As most of my faithful readers know, last weekend marked the occurrence of our most recent state convention. During that convention, the state party adopted a "compromise" voting system solely for this convention and elected a new state chairman, Audrey Scott. Oddly enough, Wicomico County's delegation had the distinction of being the only county to vote against both proposals, which otherwise carried by huge margins.

I'm not going to say that I speak for the entire local body because I don't - we all have our reasons for making the decisions we do. Perhaps we have seven people who simply don't "go along to get along" but I happen to think there's underlying reasons for our stance as the establishment's thorn in the side.

It seems to me that Wicomico County looks upon itself as the guardian of the interests of smaller counties, especially those on the Eastern Shore, and their role in the Maryland Republican Party. For the entire term I've been on, our county's delegation has been in the forefront of trying to bring about change in the party by replacing the three Vice Chairs with regional chairs (including one reserved for the Eastern Shore) and scrapping the LCD voting system which marginalized small counties and propped up larger counties, enabling one such county to practically outvote the entire Shore delegation by itself. Having a "one man, one vote" system would at least enable the Shore to have more of a voice and a role in determining the direction of affairs.

With the old system, we had little say in what went on. It was revealed to us by one office-seeker that Eastern Shore delegations needed little more than a cursory visit during a recent convention with a contested officer race because that person needed to secure votes from the larger counties to win. Our tiny share of the vote wasn't going to make a difference.

As currently constituted, the nine Eastern Shore county delegations would make up 71 of a possible 267 votes at the next convention, assuming all voters are present or represented by proxy. (Cecil and Talbot are at nine apiece; Dorchester, Somerset, Caroline, and Kent have seven members; and Wicomico and Worcester will expand from seven to nine prior to next spring - an action voted on as part of this most recent convention.) Thus, we have 26.6% of the voting strength. But the so-called "compromise" measure diluted our strength to 20.4% of voting power.

Perhaps what irked us the most about the events which transpired is that we had put up similar proposals in previous conventions only to be shouted down and ridiculed by larger counties who liked the status quo. Only when it was determined by careful reading of the rules that we need not use the old LCD voting method did the I-95 corridor counties suddenly come begging for the "compromise" solution.

But the compromise didn't really accrue to the benefit of small counties and I suspect after careful consideration they may find they were snookered by the larger counties. And, since "one man one vote" is the default voting method, perhaps it's time to get a little bit better deal next time around! Maybe an agreement to install that regional chairs thing is worth the price paid in giving up a slice of our power - since 226 people were represented by vote or by proxy this time around, getting the Eastern Shore and any one Western Maryland county to vote as a bloc effectively kills any compromise because a rule change requires a 2/3 majority. Any number of horse trades become possible once we figure out that we can have our say! Of course, that would also take vigilance from those on the Rules Committee to make sure the "compromise" voting method is indeed not carried over but reconsidered next time, as promised.

Just grist for the mill.

Now, on to Audrey Scott. My take on her is that she didn't poll well with us because of a perception she's part of the establishment, and it was that faction which ousted Jim Pelura - a chairman we liked and admired - from the party's top position. It's possible she can win us over, but in mending fences it seems to me that she should come down and meet with us at the first opportunity (Audrey, if you're reading this we meet the first Monday each month.)

I was personally called by both Audrey Scott and opponent Daniel Vovak, so I got to listen to both pitches. Scott also called into our Central Committee meeting last Monday, although the Skype and local computer only allowed an audio connection which faded in and out.

Obviously Audrey Scott has a lot of work to do with raising money, and the parade started by Mike Collins of Anne Arundel County was a good start. But some high rollers seemingly weren't playing ball with Jim Pelura yet are happy to help out Audrey Scott, which to me raises a red flag whether they are contributing because they agree with our philosophy or simply to buy a little bit of influence. I'm certainly not naive enough to believe that money plays no part in political decisions but, unless there's been a change in philosophy eminating from the top, we Republicans are standing for the same principles under Audrey Scott as we did under Jim Pelura - I know my mind hasn't been changed, I'm still conservative. So are we selling out for the almighty buck? I certainly hope not!

Maybe the county I help to represent has a little bit of Missouri in it - we need to be shown that things will be made better for our interests before we jump on board the bandwagon. It will be interesting to see who offers their services as part of the expanded Central Committee and who decides to stay on after next year's election. The crop I came in with made up over half the Central Committee and the expansion brings even more turnover unless one of those I helped to replace decides to come back.

There's a lot we can do to help the state party as a whole, yet the perception we small counties exist as the red-headed stepchildren of the Maryland Republican Party leads to actions like skipping conventions or not sending money into the state party coffers. Obviously it's detrimental to our cause as a whole but we have to be assured we can get out of the party all that we put into it. We don't ask for much, just as fair of a shake from the new Chair as we received from the last.

For the third time this fiscal year (which only started July 1st, so we're 4 1/2 months in), the state of Maryland has been forced to make budget cuts. This $360 million in budget actions brings the total to over $1 billion.

Doing his best to make lemonade out of the lemons he grew, Governor Martin O'Malley related, in part:

“These have not been easy decisions, but they have been necessary decisions to balance our State’s budget, and get our state through this recession more quickly and stronger than other states,” said Governor O’Malley.  “Our citizens expect and deserve a government that works, and in spite of the most severe recession in a generation we’ve been working to reform our State government to make more efficient and effective.”

In the past three years, the O’Malley-Brown Administration has implemented $4.6 billion in budget cuts and spending reductions, including the elimination of more than 3,300 state positions.

Governor O’Malley once again held public education harmless in this round of budget cuts, noting Maryland’s nationally ranked number one public schools and the need to invest in our schools even in difficult times.  General Fund support for K-12 education in FY2010 will exceed FY07 spending by almost $700 million. 

Of the FY2010 budget actions, six of every ten dollars have come from reforming state agencies.  Among today reductions were efforts to continue reforming our State government to make it more efficient and effective, including the suspension of non-essential vehicle purchases and reducing out-of-state travel for state employees.  In addition, the State Highway Administration will reduce operating hours for five of 12 SHA-operated rest areas.  An additional rest area will close during the winter months, and the rest area at US 219 at Keyser’s Ridge will close permanently.

Additionally, Governor O’Malley introduced $11 million in savings from efforts to ensure that only people who are eligible for Medicaid receive Medicaid services, and by scaling back unnecessary services; $500,000 in savings from negotiating lower prices with venders; and $3 million in savings from streamlining operations and consolidating functions across our government.

Can I add something here, Governor O'Malley? Unlike the federal budget which is created by Congress, YOU MAKE THE STATE BUDGET! So these cuts are in the budget because you overestimated the revenue you would get and/or didn't have the will to look people in the eye and tell them "no".

Just like Wicomico County's budget, you left education as the sacred cow and contrived a number of ways to rob several existing funds (many of which seem to be slush funds for some pet purpose or another) or look to Uncle Sam (maybe I should say Uncle Barack) in order to bail you out. You place a lot of faith in Fedzilla to plug in the holes your cuts are creating.

Yet you have the audacity to smugly claim that your General Fund spending is now $500 million less than three years ago - and that you've made $4.6 billion in cuts over that timespan - but education spending is up $700 million. Well, perhaps if you'd get the budget right the first time we wouldn't have these problems. It's bad enough you jacked everyone's taxes up yet still can't figure this out on your third try.

Adding a voice of sanity is GOP challenger Larry Hogan:

Today, Martin O’Malley and the Board of Public Works cut $300 million more out of the State Budget. The cuts reduce millions in spending already committed for college financial aid, Medicaid funding, and state mental health programs. The cuts also may violate state law regarding the amount of appropriated funding that can be taken back by the state.

“Martin O’Malley continues his assault on the citizens of Maryland while exposing to all that he is unable to put Maryland's fiscal house in order. Twice now, he has made significant cuts to the state's Medicaid program after significantly increasing it less than a year ago. And once again he has chosen to put the burden of his overspending on state employees. This leadership does not work for Maryland citizens," Hogan said.

Hogan continued, "Here's what the citizens of Maryland have learned from Martin O'Malley over the last three years: he cannot be trusted to lead our state back to prosperity; his overspending and 'tax everything' policies have severely damaged our state's economy and revenues; and he has no problem attacking the state's most vulnerable."

According to Maryland’s Department of Legislative Services, the fiscal year 2010 budget is currently $32.3 billion; the final budget of the Ehrlich administration was $29 billion – an increase of nearly $3.3 billion in new spending.

“Martin O’Malley has spent Maryland into a one billion dollar hole,” said Hogan. “And his fiscal policies have led to the highest unemployment rate in a generation by attacking the job creators of the state with more and more taxes. It's time to change Maryland for the better by putting Martin O'Malley in the unemployment line in 2010. Only then can we put Maryland back on the right fiscal track.”

If O'Malley gets a second term and the economy somehow picks up, it's a safe bet to assume that he'll raise taxes in order to "make up" for all the spending cuts he's had to provide. Or, all those items this budget transfers to the federal ledger will stay there until fiscal responsibility returns to Washington and transfer payments to states are reduced. Naturally, O'Malley would then blame Republicans for that occurrence because the prospects for fiscal sanity inside the Beltway over the next couple years are dim at best.

However, if Larry Hogan gets in that would provide the opportunity (although he would have to do so with lightning speed, starting the day after the election) to reevaluate every line-item in the state budget. It may take the first year to pare the budget down to a more appropriate level - if you assume a reasonable 3% per year growth from the FY07 figure provided, the FY12 budget would work out to $31.58 billion - but once that's done, budget number two can work from a standpoint of reducing the tax burden on Maryland residents and employers. Of course, the dirty little secret Democrats won't admit is that cutting taxes would increase revenue, so if you combine that with prudent spending habits Maryland can weather the next storm more easily.

It would be a vast improvement from the O'Malley crisis management method being employed now.

Note to fellow Maryland Red County readers: As a member of Wicomico County's Central Committee I attended the recent state convention where Audrey Scott was installed as the new party chairman - my pictorial coverage may be found here.

I came across an interesting article in yesterday's Washington Post regarding some of the media buys which have occurred over the last couple days.

The piece by Aaron C. Davis and Ben Pershing features a number of House Democrats who voted on both sides of the bill. Obviously groups like Health Care for America Now and AFSCME are giving "attaboys" to those who voted yes and condemning those who properly voted no, with notable exceptions. Apparently Frank Kratovil is being spared their wrath - for the moment, anyway.

To me, though, this is the money part of the article, part of which quotes our plurality Congressman:

Rep. Frank M. Kratovil Jr. (Md.), who was one of 39 Democrats on the other side of Saturday's vote, was spared in initial ads and protests. But he said that he expects criticism for his no vote to carry into the 2010 election.

"Some on the Democratic side think I should have blindly voted for it because it was a priority of the leadership, and some on the other side say don't vote for it regardless of what's in it," Kratovil said in an interview Monday, noting that his vote on the final legislation could still be in play.

The freshman, among those who swelled the party's majority in the House, initially voted against President Obama's stimulus bill this year. Over the summer, he voted for climate-change legislation. Kratovil said he thinks his record adds up to a powerful case for independents -- and maybe some Republicans in his Eastern Shore district-- that he can base decisions on policy and not politics.

"I think I've demonstrated . . . that I won't let pressure force me to go one way or another," he said. (Emphasis mine.)

So his vote can still be in play, huh? Remember, folks, it's all but certain that if the House bill survives in the Senate (or if a companion Senate bill passes) he's going to have to vote on this again. Nor should we forget that, to Frank, "universal health care - means universal." At least that's what he campaigned on in 2008; then again, at the time he didn't have a voting record to dissect.

Those who congratulated Frank for his wise vote against Pelosicare (probably knowing they had a vote or two to spare) might not be so pleased with him when he turns around again and votes for a "compromise" House-Senate bill. It's been hard to figure out just what core principles Frank has and this subject muddies the waters even further.

Sometimes one can go through a number of days having time to tend to personal affairs because the opportunity to engage officials isn't particularly urgent - at least not in a public venue, anyway. Those of you who took a few minutes out of your day to contact Congressman Kratovil about Pelosicare should be commended regardless of which side you were on. In my case, the skirmish was won but we lost the overall battle. Next up will be our Senators, but the chances of winning that skirmish are far smaller because they make no pretense of being independent - they're hardcore leftists.

But I digress. Today and tomorrow are two days where the calendar is filled with opportunities for civic engagement.

On Saturday I received a request to place a notice about tonight's Salisbury City Council meeting and taking the opportunity to speak out during the public comment period; after all:

This is an urgent call to action because crime in Salisbury is out of control.

Crime doesn’t care if you’re conservative, liberal or middle of the road.

Crime doesn’t care if you’re Republican, Democrat or Independent.

Crime doesn’t care if you’re an employee or a business owner.

The question is…

Who DOES care about stopping the crime in Salisbury that threatens our lives and livelihoods, families, students, the elderly?

This Monday night, November 9th at 6 p.m., at the Government Office Building, face the Salisbury City Council and ask:

"Will you continue to support the rising crime rate or will you take action against crime, starting now?"

During Public Comment, state your name and full address, keep it civil, keep it brief, and speak from your heart.

Join Americans for Prosperity, Progressive Delmarva, and many other citizens in letting their voices be heard.

Don't worry, I have my take on this and I'll get to it before you know it. But tomorrow brings TWO meetings worth attending - unfortunately they happen at the same time.

First of all, there will be a public hearing of the Maryland Public Service Commission at Salisbury University.  The hearing will be at 7:00 PM in the Nanticoke Room (Room 236) of the Guerrieri Center.

The purpose behind the hearing is to give Delmarva Power the opportunity to face their public regarding a proposed rate increase.

Then Wicomico County residents will have the chance to speak out on budget cuts at a public hearing scheduled for Tuesday, November 10th at 7pm at the Wicomico Civic Center, in the Midway Room. Of course, the county Board of Education rescheduled their meeting to an early afternoon timeslot just so they can justify their existence and refusal to meaningfully partake in the sacrifice other county agencies must endure at the evening meeting.

Oh, and don't forget the sure sob story from County Executive Rick Pollitt about laboring under a voter-imposed revenue cap.

So let's return to the meeting of Salisbury City Council scheduled for tonight.

Obviously crime is a problem in Salisbury, as it is in a number of other locales. But the slant of the full message to me basically called for the dismissal of SPD Chief Allan Webster. Perhaps a fresh leader would help, but a changing of the guard at the top does little to address a number of other underlying problems which lie beyond the scope the SPD can work on - poor parenting, a subpar local economy, the glorification of the "thug culture", and influx of illegal immigrants who are easy targets for criminal activity.

And then we have Delmarva Power. Unquestionably their costs are going up, particularly the price of purchasing the raw materials required to create electricity. But another component of their cost is conforming to the ever-expanding maze of regulations and mandates placed upon them by Fedzilla and the state governments - case in point, Maryland's requirement for a percentage of generation to come from "renewable" sources. These generally cost more per kilowatt-hour than the standard fuels used for power generation. Coal and natural gas may be villified as fossil fuels but they're also cheaper than getting electricity from renewable sources.

Wicomico County is a primary user of Delmarva Power's services, and a rate increase would have to be factored into their next budget. It's a scary prospect because a large portion of the county's reserve funds are going to go into balancing this year's ledger so they won't have that cushion to fall back upon, made even more scary because next year is an election year for the entirety of county government.

Perhaps the largest problem Pollitt has in balancing his budget is a state mandate called "maintenance of effort." That makes it most difficult to enact any cuts on the half of county expenditures going to educate Wicomico County's public schoolchildren. Moreover, much of the education budget goes to labor and it's mostly regulated by union contracts, so cutting there comes at the risk of a teachers' strike.

Obviously it's important to make our voices heard locally. But solving the underlying problems addressed by these meetings isn't just something which can be done at a local level. The dependence of local governments on state and federal funding comes at a great cost in losing the ability to solve these dilemmas in-house.

Limiting the size and scope of government then, in effect, becomes a chicken-and-egg argument. It's difficult to bring the federal government to its knees and much easier to achieve victories locally. But to achieve a more lasting solution to what ails our nation and economy, the federal beast has to be brought under control and relief given to state and local governments in the manner of cutting back on mandates and regulations on them. In turn, the states need to loosen their iron grip on local governments.

We can't address these issues directly tonight and tomorrow. But it's a point which deserves to be made.

Fresh off GOP gubernatorial election upsets in New Jersey and Virginia, is there hope for a Republican comeback in Maryland?

According to a recent poll, trouble may be brewing for Governor O'Malley in next year's election. The poll, conducted by the nonpartisan Clarus Research Group, interviewed 637 voters in Maryland between October 30 and November 2, 2009.  Perhaps the most troubling sign for Maryland Governor O'Malley was that 48% of voters polled say would they would prefer someone new to win and only 39% say they want to see Gov. O'Malley re-elected.

The front runner for the Republicans would be former Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich.  Even though Ehrlich has not committed to running, Clarus included a hypothetical 2010 rematch in their poll with O'Malley leading his former Republican rival by a 47-40 percent margin.

The results of the poll highlighted that O'Malley has a significant advantage over Ehrlich among women and African Americans voters. During the 2006 election, O'Malley defeated incumbent Ehrlich with a nearly 20 point advantage with women voters and a 60 point advantage with African Americans.

From watching Tuesday’s election returns from Virginia and New Jersey, we can see that even in blue states liberalism is failing. Obama talks a great game, and says the right things – such as promoting health care reform through “choice and competition,” – but is unable to produce legislation that matches the rhetoric. And people are wise to the double talk now. We the people know better, and we watch what the politicians do rather than listening to what they say.

Could anyone imagine seeing a Republican take the governorship of deep blue New Jersey? Go back one year and remember how dominant Obama was in Jersey, easily winning the Democrat stronghold, and ask that question again. It is likely that anyone forecasting a Republican taking the governorship just one year later would have been ridiculed and mocked until he moved to a remote island where no-one has televisions, newspapers or internet access. It just seemed impossible. And yet, here we are today, watching more than 50 percent of New Jersey voters reject Jon Corzine and his failed liberal policies.

Watching these two states that went for Obama in ‘08 do such an about face in this short a time should give every Republican in Maryland cause for optimism. If a state like Jersey can elect a Republican to the governorship, and Virginia can support the Republican by a ridiculously large margin of 18 percent, why should we in Maryland not take that as a sign that the Democrats are more vulnerable than ever and move in to capitalize on that vulnerability. As much as Obama has failed on the national stage, Martin O’Malley has failed the State on every level. He promised lower energy costs, but BG&E customers, who thought they had it bad before, saw their rates skyrocket by 85 percent under Martin O! And while talking about the need to lower energy costs for all Marylanders, O’Malley has fought for “Global warming” legislation that will raise energy costs across the board.

One example of this is the $140 million energy tax, which has been passed along straight to Maryland residents. Add in his opposition to allowing a merger between EDF and Constellation to enable the construction of a new nuclear reactor at Calvert Cliffs, and O’Malley has fought a project necessary just to keep Maryland’s electrical production at current levels. Preventing the production of new energy is not the way to bring costs down.

In addition to his failed energy policy, O’Malley presided over the largest tax increase in Maryland’s history, which had to be conducted in a special session to avoid those pesky constraints imposed on the legislature during the General Assembly. This has helped Maryland ascend to the dubious honor of having the fourth highest tax burden (state and local) in the entire nation. Looking at 2006 data, which precedes the O’Malley tax hikes, Maryland’s individual income tax collections were already the second highest in the nation. All of this does not bode well for the governor of a state neighboring Virginia, which saw the Republican storm into office despite having lower taxes than Maryland..

Given the political winds and the fierce opposition to out of control taxation, government spending and government growth, the Maryland Republican Party is faced with a very favorable environment in 2010. It is now up to the party to turn that advantage into results by giving voters a solid, concrete message to get behind, closing the registration gap (Maryland has approximately one million more registered Democrats than Republicans) and then making sure those Republican voters turn out in force. The opportunity is there, will Maryland seize it?