I have so much fun with the e-mails from Organizing For Against America. Now they've undertaken a week-long "Final March for Reform" with steps their minions are supposed to take in order to achieved their desired result of Obamacare.

Step 1 was yesterday, where participants were supposed to "get the facts out." So here are some of their so-called "facts":

As the President has made clear, Americans deserve a final up-or-down vote on health reform. And the House is now expected to hold its final vote as soon as one week from today.

Yet House Democrats are scheming to avoid this. From CongressDaily yesterday:

House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter is prepping to help usher the healthcare overhaul through the House and potentially avoid a direct vote on the Senate overhaul bill, the chairwoman said Tuesday.

Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version.

Undaunted, Obama's flunkie David Plouffe pressed on:

As we speak, insurance-industry lobbyists are gathering at the D.C. Ritz-Carlton to stage a last-minute blitz to block reform -- even as they jack up premiums by as much as 60% for small businesses and families across the country.

You know, I doubt you can get the Ritz-Carlton or any other major venue at a moment's notice. This meeting was set up months in advance and besides, I thought we were supposed to have this last summer anyway.

Plouffe wraps up on this class-envy, "us-versus-them" note:

We've put together a simple summary of the President's proposal, a fact sheet to show friends and co-workers how the plan will specifically help them, posters to display, Facebook notes to post, and much more.

(snip)

Today, it's time to show the insurance lobbyists that no smear campaign cooked up at a posh hotel can match the power of millions of regular citizens who are ready for change and committed to the truth.

Yep, that's grassroots all right. You have your talking points, we have this: Nancy Pelosi wants the bill to pass so we can find out what's in it. Seems like it's too late then, unless they want things to be hidden.

Here's the real truth. This bill was of the special interests, by the special interests, and for the special interests. They don't have the votes and they know it - hence the "Slaughter solution." OAA has presented its case and lost in the court of public opinion.

By the way, here's the Day 2 instruction, with OAA's Mitch Stewart the flunkie of the day:

President Obama has called for the House to vote to move health reform forward as early as next week. Your representative, Rep. Frank Kratovil, stood with the President to create as many as 3.9 million jobs with the Recovery Act, and deserves our thanks. Now, it's important to make it clear that the voters back home stand with President Obama and want health reform.

Yes, he pointed out Kratovil's most glaring failure to date, voting for the porkulus bill, If Frank doesn't hew to his word and vote against Obamacare, he may as well pack now. Kratovil can run to the right all he wants with his budget proposals and crackdown on illegal immigration, but a vote for Obamacare is his political funeral. And I'm sure he knows that.

So the battle lines have been drawn, activist vs. activist. I suspect there's more of us than there are of them, and right is on our side. If they need to resort to trickery and deceit to pass their bill, well, there may not be much we can do about that now but certainly we can defeat this in other venues too. Just ask the commonwealth of Virginia.

In an effort to contrast herself with longtime incumbent Barbara Mikulski and create pressure on the Democrat to forgo a vote for reconciliation (should it become necessary), Amedori has set up an online petition:

Today, Carmen Amedori, Republican candidate for United States Senate in Maryland, launched an online petition calling on United States Senator Barbara Mikulski to vote no on reconciliation for Obamacare.

“Reconciliation is not the method to pass health care reform. This parliamentary maneuver has never been used for such a sweeping piece of legislation,” said Amedori. “The President’s plan for health care reform is seriously flawed. That’s why no one elected Republican Senator will support the legislation.”

Reconciliation has been used 19 times since 1980. 12 of those times the procedure was used to pass omnibus budget bills that had an overwhelming support in the Senate. Only on 2 occasions were the budget bills controversial enough to lack bipartisan support.

“I am launching this online effort to send a message to our Senator that Marylanders don’t want Obamacare forced down our throats and that she should vote against reconciliation,” stated Amedori. “A national mandate is not a way to make health care more affordable.”

People can join Carmen’s effort by visiting her campaign website or by friending Amedori For U.S. Senate on Facebook.

Amedori believes that a health care reform package must include tort reform, associated health plans, rules that allow people to purchase health insurance across state lines, more emphasis on health savings accounts and a method for allowing people with pre-existing conditions to purchase insurance coverage.

Amedori is a former Maryland House Delegate where she served on the Judiciary Committee and quickly rose to the position of Assistant Minority Leader. She earned a distinguished reputation for being tough on crime, a strong advocate for property rights, and a champion for small business. In 2004, Governor Robert Ehrlich honored Amedori by appointing her to the Maryland Parole Commission where she served until last year.

(snip)

Amedori believes that as the next United States Senator she can do a better job for the people of Maryland. “It is time we had a Senator focused on results rather than political gamesmanship. As a former member of the House of Delegates, I know how to make a difference. Barbara has had 24 years and now is the time for new leadership,” added Amedori.

It should be noted I edited the original release slightly, but the point remains that if the Obamacare supporters choose the reconciliation route (which I doubt, since the House passage of the Senate bill gives us legislation which wouldn't necessarily need to be reconciled anyway) Barbara would almost surely align with her fellow Democrats as being one of the 51 votes. Certainly Mikulski would feel safe enough in her seat to do so.

The other obvious reason for having the petition is gathering contacts for other communications from her campaign, which is fine - after all, I think voters should be well-informed about all of the candidates running. Carmen is unlike the others running in that she has a legislative record, and it's one that's been judged to be fairly conservative by the former Maryland Accountability Project (Amedori served in the House of Delegates 1999-2004.) But each voter should study all the candidates, judging their stated principles, goals, and experience inside and out of the political realm.

Since I got the release a little bit ahead of time, I can vouch the petition is up and running and I already signed it. You should too, even if you support one of the other six candidates currently in the race.

On Thursday the BrinkleyPipkin budget reduction act (in Maryland that's SB1004, Budget Reconciliation and Balancing Act) had its hearing. When I got the release on this hearing this was the part which jumped out at me:

The Brinkley-Pipkin budget reduction act had a hearing before the Senate Budget and Tax Committee today. By taking significant steps to further reduce spending in this year's budget process, the Brinkley-Pipkin plan buys additional time to constrain spending to the existing available revenues without the need to raise taxes.
 
A key feature of the plan is the elimination of built-in statutory increases in state programs. This feature and an additional $75 million in spending constraint over the next three years would allow current revenues to "catch-up" with spending, thereby bringing ongoing spending and revenues into balance.

Many lobbyists and county officials testified today against additional cuts to state spending. Representatives of unions also opposed the Brinkley-Pipkin plan of additional cutbacks including the removal prevailing wage from state projects. The majority of citizens and taxpayers who testified supported all efforts to cut back government overspending. (Emphasis mine.)

So once again we have the government and big-government interests (i.e. the lobbyists) vs. the people. The information I was provided also had a chart showing the difference between our current budget path (which will certainly lead to higher taxes) and the Brinkley-Pipkin projections.

In theory, at least, the Republicans' proposal not only balances the budget but creates a small surplus.

Obviously the counties were there to argue that the budget would be balanced on their backs and perhaps they have a point. But this should also lead the local governments into an effort to prioritize what services they wish to deliver, with the public being involved by determining how much they want to pay. For example, it would fan the flames of the ongoing debate here in Wicomico County regarding the revenue cap the county currently employs.

Government cannot co-exist with a free society as a cure-all. Every dollar taken out of your pocket to pay for services they wish to deliver is a dollar that you cannot use as you wish, despite the fact it was freely given to you. (In more and more cases, however, that dollar was given to you by the same government who wishes to take it away.)

It's way beyond time to consider that role government has to play and amend it accordingly. Maybe not all of the cuts in the Brinkley-Pipkin proposal are wise, but they can begin this vital discussion of the role our state government plays in our lives.

My original intention was to write a very short post highlighting an excellent, well-documented piece on Human Events by Newt Gingrich regarding the specter of reconciliation - after all, he's been in Congress so I would have to defer to his expertise on the subject. I don't always agree with Newt but I'm a fan and the man has a pretty good understanding of history.

But in looking for the actual website for the above link (I get the Newt Gingrich Letter in my e-mail so I don't necessarily go to Human Events all the time) I found an op-ed by Maryland U.S. Senate candidate Dr. Eric Wargotz detailing his trip to Massachusetts during the exciting final days of Scott Brown's campaign.

What I found most interesting was that Eric didn't pull any rank during the visit, going out and slogging in the trenches like hundreds of other political volunteers. Having done petition drives in the cold and snow of January in Ohio for a candidate who wasn't even in my district, lit drops and door knocking in October's chill, and working the polls on a number of raw and rainy Election Days both here and in my native area I could relate.

And while Eric didn't have the chance to hang around to savor Scott Brown's eventual victory, there is a thrill for those of us who are political junkies as the elections draw closer.

Yet it's both political junkies and agnostics who can make a difference in the battle over health care. Newt's article is important because he describes the process which either health care bill needs to go through in order to be passed. Aside from a few small cracks here and there, the GOP wall of opposition has held fairly firm over the last many months these Obamacare proposals have been debated (remember, the original goal was to have health care done by last August's recess.) With Frank Kratovil being considered as one of the possible key votes on the current reform packages being considered, it's very important to let him know his original opposition should stand.

Unfortunately, none of the phone calls and e-mails beseeching them to "just say no" to Obamacare are likely to dissuade our two United States Senators from toeing the liberal Democrat line and voting in its favor. Since Barbara Mikulski has put aside those rumors she was calling it a career, the national GOP will likely not invest much time or effort into the Maryland Senate race. (Too bad, because the money they wasted on Dede Scozzafava may have come in handy here.)

It just so happens that Wargotz is hosting an online "Mikulski Retirement Party" (it's really a 'money bomb' fundraiser) tomorrow. That's an idea borrowed from the Brown campaign too, and if it works half as well as Scott's he'll gain an even larger financial advantage over his two main contenders. (He had a huge cash-on-hand advantage on Jim Rutledge at the end of 2009, but Wargotz's pot was less than 1/10 the size of Mikulski's. Carmen Amedori has just entered the race so she has no FEC reporting data yet.)

Right now we have to play the hand we were dealt in 2008, though, so it's up to us to convince the jokers we have to vote in our country's best interest and scrap this health care debacle once and for all.

One criticism I've had about Maryland's budget system is its lack of flexibility. There are a lot of money pots out there besides the General Fund, and Martin O'Malley seems to want to take money out of every one of them to balance his FY2011 budget. This from Americans for Prosperity:

As you know, the Senate Budget & Taxation Committee will be holding a public hearing this Wednesday on SB141. This bill, the Budget Reconciliation and Financing Act, will transfer nearly $1 BILLION from the state’s 382 special funds to cover Gov. O'Malley's budget deficit.

(snip)

One of the funds Gov. O’Malley is proposing to raid is the Transportation Trust Fund (TTF). Started in 1971, the TTF is the account used to pay for road, bridge and infrastructure repairs. It is primarily funded by the gas tax – each time you fill up at the pump, you are contributing to road repair…or so you thought. This year, O’Malley has decided to take $125 million of those taxes and use it to paper over his $2 billion deficit.

Stealing from the Transportation Trust Fund becomes even more problematic next year, because the TTF is already under-funded. When the fund runs dry you can bet that the liberal politicians will want to raise taxes. Senate President Mike Miller has been pushing the idea of a gas tax hike for the last few years.

Another fund that O’Malley has decided to attack is the Injured Workers Insurance Fund (IWIF). IWIF is a low-premium insurer for many businesses who provide workers compensation to employees. It is financed by the premiums each policy holder pays on a quarterly basis.

Not only is the legality of the state confiscating $26 million from a private insurance company in question, but this move will hurt small businesses. Again, when the fund is drained, the premium rates will rise to replace the stolen revenue.

Small businesses are the engine of our state economy – they employ nearly two-thirds of the workforce in Maryland. If we expect an economic recovery with job growth, the government cannot continue to put undue burdens on businesses. The last thing small businesses need right now is to be paying higher insurance premiums or gas taxes.

382 special funds in the Maryland budget? WTF? Anyway, the Maryland Senate Republican Caucus also weighed in:

Entering the 2010 legislative session, there were few remaining reserve funds left to tap. They have all been depleted. O'Malley has exhausted all available reserves except for the Rainy Day Fund. Tapping the Rainy Day could jeopardize the coveted Triple A bond rating which would cause great embarrassment to the administration.

So O'Malley turned to the Injured Workers Insurance Fund to tap a reserve of $20 million. Problem is - the IWIF reserve is not state money. It is not taxpayer dollars. Instead it is overpayments of insurance premiums from small businesses throughout the state.

Then is it legal? A 1968 opinion of the Attorney General's Office states that reserve funds of the State Accident Fund (IWIF's predecessor) are not state funds accessible for general purposes. Established as a nonprofit insurance company, IWIF is a quasi-public agency and state use of insurance overpayments as a fund swap would be unconstitutional.

To cover their tracks, the O'Malley Administration has now introduced bills (Senate Bill 507 and House Bill 1008) that would give the Governor authority to transfer the $20 million this year just as long as it's never done again. Go figure!

So, not only do we have the BRFA bill but now another bill in order to fix things for this year. Sheesh.

The larger question is what we'll need to do next year to fill in all of these pots. With the federal portion of the state budget now eclipsing 60 percent, one would think that Barack Obama may bail out his cohort if he's reelected this November. But with these funds come strings and that lack of flexibility will probably preclude O'Malley being able to make up the shortfalls with federal money next year.

Three years ago, Governor O'Malley called a Special Session to address this issue and its result was a number of tax increases which were supposed to correct the state's structural deficit. However, the increase in the sales tax, cigarette tax, and a (since-repealed) "tech tax" on computer services were counterbalanced by a huge increase on spending which attempted to bring health insurance to thousands more Marylanders.

To the surprise of everyone - except those with a little bit of economic common sense - these new levies didn't bring in as much money as the so-called experts predicted. In all that's not so bad, but other previous taxes like property and real estate transfer taxes also declined. Making matters worse (but certainly not unexpected) is the outflow of capital due to the "millionaire's tax" - again, from the Senate GOP Caucus:

According to an Associated Press article posted at Examiner.com, Montgomery County has experienced a 27% decline in tax returns from high income earners. This decline has contributed to a loss of $4.6 billion in taxable income: "County Executive Isiah Leggett says some wealthy residents who own homes in other states are establishing residency elsewhere. Officials believe the state's millionaire tax is a factor."

You think?

Unlike the perception progressives attempt to create about TEA Partiers as people who want to get government services without paying for them (a description more apt for Democrat voters,) most don't mind paying a fair share in taxes. But what we want in return are efficient services which perform necessary functions, and too often we find that government at all levels fails to deliver on one or both sides of the equation.

If Martin O'Malley truly decided to live within his means, he would gain the intestinal fortitude to make cuts such as the insurance program he started. Obviously it's a decision which affects a large number of people, but so would increasing taxes and fees. Raising the gas tax, for example, would disproportionately affect poor and middle-class Free Staters and rural residents like those on the Eastern Shore would pay more of a toll than city residents along the I-95 corridor.

One issue sure to come up in this year's campaign will be fiscal accountability, and while Bob Ehrlich wasn't the poster child for frugality the state was in much better financial shape when he left office than the potential mess he inherits should he be re-elected for a second, non-consecutive term.

Perhaps a solution would be to bring in some solid fiscal conservatives for the General Assembly in with Ehrlich, hopefully to keep his free-spending tendencies in check. Mark my words, if Martin O'Malley is reelected 2011 will be a rerun of 2007 - a session devoted to raising taxes and killing off whatever recovery the state is scratching out by then.

As the Church Lady would say, isn't this conveeeeeeenient? I talk about Republicans divided in an op-ed then talk about uniting hours later. But Daniel Vovak makes a good point at a time when unity would be necessary.

The Republican Primary on September 14, 2010 has produced a spirited contest for the office of U.S. Senator, facing the probable Democratic primary winner, Barbara Mikulski. According to official reports and announcements, on the Republican ballot will be seven candidates, including: Carmen Amedori, John F. Curran, John B. Kimble, Daniel W. McAndrew, Jim Rutledge, Corrogan R. Vaughn, and Eric Wargotz.

Daniel "The Whig Man" Vovak has proposed a "Statement of Unity" for the Republican candidates to sign, and has pledged $250 to the primary winner, should that person sign his form. Vovak says, "Although I will not be a candidate for U.S. Senate in 2010, I was a candidate in 2006 and I remember perfectly well how Michael Steele treated the primary as a mere formality, never reaching out to any of his nine primary opponents, which hurt our Party in November 2006. In 2010, it's a different situation because the Republican primary is a wide-open contest. It's not that Maryland Democrats have been successful, it's Maryland Republicans who lose statewide seats through internal division. Once these candidates unify behind the primary winner, any Democrat can be defeated."

Vovak says that following last week's U.S. Senate candidates' debate in Montgomery County, every Republican candidate sought his support.

(snip)

In spite of losing statewide (among Central Committee members who selected a new party chairman in the wake of Jim Pelura's resignation last year), Vovak sincerely congratulated (current MDGOP Chair Audrey) Scott following her decisive win and offered his help. Vovak says this "Statement of Unity" is something he practices and believes. He says, "If I had won the chairman vote, I would have proposed this same Statement to position Republicans for winning, long before Election Day. I have no doubt Audrey Scott shares the same goal."

Currently, three of the seven candidates have indicated they will sign the Statement. Because Vovak has not been able to speak directly with all of them, he said he will wait until all have been given ample time to respond before releasing their names, though those candidates can speak freely at any time with their supporters and the media, should they desire to do so.

Within the Maryland Republican Party Constitution, under Article 11, Section 2, d(2), Maryland's Republican Chairman must show no "partiality or prejudice" towards any Republican candidate before a primary. Article 2, Section 2 states that the Party "works towards the election of Republican nominees."

It's an admirable goal, and perhaps we will see all of the contenders sign this agreement before all is said and done September 14.

But this election is somewhat different than Steele's 2006 campaign as there is no de facto favorite. A couple have run previous bids for the Senate that drew little support (Kimble and Vaughn, both also-rans in the '06 race with Vovak) and a couple others are perhaps dark horses due to lack of name recognition or fundraising prowess - I'd put Curran and McAndrew in that category. The other three (Amedori, Rutledge, and Wargotz) to me are the leading contenders, with Amedori perhaps being the "establishment" candidate based on her tenure in the House of Delegates.

I happen to agree that the Maryland GOP shouldn't take a stand to support any candidate pre-primary. I know some disagree with me because they fear the voters may select some David Duke-esque radical as the party's representative but I place a lot more faith in the party electorate than apparently these officials do. I already lived in one state which tried to bribe and cajole good Republican candidates like Ken Blackwell out of the race to avoid primary fights and I don't want a repeat in Maryland.

Since the reports of Barbara Mikulski retiring were apparently premature, it looks like whoever survives the primary has the uphill fight of knocking out the entrenched, reliably liberal incumbent who may be keeping the seat warm for Martin O'Malley once he's through being governor.

I believe there is a scenario possible where, if Mikulski wins and O'Malley loses in November, Barbara could retire in early January and Martin O'Malley could name himself  successor (or a placeholder to keep the seat warm) just before his term were to expire - leaving the possibility of two new Senators from the state in 2013 as Ben Cardin also runs for re-election in 2012 and the seat held by Mikulski is opened up for a special election by current state law. I think Martin O'Malley has aspirations beyond being Governor and this would be an opportunity for him to go national.

All that has yet to be seen but in any case it's good for Republicans to put up a united front as they campaign to upend the Democrats' apple cart this November.