A Mea Culpa

Thanks for saying this (3.00 / 1)

I, too, was apparently too credulous about the intentions of the MoCo legislators. And, at the risk of engaging in self-promotion, I do hope blogging can help promote transparency in our state's politics.

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

---

by: Isaac Smith @ Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 19:47:25 PM CST

The problem is (3.50 / 2)

the word "silent."  On an immensely significant occasion such as the recent special session, "silent" is equivalent to "not really doing anything."  If Luiz Simmons and Ben and Rona Kramer are going to bloviate about how bad the progressive tax package was, then the rest of the delegation sitting there silently is going to be taken as acquiescence.  The only, and I do mean only, comment I ever heard in protest was from District 20 Delegate Heather Mizeur, who, in response to Ike Leggett's disastrous attempt to sabotage the tax package, stated that she didn't get elected to lower taxes for rich people (paraphrase).

Bravo.  More, please.  But where was the rest of the delegation?  If what Eric says is true, then what I said, which I am sure his delegate friend is mad about, is more true than ever:  where is the leadership?  Where is Brian Frosh?  What, ultimately, was accomplished by all of that silent disagreement?

Whether because of inexperience, unwillingness to speak up, fear of bucking O'Malley (who ultimately wanted a deal, any deal, so long as it balanced the books for the moment) or whatever, our delegation looks bad.  If the reality was different, that in fact they all hated the regressive changes in the tax policy, then why the @%#$%^#$ did they vote for it?  And if they cut a deal, what's the good news?  Vague and ultimately meaningless promises on future GCEI funding and some dedicated transportation moolah, best as I can tell.  IMHO, a bad deal.  If there's more, I'd suggest that Eric's friend tell him what that is so that he can share it with the rest of us.  Maybe then I'd agree -- but not now.

---

by: lefty @ Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 21:15:36 PM CST

My First Attempt (3.00 / 1)

Since the special session ended, I have been trying to develop an overview to explain everything that happened and to explain why some decisions unfolded the way they did.  Unfortunately, other events have distracted me during the past few days.  I do not think I will be able to summarize all of my comments here now, but I will start with a few.

First, I think the Montgomery delegation has been unfairly criticized over the past few weeks.  (I know I am not exactly objective on this point.) However, seven of eight senators voted for the tax package, while only two of eight from Baltimore County did and five of six from Baltimore City.  These numbers include five Democrats who voted no.  George Della from Baltimore City has even signed Republican guru Grover Norquist's no tax pledge.  In my humble opinion, that is much worse than anything Rona Kramer ever said or did.  Yet, we get attacked while they get a pass.  

It is frustrating that we are criticized for trying to work out a compromise that could muster a majority instead of defending purity in defeat.  Believe me, a much smaller income tax package would have moved if it were not for a group of liberals, mainly from Montgomery, who said no.  Brian Frosh risked his senate leadership plans by sticking to a hard liberal line.

Next, I try to keep intra-party disputes out of the newspapers.  I do not need to enter into debate with colleagues on the pages of the WaPo or Sun.  Other Democrats feel the same way.  Just because it is not in the paper, does not mean that there was or is an active attempt to fight back in both chambers.

Hopefully, in a later post, I can address the issue of progressivity.  I do not think we can divorce the revenue package from the extremely progressive spending plans we have in Maryland.

---

by: Rich Madaleno @ Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 22:51:21 PM CST

That's fair... (3.00 / 1)

... and one of the problems we have on these blogs is that we don't cover the Baltimore region thoroughly enough, which is one reason I think so much criticism was directed at the Montgomery delegation. So, again, there's something we need to work on.

In re: "Just because it is not in the paper, does not mean that there was or is an active attempt to fight back in both chambers."

What I was getting at is this: if the only people working the media are the ones we disagree with, then it's not surprising that conservative voices dominated coverage of the session. I don't think that all intra-party disputes need to be aired, but the media, including blogs, should be a tool for rational debate of important issues. If the only debates that happen go on behind closed doors in the state house, then citizens are left out of the process. That breeds mistrust.

---

by: Eric Luedtke @ Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 05:25:25 AM CST

[ Parent ]

To amplify (3.50 / 2)

Eric's response to the Senator (who deserves kudos for even being here) a bit, if the siblings Kramer and Simmons are trashing the delegation to the media, and the rest of the delegation does not respond, that's bad media and public relations.  While a philosophy of keeping "intra-party disputes out of the newspapers" is a fine one in theory, when the other side trashes you publicly, it's not a violation of that philosophy simply to respond with respect to the issues at hand.

When Rona and Ben Kramer say that the tax burden of the O'Malley plan is too high for Montgomery County's wealthy, RESPOND.  "No, it's not.  This is not about geography, it's about fairness."

When Ben Kramer says that the Montgomery County delegation is a "mess" and "ineffective," RESPOND.  "No, Delegate Kramer, with all due respect, it is your out of control comments and insatiable desire to pander to the rich that is causing disunity in the delegation."

When Luiz Simmons goes off on one of his bloviating, rambling speeches about taxes, and again criticizes the delegation as a whole, RESPOND.

And whatever you do publicly, what happens privately should be brutal.  Simmons, Kramer and Kramer ought to be taken to the proverbial woodshed and horsewhipped.  Rona Kramer should be removed as head of the delegation, and someone else (you?) should be put in her place.  And they should be warned -- "do it again and we'll throw you right the hell out of this delegation.  Go be Republicans if that's how you're going to do things."

The Senator is right, loyalty matters and discretion does, too.  So make that a rule and then bloody well enforce it.  Don't make a big deal about it publicly, but just do it.  The rest of us will know you did it by either (1) the deafening silence from the turncoats in the future, or (2) their being kicked out of the delegation.  Being a Democrat has to mean SOMETHING, even in a County as lopsidedly partisan as Montgomery.

Either alternative will make for a better Montgomery County Democratic caucus -- in reality and in the perception created by the media and us bloggers.

---

by: lefty @ Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 07:21:40 AM CST

[ Parent ]

To be fair (0.00 / 0)

We have criticized Della for signing on to the Norquist pledge, at least at the time he did it.

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

---

by: Isaac Smith @ Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 09:09:03 AM CST

[ Parent ]