In other words, if the Senate didn't do its job without papa Miller to ride herd, they wouldn't deserve re-election, because they'd be doing serious damage to the party.

Because for Luedtke and his ilk, the party always comes before the people. And he, of course, forgets what happened when the Glendening map was thrown out in court for....completely screwing Republicans and conservative Democrats, with sitting Senators stuck in the same district.

Of course, Luedtke calls it a disaster....I call it a good start.

Is Cathy Vitale going to Challenge Leopold?

This is interesting from today's Political Notes:

County Council Chairman Cathy Vitale, R-Severna Park, will host a breakfast and discussion on "Fiscal Trust and Responsibility: Local Leadership for National Success," from 7:30 to 9 a.m. Tuesday at Carrol's Creek Waterfront Restaurant, 410 Severn Ave., Eastport.

Guest speaker is Dr. Donald J. Devine vice chairman of the American Conservative Union and editor of "Battleline."

Very interesting, particularly given Vitale's recent comments on the budget. It's not like you talk about fiscal trust at the local level when you're running for a legislative position.

Of course if Vitale is serious about running for County Executive she needs to get new campaign consultants, because we have seen time and again that her longtime consultants from Currier Communications are too interested in their own press clippings to focus on actually winning a competitive race for once.

Ignore their will at your own risk

As Governor O'Malley continues to ignore the will of the voters and continues to try and tax and spend us to death, his poll numbers fall further into the crapper:

In a new poll by Gonzales Research & Marketing Strategy, 37 percent of the people asked approve of the job the governor is doing, while 48 percent disapproved. Another 15 percent of people in the survey had no opinion.

O'Malley's approval numbers dropped after November's special session. That's when $1.4 billion in tax increases were approved to address a projected $1.7 billion structural deficit.

If the Democrats want to wax poetic about how the Governor is doing what's right and not what's popular, go right ahead. But it is looking more and more apparent that Ehrlich II will be starting in January 2011...

Denials, Ego, Mistruths

The Sun documents more absurdity in the life and times of John Leopold....

In one story, Leopold goes out of his way to again deny that he is running for Governor:

Leopold said he is committed to seeking a second term as the county's chief executive. A gubernatorial candidate in Hawaii in 1978, he said he is not setting his sights on higher office in Maryland.

All I can say is this: that for a guy who says he is committed to serving a second term (and God knows Anne Arundel County doesn't need that), he sure is spending a lot of time denying that he is running for Governor in 2010...

Next, the Sun turns its attention to impact fees, particularly the fact that a consultant (as we have noted before) has suggested to Leopold that the county drastically raise the fees:

Relying on a study by a nationally known consultant, County Executive John R. Leopold is calling for substantial increases in the fees levied on developers -- and, in the cases of homes, typically passed onto the buyers. The current flat rate of $4,904 for a single-family home would increase to $28,315 for a four-bedroom house and $39,257 for a home of five bedrooms or more, according to the study. The highest proposed residential fee would be for a condominium or apartment of four or more bedrooms: $53,322, or more than 12 times the current top rate of $4,274.

Leopold said his bill, which the council will introduce Tuesday, seeks to offset the full burden that new building -- homes, hotels, hospitals, warehouses, nursing homes, offices, marinas and retail -- places on roads, schools and public safety. The figures in the bill have not been finalized.

All of this seemed to be news to the County Council. It was the understanding of Councilmembers that Leopold's office would work the with the Council on an impact fee bill, but instead dropped Leopold dropped his own bill on his own:

Councilman Ronald C. Dillon Jr. and Vitale said that the Leopold administration late last year had offered to work with the council to settle on fee amounts. But when council members asked for more information, Leopold pushed ahead with his legislation alone, they said.

"I was taken off-guard when the administration introduced the bill," Dillon said. "Until then, I thought there was a desire to share information. Then things went awry."

And Councilman Ed Middlebrooks fortunately comes out and states the obvious:

Other council members said Leopold sent down a bill knowing that it stands no chance of passage. They accused the county executive of using the bill as a political ploy in hopes of currying favor with anti-growth interests.

"I don't think [Leopold] is being honest with the citizens. ... It's just politics," said Councilman C. Edward Middlebrooks, a Severn Republican.

So there are a lot of notable, albeit unsurprising issues going on with Leopold. He continues to deny his ambition for higher office. He is back serving as the Lone Ranger, working on his own without trying to come to a reasonable compromise with Councilmembers on the issue (not saying that anybody should be raising such taxes). And Leopold is intentionally introducing legislation designed to give him political cover for the hundreds of thousands of dollars from developers that he took as donations in direct opposition to his campaign promises.

Once again, we have to come back to John Leopold and the issue of character. People have known that this is the kind of operator John Leopold is in his forty-years of public service, going back to his 1968 election to the Hawaii Board of Education. The fact that Leopold was able to be elected to the top post in our county is an unfortunate to good governance and the future of our county. And every couple of days we see another reason as to why Leopold's election was bad for our party and bad for our county...

The Canary in the Coal Mine

You know that Maryland's Democratic leadership has made some poor choices on taxes and spending when one of their own starts warning that they may have sent the state economy into bad water:

Maryland Comptroller Peter Franchot (D) offered a bleak assessment of the state's economy yesterday, saying recent changes to the state's tax laws could negatively affect an already dire financial outlook.

Delivering Maryland's first State of the Treasury speech in recent history, Franchot, who considers himself the state's chief fiscal officer, said the subprime mortgage crisis, instability in financial markets and declining retail sales are driving the economy into "a period of profound uncertainty."

The full speech is available from the Comptroller's website. And true to form (and my opinion that Franchot is preparing a 2010 primary challenge to Governor O'Malley), the Comptroller railed against the tax package:

Furthermore, I believe that we must acknowledge that the sweeping changes to Maryland’s tax laws – which resulted from last Fall’s Special Session – have only added to this climate of unpredictability. As you know, I publicly objected to the idea of writing complex tax legislation in a frenetic and overheated political environment. Significant tax increases were essentially drafted behind closed doors and adopted without the benefit of substantive analysis, meaningful public hearings or consultation with stakeholders. And while I commend Governor O’Malley and the General Assembly for their shared commitment to resolving Maryland’s structural deficit, I remain deeply concerned about the potential of some of these tax measures to inflict harm on our State’s economy.

I am particularly troubled by the expansion of the Maryland sales tax to computer services. I spoke out in public opposition to this proposal when it was rammed through during the closing days of the Special Session, and I feel the same way today. This technology tax tax, if allowed to stand, will erode Maryland’s competitive advantage in the Knowledge-based economy.

What Franchot's endgame with his criticism of O'Malley and General Assembly leadership is anyone's guess. But it is significant that somebody who is probably to the left of just about every major elected official in the state of Maryland is being critical of O'Malley, the General Assembly, and the way business was conducted during the Special Session speaks volumes of how bad things are in our state. Politically, Franchot would have been expected to be on board with the historic tax hikes that we saw, but instead even he is concerned with the way everything went down.

Is this another salvo in an O'Malley v. Franchot gubernatorial primary? There is a long way to go before we can speculate too much about that. But it says a lot as to why O'Malley's poll numbers are sinking when ever those who are generally philosophically in league with where he wants to take our state can't support his tactics and methods...

Read between the lines

Folks, it's right and front of you, and it's the reason Mr. Unimpeachable John Leopold once again violated his favorite campaign promise:

County Executive John R. Leopold has amassed a half-million dollar campaign war chest during his first year in office, shattering previous records for Anne Arundel County, campaign finance reports filed yesterday show....

According to records obtained by The Capital, more than half of the $504,325 Mr. Leopold raised during 2007 came from the development and land-use community. At least another $14,000 came from his employees and political appointees. Mr. Leopold nearly matched what Robert L. Ehrlich raised during his first year as governor four years ago, and far surpassed the $62,178 Janet S. Owens collected during the first year of her first term.

Despite the hefty contributions from developers - garnered largely at private, $4,000-a-head fundraisers - Mr. Leopold said he has a record of independence that would be untainted by the contributions.

"I've said from the outset that builders and developers should have a voice at the table but should never be able to drive public policy in the county," Mr. Leopold said.

Well, other than John Leopold once again breaking a campaign promise (which might as well be his middle name), you can see that this is more than just a Liberal Republican gearing up to run for another four year term.

John Leopold is preparing a run for Governor, something that I have been saying for a long time. At the end of the day, he may not actually run for Governor, but nobody can deny the fact that Leopold is certainly trying to position himself as a player in the 2010 gubernatorial race.

The Republican Party is going to have to make sure to come together before 2010 and ensure that the we do not get stuck with someone like John Leopold as our party's statewide standard bearer....

John Leopold's Self-Love

Man, in today's Gazette John Leopold really pours the love on himself:

A review of his first year in office, however, shows an aggressive record of strictly enforcing environmental laws, slashing government spending, cracking down on panhandlers and illegal immigrants, and managing growth ahead of a major expansion of jobs at Fort Meade.

''The best campaign is a good performance in office and our first year record of accomplishment speaks for itself," he said. ''It's not a record to stand on, it's a record to build on."

It's not really a record that I would want to run on, because while Leopold claims to be slashing government spending, the fact of the matter is that government is continuing to grow in Anne Arundel County. Not only the size of government, but the scope of government as well. We have noted a lot of this stuff, his hypocrisy on panhandling laws, his seeming inability to manage the growth, his support of shutting citizens out of participating in the School Board process, and of course now jumping into bed with the developers who he said he would never accept money from. He raised taxes on seniors, tried to implement a rental car tax, and publicly supported Martin O'Malley's tax increases. Is this really a record that John Leopold is proud of? If you listen to Leopold's Self-love it is.

Of course, Leopold's Self Love-in didn't preclude him from proposing more tax hikes:

The county administration last night proposed an enormous increase to the fees levied on new homes and buildings, in some cases suggesting fees more than 10 times higher than those currently charged.

County officials say current impact fees are artificially low and the higher ones are needed to prevent taxpayers from further subsidizing new development's impact on schools, roads and public safety services - problems that helped lead to a $1.5 billion backlog of school construction and crowded roads.

Builders say the new fees are so high that it may shut down building in Anne Arundel.

Of course Leopold rights it off as being something that a "consultant" proposed. But get real, it's just Leopold doing what he loves to do: raise taxes.

What the Republican Party in Anne Arundel County really needs is not a liberal Republican to continue to defy our values as conservatives, but we need an honest-to-god conservative Republican to challenge John Leopold in the 2010 primary....

It starts tomorrow

Annapolis' long-awaited version of budgetary Armageddon comes to town tomorrow. And let's face it: other than the fact that taxpayers are about to get hosed, we don't really know what is going to happen. If legislative Democrats reverse four-years of precedent under the Ehrlich Administration and decide to support a slots package, the entire session could be over relatively quickly. Mike Miller will likely allow most of the O'Malley tax package through the Senate. In that case, we will see slots, and we will see higher income and sales taxes, to say nothing of the expansion of services and items covered by the sales tax.

But if the slots bill is a no go, the General Assembly will likely go the full thirty-day distance. I see no way that the legislative leadership and the O'Malley Administration will be able to come together on a deal. The O'Malley folks want there to be a consensus on the issue with the leadership, but the O'Malley idea of consensus is everybody agreeing to do what the Governor wants. Given the fact that this leadership style is even more defiant of legislative wishes than even the Ehrlich Administration, O'Malley is risking a lot of political capital on something that is nowhere close to being a sure thing.

My prediction for the session? Nothing gets done, O'Malley's position is seriously compromised, and he finds himself incredibly vulnerable to a primary challenge in 2010, to say nothing of increasing the likelihood of a Republican victory in the 2010 gubernatorial election.

Checking in where I have been

In this Friday's Gazette, Barry Rascovar checks in where I have been for some time now: that Peter Franchot is positioning himself extremely well to mount a challenge to Governor O'Malley's left during the 2010 gubernatorial primary.

The more Franchot fights the special session, and the more likely it becomes that O'Malley's tax-hike gambit fails, the more likely a Franchot challenge will become....

Misusing the Office

We have gone over before the duties and responsibilities of the Office of the Comptroller and Peter Franchot's inability to understand them. And I'm pretty sure that this isn't in there:

State Comptroller Peter Franchot has agreed to cull state income tax records to identify Howard County families who might qualify for health care assistance and then send them letters offering help, county officials said yesterday.

"Who knows better than the state comptroller who is making less than 300 percent of [the federal] poverty [level]?" asked Dr. Peter L. Beilenson, the county health officer, referring to the income cutoff to qualify for federally funded health care programs for children.

The letter campaign was to be announced today at Franchot's Baltimore office on West Preston Street as the latest component of what Howard County officials say will be a comprehensive plan to offer health care access to all uninsured residents. Details of the plan are to be revealed Tuesday.

So the state is going to spend taxpayer dollars to help Howard County spend more taxpayer dollars on covering the uninsured? Where exactly is that in the Comptroller's job description?

Franchot's job is to collect the taxes, and realistically not much else. His job is to not turn the resources of the Comptroller's office over to help Howard County expand the number of citizens on government assistance, no matter how well meaning he is about it. If the people of Howard County want to offer comprehensive health care to its uninsured, and so long as they are using the taxpayer dollars of Howard County residents, I don't really have a dog in the fight. But I do have an issue when the Office of the Comptroller, funded by my taxes, is being misused in this manner.

I will note, however, that the same people who praise Peter Franchot for his "courage" would be first in line to charge the Bush Administration with high treason if they proposed using IRS records to track terrorists...

The Beginning?

Comptroller Peter Franchot unleashed this criticism of the O'Malley tax plan this week:

State Comptroller Peter Franchot criticized government leaders this week by saying it would be "reckless" to add $2 billion of tax burdens in a special session before December revenue estimates can show whether the economy is tanking.

The volatility of the local, state and world economies - and the lack of analysis in the budget plans put forward so far by Gov. Martin O'Malley - have Mr. Franchot concerned the administration is not fully considering the effects of new taxes.

The governor's piecemeal rollout of the different tax options to address a projected $1.7 billion deficit next year has made it difficult to see how all the proposals fit together, he told The Capital's Editorial Board this week.

"We have an opportunity to reform the tax code and instead we have treated it a little bit like a take-out menu," he said. "It's just not comprehensive or inclusive (and) ultimately I don't think it ends up being fair."

Read the whole thing, but I ask you this: is this the start of Peter Franchot's primary challenge to Governor O'Malley in 2010?

We're not this lucky

David Kyle has this:

It seems that Governor O’Malley had at Party caucus lunch today and announced to them all that Delegate Dwyer was going to be running for Governor against him. I almost fell out of my seat when I heard this new rumor. Where the Governor got this bit of news I have to wonder, as it seems to me that he must have someone on the inside of things. Hmm, who recently in the Republican Party has been leaking things to the papers?

Now I have to admit that I had this conversation with Dwyer several years ago but it was not something that we went into great detail on. As I am no longer close to him I don’t know if he has decided to do this or not, I guess time will tell.

This is fantastic news. First, it will give the Maryland Republican Party the opportunity to show that Don Dwyer is not the face of our party. There is no earthly way that he wins the nomination, as he is too far to the right, irritates too many people, and of course has not always supported the party.

And secondly, it would be nice to have a third Delegate in District 31 who actually, you knows, tries to do their job. I'm still pretty tired of Dwyer getting $43,000 a year to accomplish nothing. It's like a having a welfare recipient on the government dole instead of a Delegate...

Incumbent backs Incumbent: Film at 11

Andrew Kujan is puzzled that Comptroller Peter Franchot is backing Al Wynn in his 2008 re-election primary instead of ultra-lefty Donna Edwards:

To say the two men have divergent interests is an understatment.

When Franchot was elected as comptroller, some criticized the expansion of his office's powers. Franchot dismissed these claims....

I once supported the Comptroller's expanded actions, because I figured the man's head was on straight. Now I am not so sure.

Franchot has decided to endorse a congressman who will be actively working against his goals as a progressive. Whether he was fooled or went willinging, I do not know, but I do know I am disappointed.

Sure, an incumbent backing an incumbent against a primary challenger is not exactly breaking news. And there's a lot of material there to deal with (why anybody would want to expand the powers of the Comptrollers office; why would anybody think Franchot had his head on straight). But I think Andrew misses the four little numbers that have everything to do with this decision.

2010

It is no secret that Peter Franchot desperately wants to run for Governor. It is also no secret that O'Malley's a little too moderate for Franchot's tastes. Nor is it a secret that the African-American community is not particularly gung ho for O'Malley or the slate of candidates that came out of the Democratic ticket in 2006.

So ask yourself this; if you were planning on running an insurgent primary to an incumbent Governor's left in three years, wouldn't you want to do whatever you could to help shore up support and build political capital wherever you could get it?

Just a thought....