Posted tagged ‘Tom Hucker’

07.09.18 An open letter to my Democratic elected officials: Stop Floreen now!

July 9, 2018

In addition to publishing this blog post, I will also email it to all the officials listed below. I encourage all readers to send something similar to their elected representatives.

To:
US Sen. Ben Cardin
US Sen. Chris Van Hollen
US Rep. Jamie Raskin
Sen. Will Smith
Del. David Moon
Del. Jheanelle Wilkins
Del.-Elect Lorig Charkoudian
County Executive Ike Leggett
County Councilman Tom Hucker
County Councilman George Leventhal
County Councilman Hans Riemer
County Councilman-Elect Gabe Albornoz
County Councilman-Elect Evan Glass
County Councilman-Elect Will Jawando

With today’s news that the Maryland Board of Elections will allow Nancy Floreen’s independent run for county executive to proceed this fall, I call on you to waste no time in standing up to this nefarious attempt to undermine our party’s nominee. The time to stop Floreen’s bid is now, before the Washington Post and its pals in the development industry start funding a smear campaign that will drown us in propaganda and weaken our nominee and our party.

I urge you not only to speak out, but also to ban Floreen from all party gatherings and activities henceforth.

While you might be forgiven for not endorsing our nominee, if you fail to denounce Floreen’s campaign, you will have taken sides against the Democratic Party, which I and others will not forget.

©2018 Keith Berner

06.22.18 Revisions to Keith Berner’s biennial voter guide

June 22, 2018

You may want to review the original version of my guide, which I published on June 5.

Governor: Rich Madaleno Ben Jealous
US Senate: anyone but Ben Cardin
US Congress CD6: Roger Manno
US Congress CD8: Jamie Raskin (unopposed)
Montgomery County Executive: Marc Elrich
Montgomery County At-Large:
—–Definite (in alpha order): Brandy Brooks, Jill Ortman-Fouse, Will Jawando, Chris Wilhelm
—–Pick two of three: Bill Conway, Seth Grimes, or Jill Ortman-Fouse
MoCo D1: Meredith Wellington
MoCo D3: Ben Shnider
MoCo D5: Tom Hucker
MD Senate D18: Dana Beyer
MD Senate D20: Will Smith (unopposed)
MD Delegates D20: Lorig Charkoudian, David Moon, Jheanelle Wilkins
Moco Democratic Central Committee At-Large:
—–Women: Marie Mapes
—–Men: Justin Chapelle, Edward Fischman, Dave Kunes

With so many dilemmas of riches, new information incoming, and an opportunity to interact directly with candidates, I am revising some of my original recommendations.

Governor. It is without any joy that I am switching my recommended vote from Rich Madaleno to Ben Jealous. I still believe that Madaleno has the most talent and experience in this race, by a considerable margin. Sadly, his campaign just hasn’t caught fire: he has remained around 6% in polls for a good while now. The race is now pretty clearly between Jealous and Rushern Baker. If you agree with me that Baker is too bland and centrist and likely to get creamed by Larry Hogan in the fall, you have to vote tactically. Vote for Ben Jealous to stop Rushern Baker and set up a strong November match-up that Democrats can win.

Montgomery County Council At Large. I have moved from listing Will Jawando as someone definitely to vote against last summer  to believing he has the smarts, policy understanding, and progressive philosophy to deserve your vote. I had been concerned in the past about what I thought was a thin history of community service in our county. At a meet-and-greet this week, Jawando disabused me of that notion, rattling off a nice list of his contributions, including a summer reading program for disadvantaged youth. (See also his response about this on the Progressive Neighbors questionnaire – Question 6.) I’m also impressed by the zero rating the pernicious developer group Empower Montgomery (EM) gave him in recent mailings. (See why EM is bad news.) I remain concerned that Jawando’s outsized political ambition will distract him from his job on County Council after a couple of years, but am willing to accept this risk.

So, if I am moving Jawando into my top four in the 33-person at-large race (where you get up to four choices), whom am I “demoting”? This practically breaks my heart, because all the candidates whom I have considered seriously would be fabulous in office.

So: Chris Wilhelm and Brandy Brooks absolutely remain among my top choices. My other finalists have been Bill Conway, Seth Grimes, and Jill Ortman-Fouse.

I have, in effect, demoted Ortman-Fouse into a three-way tie with Conway and Grimes. I still think Jill Ortman-Fouse has a good chance of winning, but I am disturbed by the very high ranking given to her by Empower Montgomery. Ortman-Fouse shared with me the questionnaire she submitted to EM and I don’t see any obvious reasons for concern. But I am bothered by her willingness to accept their support without comment (and have asked her to renounce it and denounce them). Just the same, Ortman-Fouse remains on my list.

I also still think highly of Bill Conway whom I think is well positioned to win. I am concerned that Grimes is not as well positioned to win at the other two, based on my observation that he has trouble “sealing the deal” when he meets informally with progressives. So, I’ll be flipping a coin between Conway, Grimes, and Ortman-Fouse until I actually cast my vote.

Another nuance revision from two weeks ago is that I strongly urge voters to reject Evan Glass. My opposition to Glass has increased because of Nancy Floreen’s endorsement and the high score he got from EM (in addition to his WaPo endorsement I already wrote about). There remains no doubt which side Glass is on in MoCo’s major cleavage: the role of the development industry in our politics.

D20 Delegate. I have not changed any of my endorsements: Lorig Charkoudian, David Moon, and Jheanelle Wilkins. The only revision here is that I was gentle to Darian Unger two weeks ago. It is now apparent that Unger’s love affair with himself has fueled a highly unethical campaign. Voters should not only reject Unger’s style of politics, but should send him a strong message to return to community service and give up the quest for public office. (See my two recent posts about Unger: here and here.)

Democratic Central Committee. This body is not widely known or understood. Most of the time, these folks organize fundraisers, phone-banks, and door-to-door canvassing. But, under Maryland law – and in an affront to democracy – this is the body that appoints candidates to fill openings in public offices. (An example is that when Jamie Raskin won his Congressional seat in 2016, the CC appointed then Del. Will Smith to fill Raskin’s seat and Jheanelle Wilkins to fill Smith’s seat.)

In fact, a HUGE number of Maryland senators and delegates have been appointed by party committees. Therefore, it is important to vote only for reformist progressives as CC members: progressive because thats the type of appointments we want them to make; reformist, because we want them to work to change Maryland law to replace appointments with special elections.

Here are my recommendations for DCC for Montgomery County at-large (the D20 races are unopposed). Note that the party split the races by gender this year.

  • Women (select up to four): Marie Mapes (only)
  • Men (select up to four): Justin Chapelle, Edward Fischman, Dave Kunes (only)

Candidates whom I am not endorsing here are not necessarily bad: I just don’t know anything about them. For the same reason, I am not making endorsements in other races, such as school board, judges, and other offices.

©2018 Keith Berner

 

06.05.18 Keith Berner’s biennial voter guide: for the June 26 Maryland Democratic primary

June 5, 2018

Note: I am not endorsing in races outside my district (Maryland D20 & Montgomery County D5), except when I have particular knowledge of the candidates.

Governor: Rich Madaleno
US Senate: anyone but Ben Cardin
US Congress CD6: Roger Manno
US Congress CD8: Jamie Raskin (unopposed)
Montgomery County Executive: Marc Elrich
Montgomery County At-Large:
Definite (in alpha order): Brandy Brooks, Jill Ortman-Fouse, Chris Wilhelm
Pick one of two: Bill Conway or Seth Grimes
MoCo D1: Meredith Wellington
MoCo D3: Ben Shnider
MoCo D5: Tom Hucker
MD Senate D18: Dana Beyer
MD Senate D20: Will Smith (unopposed)
MD Delegates D20 (in alpha order): Lorig Charkoudian, David Moon, Jheanelle Wilkins

Maryland Governor

Rich Madeleno is the most qualified and capable person running for governor — by far. He is also a passionate progressive who will work every day for economic and social justice, environmental protection, and immigrants’ rights. Madaleno’s long service in Annapolis has been remarkable, earning him wide respect for his fiscal expertise. He knows better than anyone else in the field, the people and processes of Maryland government.

In case you’re still wavering, consider Congressman Jamie Raskin’s and District 20 Delegate David Moon’s enthusiastic endorsements. Finally, I watched Madeleno in two Progressive Neighbors (PN) candidate forums and both times he made the strongest, most compelling arguments against Governor Larry Hogan. Remember: that’s who we have to beat in November!

Ben Jealous, former director of the NAACP and proud supporter (and endorsee) of Bernie Sanders, merits consideration in this race. We know that Jealous will be on the right side of issues. But, Jealous has no experience in elected office and one has to wonder if his rhetoric would be matched by results. There is one reason I can think of to choose Jealous over Madaleno three weeks from now: if it appears that he is in a better position than Madaleno to beat Prince George’s County Executive Rushern Baker.

Why does Baker, who has been endorsed by nearly the entire Maryland Democratic establishment, need to be stopped? Consider, first, that this is a center-right bunch (sorry, not even Chris Van Hollen is much of a progressive any more). Consider, further, their record of backing failures, like Anthony Brown in 2014 and Kathleen Kennedy Townsend in 2002 — it’s not a gang that exactly has its finger on the pulse of Maryland voters. If Baker gets the nomination, look to him to run a lackluster campaign, much like Brown’s, and to get destroyed by Hogan. Finally, consider Baker’s endorsement of liquor salesman David Trone for Congress (District 6) in exchange for $39,000 in campaign contributions.

This rest of the gubernatorial field is so weak and inexperienced that only one candidate bears mentioning at all. Krishanti Vignarajah’s campaign is an insult to all Marylanders. She voted in DC until very recently and never provided service of any kind to our state. Her only “qualification” is having served as an aide to the previous first lady, hardly a policy heavy position. If, by some miracle, she were to pull out a primary victory, the GOP would get her knocked off the ballot in no time, because she has not resided the required five years in Maryland.

US Senate

My only recommendation here is not to vote for Ben Cardin. His domestic policy record isn’t bad, but his foreign priority is to enable the Israeli right. Cardin’s opposition to the nuclear deal with Iran and his attempt to pass legislation curtailing the free-speech rights of Americans who don’t support Israel are utterly disqualifying. It doesn’t matter whether you vote for carpetbagging Chelsea Manning or one of the other token challengers to Cardin, since none of them has the proverbial snowball’s chance in hell. All that matters is your not helping to drive up the senator’s vote total.

US Congress – District 6

Roger Manno’s record in the Maryland legislature can be compared to Jamie Raskin’s. Manno is a principled progressive and labor supporter who provides the leadership needed to turn good ideas into law.

One or two others in the race are not bad ideologically, but Manno is the only one who can beat liquor salesman and GOP-loving gazillionaire David Trone, who is the most pernicious influence in area politics since Doug Duncan’s End-Gridlock slate. Stopping Trone is of equal importance to stopping David Blair’s county exec run (see next section).

Montgomery County Executive

For progressives, this choice is even clearer than the one in the governor’s race (where there is somewhat of a dilemma between Madaleno and Jealous): Marc Elrich is the only candidate you can trust as county exec. Quoting from my endorsement last July:

Elrich is the least ego-driven politician I have ever met. He is not enamored of seeing his name or face in lights or of power for its own sake, but rather gets out of bed every day in order to make a better world, especially for the underdogs. Elrich is also the least corrupt politician in Montgomery County, having consistently refused to take contributions from the politically dominant development industry. While he is able to meet respectfully with all players in county affairs, Elrich is the only member of the council who has consistently prioritized community needs over industry interests.

Further, Elrich is one of the most intelligent and informed public leaders we have. His encyclopedic knowledge of zoning, public education (he was a MCPS teacher for 17 years), and other arcana means he is as prepared to govern as anyone.

Is Elrich perfect? Nope. For one thing he has a tendency stick his foot in his mouth with rash rhetoric, making him seem more extreme than he is. And he is a mite too rigid in opposition to growth and development for yours truly. (I worry about shutting the doors of our wealthy county on the poor who would benefit by coming here.)

But I would far rather err “to the left” on this — electing someone who will never simply do the bidding of the Chamber of Commerce, the development industry, or (deity forbid) the Washington Post — than to take a risk with any of the other, compromised candidates in this race. There is — sadly — little doubt that we will end up with a pro-Chamber county council next year and we need an executive who will check it, not enable it.

George Leventhal is the only other candidate not wholly in the pocket of the county’s bad guys. But I worry about putting anyone in an executive role who has Leventhal’s anger issues and tendency to bully. I do believe that Leventhal has good intentions, much of the time, and there has been no one better than him at constituent responsiveness. On the flip side, Leventhal’s eagerness to tout a substantively empty “compact” between MoCo and PG on preserving affordable housing along the Purple Line betrays a disturbing willingness to claim credit where none is due. Finally, Leventhal recently called for reducing MoCo’s energy tax, which is environmentally and fiscally irresponsible.

Speaking of the Post, this supposed quality newspaper embarrassed itself when it recently endorsed David Blair for county exec. Blair, who has no record of public service, has been drowning the county in mailers since February, as he attempts to purchase the election. The Post loves the millions Blair made in the pharmaceutical business. He is currently being ridiculed as #MoCoPharmaBro on Facebook and is perceived as such a danger to our county that opponent Roger Berliner (who otherwise deserves no respect or support) and Progressive Maryland are going after him with gusto (Berliner’s add compares Blair to Trone, another wealthy amateur). Blair doesn’t even vote consistently, which would eliminate him for me, even without his other flaws.

Montgomery County At-Large (four seats)

There are 33 Democrats running. Just wrap your mind around this for a moment. The most well intentioned political observers cannot possibly have gotten to know all of them. The best we can do is help each other fill in gaps and look at the past records of those candidates who have them.

I am somewhat better informed about the field than most, because I read the questionnaire responses of all 23 candidates who sought Progressive Neighbors’ (PN) endorsement, weeding out any who rejected public campaign financing. Following are my conclusions.

Brandy Brooks and Chris Wilhelm are running together as #TeamProgressive. The two of them are powerful voices for redressing capitalist excesses, improving our flawed democracy, and protecting the environment. Wilhelm, a MoCo public school teacher, has door-knocking and fundraising for a year, with impressive results. He is in sixth place among all the candidates in remaining cash on hand, as of May 15, and has a large ground operation. This puts him among the two progressive candidates with the best chance of knocking off chamber-of-commerce candidates in the primary.

There is some concern about Brooks’s short residence in Maryland (two years). On the other hand, hers was among the most compelling of the PN candidate responses I read, showing not only her philosophy, but also considerable knowledge of policy details. Brooks is not as strong financially as Wilhelm, meaning she is more likely of the two to be helped by the team they have formed.

Jill Ortman-Fouse is the other progressive with a strong chance of success on June 26. Her service as an at-large member of the Board of Education gives her name recognition across the county. Even better, she’s good at making friends: I have yet to hear any criticism of Ortman-Fouse’s character or performance. There is no doubt that our county will benefit from having education experts like her and Wilhelm on County Council. Ortman-Fouse also has worked on behalf of affordable housing, the environment, and other issues.

Pick one: Bill Conway or Seth Grimes

Both Conway and Grimes are the types who wow you immediately with their intelligence and in-depth understanding of policy.

I have witnessed over a decade Grimes’s public service as an activist and city council member in Takoma Park. His service on the board of Shepherd’s Table demonstrates his deep commitment to economic justice. His work on the Safe-Grow initiative, first at the city and then at the county level, makes him one of the strongest environmental candidates in the race.

Conway may be the most moderate candidate I am considering — and I don’t see this as a bad thing. After engaging with him directly and watching him interact with others, Conway has struck me as a no-bullshit realist. He seems to get the real constraints the county’s economic circumstances have on policy better than some of the progressives I’m supporting and he doesn’t pander. Also, it isn’t like Conway is “dangerously” moderate: he supports a minimum-wage increase and his wife, Diana Conway, is one of the county’s most prominent environmental leaders. (I don’t expect her to make policy for him. I do expect her views to be persuasive across the kitchen table.) Finally, Conway’s fundraising totals put him at the top, alongside chamber-of-commerce types like Charles Barkley, Evan Glass, and Hans Riemer. His victory could help send one of them to defeat.

Evan Glass is a nice and smart guy. But, if his hand-in-glove relationship with developers in the 2014 campaign were not enough to scare of you off, this year’s Washington Post endorsement should put the nail in the coffin. The Post’s record of support for big business and pave-it-all development is worse this year than ever. There is no chance they would have endorsed Glass if they weren’t convinced he’d be doing the Chamber’s bidding once in office.

Will Jawando has made strides over the course of his four campaigns for office in the past four years. His grasp of issues and his progressive stances on them are increasingly impressive. On a personal level, he is warm and gracious. But for me, his political ambition is off-putting, at best. I want to vote for people who want to be on County Council, rather than considering it a way station on their path to greater glory. I suspect MoCo will not be getting Jawando’s full attention after a relatively short period in office. In a weaker field, I might take this risk, but I see no reason to do so this time.

Hans Riemer, the sole incumbent running for reelection this year, was never worthy of the votes he has received and nothing has changed this go-‘round. The shame is that he is nearly certain to win.

Danielle Meitiv has managed to garner the love of nearly every progressive organization in the county without ever having done anything substantive to earn it. Before deciding to run for office, the only public thing Meitiv has accomplished was to get arrested for letting her kids walk alone on country streets (for which, she earned the rubrik “Free-Range Mom”). Meitiv is running on that fame and her status as a a climate scientist. This sounds great, but we don’t need a climate scientist in office at the county level — what we need are smart policy makers who know how to reduce county energy consumption on the ground. Meitiv is a nice person and a solid progressive. She just hasn’t earned the attention the progressive community is paying her and there are better candidates on the ballot.

Montgomery County Council – District 1

Progressives’ sentimental favorites in this race are Ana Sol Gutierrez and Bill Cook. Neither has any chance of winning, so a vote for either is as good as throwing your vote away. Gutierrez is relatively well known, but the district she served as state delegate (D18) overlaps only slightly with the county district she is running in.

Among the well-funded candidates with a good chance of winning, Meredith Wellington stands out. When she served on the Planning Board (1999-2007), she was the most consistent skeptic of the development industry. In the current campaign, she vows not to take money from those big-business interests and instead to favor community and the environment. While not all endorsements matter, Marc Elrich’s support for Wellington is telling: he believes she will be his partner on County Council, making sure that our government serves the people, rather than the Chamber. Progressive Neighbors also endorsed Wellington (along with Gutierrez).

Montgomery County Council – District 3

Ben Shnider has run an upstart campaign against Nancy Floreen’s ideological best friend on the current council, Sidney Katz. A Shnider victory over Katz would change the nature of the council profoundly for the better.

Montgomery County Council – District 5

I have been sharply critical of Tom Hucker in the past, mostly for being a bully. This remains a concern for me — as does the fact that he has been unreliable as an ally to Elrich on council. But Hucker does a lot of good work supporting workers, the environment, and economic justice. A very strong case would have to be made for not returning Hucker to council and his opponent this year, Kevin Harris, isn’t making one. Harris is taking a NIMBY position on bus-rapid transit (BRT) along Route 29 and is pandering to development opponents in Takoma Park on a local issue he should have stayed away from.

This is not a bad moment for me to digress to the issues of development and growth, in general. While I am ardently opposed to the political dominance of the development industry in our politics, I don’t believe that nothing should be built anywhere. There is a strong not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) element in the county’s slow-growth progressive community. When NIMBYs refuse to compromise for the greater good, they are no better than Republicans who oppose sharing the wealth. BRT on Rt. 29, for example, may inconvenience those who live in the immediate vicinity. But the benefits for less-wealthy commuters and for the environment outweigh those narrow concerns. 

Maryland Senate – District 18

Dana Beyer is the fearless firebrand we need in the legislature, not only to push progressive policy, but also to take on the Old Guard run by regressives like Sen. Mike Miller. Beyer is also whip smart — she has been a political activist for years and is as good an analyst of public policy, along a wide variety of topics, as you could ever hope to meet.

Beyer looks even better in comparison to her opponent Jeff Waldstreicher, whose voting record is fine, but whose repertoire includes dirty tricks. Seventh State reported today on Waldstreicher’s latest shenanigans: Waldstreicher Fibs His Way Out of Facing His Constituents.

Maryland Delegates – District 20 (three seats)

David Moon and Jheanelle Wilkins are a progressive’s dream come true. Moon’s record of accomplishment in four years as delegate is stunning across a whole range of policies (did you know he got an animal-rights bill passed last session?). Even when Moon loses (his attempt to end the tax exemption for golf courses), he changes the world by raising the issue (and he will win on this next session, mark my words).

Wilkins got a later start than in Annapolis than Moon did, having been appointed to her delegate seat seat two weeks into the 2017 session. (The vacancy was caused by Jamie Raskin’s election to Congress; Will Smith was appointed to that seat, and then Wilkins was appointed to Smith’s.) It has been a joy to watch her grow from being an I’m-on-board progressive to being a leader with substantive legislative accomplishments in the most recent term, on issues nearly as broad as those tackled by Moon.

Lorig Charkoudian is a newcomer only in the sense that she doesn’t have Moon’s and Wilkins’s incumbency. A PhD economist, she is well known locally as an expert on criminal justice reform, food “deserts” (lack of healthy, quality food in poor neighborhoods), and other economic justice issues. Charkoudian’s record of political engagement is such that she will hardly go to Annapolis unprepared: she is experienced in drafting legislation and knows how to get around the halls of the legislature.

Darian Unger is a good man who might stand out in a weaker field. In this one, he lacks the political talent, experience, and effectiveness of the other candidates. Unger has done a lot of public good outside of elective office. I wish he would find fulfillment doing just that — it’s where he shines.

©2018 Keith Berner

08.09.17 Roger Berliner is no environmental hero (plus: the shame of Mike Tidwell)

August 9, 2017

On July 25, an email arrived in my inbox with the subject line: “Roger Berliner, the environmental leader you can trust.” It was signed “Mike Tidwell, Environmental Leader,” but was sent from the Berliner campaign, not from the Chesapeake Climate Action Network – CCAN, which Tidwell directs. This was an opening salvo from County Councilman Berliner in his endeavor to become MoCo’s next executive. He has joined the 2018 race against two other current councilmembers: Marc Elrich and George Leventhal.

Writing as Berliner’s mouthpiece, Tidwell goes over the top in declaring the candidate to be “the acknowledged county environmental leader” [emphasis added]. Hmmm: acknowledged by whom?

Well, let’s specify who has not shared in the accolades. For example:

  • Those who have sought to get plastic bags out of our streams and oceans. While Berliner did support the original bag tax that took effect in 2012, it seems the chemical industry got to him a year later and he championed a (losing) effort to remove the tax from most retail establishments. He was joined by Leventhal in that noble cause.
  • Those who don’t believe pretty lawns justify use of chemicals poisonous to children and pets. Safe Grow Montgomery (which is now under threat as a result of a recent court opinion) passed 6-3 in 2015 over Roger Berliner’s opposition (credit Leventhal for being a champion on this one).
  • Those who oppose unfettered development in the county, at least in part due to concerns about environmental impacts. Berliner has consistently sided with big developers’ attempts to pave everything outside the Agricultural Reserve.

Berliner was indeed the lead sponsor of a recent bill calling for MoCo to divest from fossil fuels. On closer inspection though, how heroic was this? Well, inside sources tell me that it was Marc Elrich who originally came up with the idea. It turns out that Berliner basically jumped the queue to introduce it before Elrich could and he got only two co-sponsors: Elrich and Nancy Navarro. Leventhal, Tom Hucker, Hans Riemer and the rest opposed the bill until it was watered down to be a non-binding resolution, at which point they jumped on the bandwagon. For a change, Berliner was on the right side of an environmental issue, but it didn’t end up amounting to much.

I wrote back to Tidwell on August 3, recounting the councilman’s poor environmental record and concluding:

I agree with you that climate change is the most important issue humanity faces, but an environmentalist should care about and support environmentalism across the board. . . .Unless you can document how Berliner is better than Elrich, Leventhal, or anyone else, you have no credibility with this endorsement. (If you can document this, please respond directly — I am receptive to new information that could change my view. I plan to blog on this topic shortly, so time is of the essence for your reply.)

I got this reply that day:

Thanks for your note. I support Roger personally because he has done more on the issue of climate change than any other leader in the county over the past 10 years – in my view. Climate change is my biggest concern as a voter. Mike

That is: It doesn’t matter if Berliner is wrong about everything else. For Tidwell, climate change is all that matters and it gives license to rank Berliner above all others, including others who have at least identical records on climate change. This doesn’t fly in my book: by definition, you cannot be an environmental leader if you have a record of opposing environmental legislation.

Just how credible is Mike Tidwell, anyway? Well, he has certainly has done a lot of work on climate change and deserves respect for that. But his decision to shill for Berliner is not the only time he has gone off the rails.

In 2011, Tidwell penned an op-ed for the Washington Post, titled “A climate-change activist prepares for the worst.” Here is the choice quote:

How will we feed ourselves adequately if our breadbasket is a desert? Answer: We won’t, and there will be social unrest as a result. . . . So I even took my first-ever lesson in firearms use last December, an introduction to skeet shooting. I told myself it was in part for sport, but I did it mostly to test various types of shotguns for eventual purchase.

Here was Mike Tidwell telling us: “Arm yourselves, the end is near!” That was when I stopped writing checks to CCAN. Just as I don’t believe climate-change activism necessitates abandoning the rest of the environment, I am horrified that any progressive-change activist would join the NRA in promoting guns or engage in fear-mongering about imminent societal collapse.

Back to the county executive race. It would be one thing if you were a single-issue climate-change voter and it were Berliner vs. Nancy Floreen or Craig Rice (whose records are terrible). But the fact is that Marc Elrich has been walking and chewing gum at the same time for decades, building a record against climate change and for the environment more broadly.

 Marc Elrich is the only member of County Council with a consistent record on the environment. While most of county council has been in the pocket of developers since the early aughts; while Berliner has a negative record on pesticides and plastic bags; while Leventhal did as much as anyone to water down the fossil-fuel divestment bill and tried with Berliner to gut the bag tax; Marc Elrich has been a friend of the environment every single time.

I believe Mike Tidwell harmed his own cause when he associated it with gun-toting survivalism. He certainly isn’t helping it now by hitching his wagon to Berliner, an outright threat to the environment.

Dear voter: Don’t let Berliner and Tidwell sell you a batch of snake oil. For county executive in 2018, choose the one councilmember whom you can trust on the environment all the time: Marc Elrich.

©2018 Keith Berner

02.11.17 Slippery Hans does it again (re fossil fuel divestment; and he’s not the only bad guy)

February 11, 2017

On February 6, I posted about the Montgomery County bill to divest from fossil fuels (#44-16). I forwarded that post to all nine of council members – for most of them, it was at least the second time I had contacted them about this matter.

Two days later, I still hadn’t received any response from Tom Hucker, Nancy Floreen, and Hans Reimer, so I re-sent it to them, with this line on top:

“Where do you stand on this? Your silence is not acceptable.”

This time Riemer chose to respond:

If you watch the work session you may see my views . . . on this complicated legislation.” [emphasis added]

So, I wrote to him again:

“Hans—

Are you really telling me that if I want to know where you stand on a piece of public legislation, I need to sit through a Council work session? If I have misunderstood you, please set me straight.

—Keith”

What did I hear back? Nothing.

Hans Riemer has a long and shameful record* of trying to have it both ways, wanting to appear “progressive” (his favorite campaign word), while actually opposing progressive policy. The most egregious case was three years ago, when he fought long and hard to stop a minimum-wage increase and, when the final vote came, he kept his hand on the table until he counted five other hands in the air (meaning the bill would pass). Only then did he get on the bandwagon so that he could claim later to have helped the winning side. See the shameful (30-second) video here. (To be fair, Riemer was one of the good guys in the most recent effort to raise the wage. Even bad guys aren’t always wrong.)

Riemer has reached a new low in refusing to share where he stands with me, a constituent who has asked for him to state his position. His directive that I should sit through hours of discussion for the privilege of learning his positon is obnoxious.

Guess what, Hans Riemer? You work for me – I pay your salary!

So, Riemer is being his slippery self. But is that any worse than Nancy Floreen’s and Tom Hucker’s refusal to respond at all? Riemer is just dumber, because he has handed me more slimy rope with which to hang him. Give Floreen and Hucker credit for being more clever. But don’t give them too much credit, because their silence is also obnoxious.

Guess what, Nancy Floreen and Tom Hucker? You work for me – I pay your salary.

Meanwhile, George Leventhal – maintaining his record as THE most responsive member of County Council responded to me a second time about this issue. I respect Leventhal because of his forthrightness, but he is simply wrong on the issue. He wrote:

“There is no question that climate change is as great a challenge as any our planet and our species faces, but must we also divest from food and beverage companies because of the health risks posed by obesity? Must we divest from bank stocks because of risky investments in mortgage securities that brought on the Great Recession? Must we divest from Treasury bonds because we do not want to finance Donald Trump’s deficit spending to build a Wall on the Mexican border? How are we to respond when activist movements ask us to divest from these securities?”

Slippery-slope arguments like this are impossible to contest, because they rely on some mythical greater harm to be caused in the future by someone(s) who might — in misguided pursuit of purity – push too far. A slippery slope is fear mongering: in this case Leventhal is basically saying that we can’t trust the small minds on county council to distinguish between one policy with clear justification and a different policy with less (or none at all). Perhaps he’s right about the small minds, though.

I note that none of the councilmembers, Slippery Hans, Silent Nancy & Tom, or Leventhal disputed my math: a worst-case impact of fossil fuel divestment on the overall county portfolio would come to a 0.008% reduction in the rate of return.

Even if this measure were purely symbolic (as Leventhal claims), it is a no-brainer because it couldn’t do any more than infinitesimal harm. In fact, fossil-fuel divestment is not only symbolic: if enough pension funds and other investors pull out of these funds, their values will drop. When their values drop, other investors will pull out or not opt in. And a large enough value drop will punish the largest owners of the mega oil and gas firms in the one part of their beings that has feeling: their wallets. Less spending money for these evil-doers means less money for them to invest in purchasing more climate-change deniers for Congress.

It appears right now that Bill 44-16 has support only from its sponsors, Roger Berliner, Marc Elrich, and Nancy Navarro. With a likely veto from blindly pro-business county executive, Ike Leggett, we need a mass effort to turn three more votes on the Council.

+++++

*Here’s a Hall of Shame of previous posts about Riemer:

It is early for me to target Riemer, given that his inevitable campaign for reelection won’t heat up for many months. Don’t worry, Dear Readers: I’ll be prepared to repost all of this when the time is right.

+++++

As for Nancy Floreen, she has nothing to fear from progressive criticism, since (1) she has a long record as the least progressive member of Council and industry pals have kept her afloat, regardless, and (2) she is term-limited and will stand zero chance in a race for county executive.

For Tom Hucker, it’s another story. His seat is comfortable only as long has he is able to keep a progressive label. Hucker’s record is good overall, but it won’t be helped by ignoring constituents or siding with the fossil-fuel industry.

+++++

Please contact your members (district, plus four at-large):

Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov (D1) – co-sponsor

Councilmember.Elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov (At-Large) – co-sponsor

Councilmember.Floreen@montgomerycountymd.gov (At-Large) – silent

Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov (D5) – silent

Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov (D3) – ?

Councilmember.Leventhal@montgomerycountymd.gov (At-Large) – opposed

Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov (D4) – co-sponsor

Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov (D2) – ?

Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov (At-Large) – slippery

©2017 Keith Berner

02.06.17 Montgomery County must divest from fossil fuels (support Bill 44-16)

February 6, 2017

Bill 44-16 before the Montgomery County (MD) Council would require the country to divest from the fossil fuel industry. Credit goes to Roger Berliner (he’s not ALL bad), Marc Elrich, and Nancy Navarro for co-sponsoring this important legislation. I have already written to all my councilmembers about this. George Leventhal continued his record of being the only councilmember who responds to (my) constituent inquiries, but he is wishy-washy on this issue, writing to me, “This is not an easy call. I understand its symbolic value but I am concerned about anything that may put at risk the county’s ability to keep its promise to retirees.”

I have heard nothing from Nancy Floreen, Hans Riemer, or Tom Hucker, my other reps.

Supporting divestment should be a no-brainer. According to the Washington Post, fossil-fuel investments constitute $65 million, out of a $4-billion MoCo portfolio, or 1.65%.  So if we assume that moving those investments elsewhere would produce a rate of return 0.5% lower than leaving them where they are (this is a pessimistic assumption, since there are plenty of well-performing investments outside this industry), the overall impact would come to a 0.008% reduction in the portfolio’s rate of return. Bottom line: even under a pessimistic assumption, the impact would be negligible.

Those arguing against divestment either haven’t done the math, are climate-change deniers, or have a personal stake in the fossil fuel-industry.
Please contact your members (district, plus four at-large):
Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember.Elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember.Floreen@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember.Leventhal@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov
Probably a bit less effective, but still worthwhile would be to use either use 350moco.org’s petition or to write to all councilmembers at once using the Council website.
©2017 Keith Berner

12.07.16 County Council disses Marc Elrich, as usual

December 7, 2016

At the bottom, you’ll see Nancy Floreen’s celebration of the council’s great new leadership: Roger Berliner and Hans Riemer. Above it you’ll see my letter to the councilmembers. Please remember this when all of them run for county executive (against Marc) in 2018.

Subject: MoCoCo new leadership announcement
Date: December 6, 2016 at 21:00:41 EST

This new leadership is another deliberate exclusion of the most popular and nearly longest serving councilmember: Marc Elrich.Marc beat you other at-large members twice in a row and has now served 10 years on the Council. I’m sure Marc is a big boy and can withstand the evident enmity from his council colleagues, but *I* am insulted. All of you who have conspired to keep Marc out of leadership have betrayed me and thousands of other Moco voters who support him more than they do you. I and others will have a long memory.

©2016 Keith Berner
nancy_floreen_s_montgomery_in_focus__december_2016_-_inbox

07.02.16 County Council repeals employee benefits for domestic partners

July 2, 2016

An open letter to regressive Montgomery County Council members. . .

To: George Leventhal, Nancy Floreen & Hans Riemer:

I am extremely disappointed that you voted (and George led the effort) to strip county employees’ domestic partner benefits. In order to save about $1.98, you have placed MoCo firmly on the side of regressive social policy. Sure, domestic-partner benefits were often created to get around discrimination against same-sex couples. But these benefits also took government out of any role in judging the shapes of love and families. As for some of the where-do-you-draw-the-line/where-does-does-it-ever-stop complains I’ve seen on Facebook, this is not rocket science. My nonprofit employers allows staff to designate one domestic partner, without any demand to see a marriage certificate. The fact that Marty Ittner and I live at the same address is good enough for them — why shouldn’t it be good enough for the county?

I congratulate Marc Elrich, Tom Hucker, and Craig Rice for being on the correct side of this issue. But I’m also disappointed that they didn’t warn their constituents in advance of this misguided action so that public pressure could have been brought to bear. (And I congratulate MD Delegate David Moon for alerting me and many others to the issue on Facebook.)

—Keith

©2016 Keith Berner

 

04.17.16 Jamie Raskin for Congress

April 17, 2016

Jamie Raskin’s record of accomplishment is astounding. Let’s start with his 2006 campaign for the Maryland Senate from District 20. (Beginning there gives short shrift to Raskin’s career as a nationally respected professor of constitutional law at American University.) In launching the effort, Raskin not only took on an entrenched incumbent, Ida Reuben, who had been serving a decidedly anti-progressive party machine and big-business interests for decades. He also purposely took on a long history indifference to state politics by D-20 voters.

While our district is home to some of the most progressive voters in the country, many of our neighbors had only been focused on national and international politics. Year after year, Ida Reuben and her ilk represented us in Annapolis, keeping Maryland blue, but hardly better than center-right. Raskin not only trounced Reuben thoroughly (2 to 1) in a race he was supposed to lose. He also carried Tom Hucker and Heather Mizeur with him as state delegates, in a progressive sweep. D-20’s powerful chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, Sheila Hixson, got with the program, moving from cautious centrism to forceful progressive leadership, with Raskin as a guide and partner.

Jamie Raskin’s election, then, was not only about a single senate seat. He consciously sought to create a movement, providing the vision and voice that have given D-20 and our values the power we lacked in Maryland. This is leadership defined.

The list of legislation passed with Raskin’s authorship, contribution, co-sponsorship, or advocacy is too long to recount here. Same-sex marriage, gun control, environmental regulation and remediation, economic justice, campaign finance reform. Not everything Raskin has touched has become law. (There is more work to do in a state that remains far more conservative than its Democratic reputation implies). But so many laws would never have seen the light of day or gotten to victory without him in the trenches.

Raskin’s most recent success is his “Noah’s Law” the toughest anti-drunk driving measure in the country, which passed in the just-concluded legislative session, overcoming years of liquor-lobby opposition.

Another element of Jamie Raskin’s leadership is his compelling oratory. He generates enthusiasm and motivates action by walking into a room and opening his mouth. The legions of passionate volunteers who have served in his campaigns demonstrate this. In fact, it is the door-knockers and phone-callers who have made Raskin viable against two opposing campaigns flush with millions of dollars of dirty money. (Kathleen Matthews is the most heavily corporate-PAC funded congressional candidate in the country. David Trone has spent a completely mind-boggling $9.1 million in a blatant attempt to purchase personal glory.)

Indeed, the contrast could not be starker between Raskin, whose life has been dedicated to public service and the two moneybags candidates who have served only themselves and their business interests.

I have written previously about these birds of a feather, both of whom cared so little about policy and politics – prior to seeking their own renown in Congress – that they didn’t bother to vote in two of the last three primaries. Each has been responsible for massive contributions to far-right GOP candidates and officeholders around the country (see Matthews and Trone). Both claim a moral pass on this, because throwing money to bad guys in a corrupt system was what they had to do for business.

There is no moral exemption for helping bad guys in order to enrich yourself or your corporate masters. If you send money to the GOP, you are backing GOP policies, period. While Jamie Raskin has been working hard every day to clean up campaign corruption, Kathleen Matthews and David Trone are its very embodiment.

Your blogger is deeply offended by the mere presence of Matthews and Trone in this race. Their progressive rhetoric is superficial. Their lack of community service reveals their selfishness. Should either be elected, the best a progressive voter could expect would be general support for a Democratic agenda, without any leadership for progressive values. And we could expect both to advocate for the status quo regarding the role of big, corrupting money in our broken democracy.

Jamie Raskin is not the only worthy candidate for Congress in MD-8. Kumar Barve (D-17) has served honorably in the Maryland Senate, making a name for himself as an environmental leader, among other things. Ana Sol Gutierrez (D-18) has been a reliable progressive vote in the House. But both lack Raskin’s power and results. Gutierrez seems in this race to be running solely on her Latina identity, a worthy consideration, but hardly sufficient to justify your vote.

Will Jawando is smart, articulate, and progressive. But he is tainted by having taken Big Pharma money, has provided little or no community service in the area, and seems to offer only his ethnic identity (as an African American) and brief, barely-relevant service in the Obama White House as rationales for his campaign.

Former State Department official Joel Rubin has contributed positively to the race, mostly by criticizing Matthews and Trone.

Coverage of this campaign would not be complete without commenting on pernicious role played by the Washington Post. It is hardly a surprise that the virulently pro-corporate, anti-union newspaper endorsed Matthews – they can count on her to do its bidding and serve its interests, if not explicitly, then certainly in style and attitude. (Another indication of Matthews’s likely fealty to big business if she were elected is her endorsement by former Montgomery County Executive Doug Duncan, the prince of pavement.)

Even though the Post acknowledges that there is hardly an iota of stated policy difference among the candidates, it condemns Raskin for being “doctrinaire.” This flies in the face of his success in building bridges, not only across Maryland’s partisan divide, but also within the Democratic Party. (Raskin has managed to create an enduring alliance with hardly progressive Senate President Thomas V. “Mike” Miller [D-27], a remarkable feat.)

The Post’s influence is more insidious than its editorials. While sole Montgomery County political reporter Bill Turque has done some good reporting on the race. He has also ignored Raskin (at times) or damned him with right-wing language that clearly reflects the Post’s editorial bias.

Jamie Raskin has an extremely bright future, not only as a movement leader, but as an effective legislator who will serve the public good for decades. And if Raskin ever decides to move on from legislating, look for him to serve in the judiciary or in a future Democratic administration.

Maryland D-8 voters must show we cannot be bought. We owe it not only to ourselves but to the country to keep Jamie Raskin on an upward trajectory in service to all of us.

©2106 Keith Berner

06.25.14 Close races: Hucker vs. Glass in MoCo D5 & Morales vs. Crutchfield in MD D19

June 25, 2014

I am following two very close races:

  • MoCo Council D5, where Tom Hucker leads Evan Glass by 217 votes (out of 18,609 cast)
  • MD D19 Delegate, where Maricé Morales leads Charlotte Crutchfield by 399 votes (out of 26,854 cast)

These races are not over, because MoCo Board of Elections (BoE) still has not processed about 2100 provisional ballots. These ballots result from registration discrepancies found when voters sign in at the polling place. The voters are allowed to vote, but their registrations have to be investigated and validated before their votes are actually counted. The BoE will start gong through these tomorrow.

So, do the candidates who trail by 200 or 400 votes actually have a chance at this point? Unlikely and here’s why:

  • The approximately 2100 provisional ballots are county wide. (The BoE could not tell me in advance of processing them how many fall into which districts.) With eight state districts in the county and five county districts, and assuming a relatively smooth distribution of provisionals across the county, that would mean approximately 263 provisionals per state district and 420 per county district.
  • An unknown number of these provisional ballots will be disallowed, meaning that the actual number counted will be lower than these estimates.
  • So, for Crutchfield to overtake Morales would require her to win more than 100% of the outstanding votes; that is, her only chance is if for some reason D19 has a huge surplus of provisional ballots and then she would have to win virtually all of them. Forgeddaboutit!
  • For Glass to overtake Hucker, he would have to win 51.6% of the provisionals. Given Glass’s 37.44% of votes already counted, this is a stretch, but by no means impossible. With the likelihood that some of D5’s provisionals will be disallowed, the road for Glass to climb becomes that much steeper. Partisans of the two candidates in this race will be on pins and needles for days to come.

For all of those who stayed home this election, you have only yourselves to blame for not being among the handful of votes to decide these two squeakers.

Though I did not endorse Hucker in D5, I am rooting for him as hard as I can. Given the victories by the pro-development forces in the rest of the county (except for Marc Elrich’s first-place finish in the at-large race), Hucker would be the only potential moderate-growth progressive to partner with Elrich.

As I came out of my polling place yesterday, Glass approached me politely to say that he thought I (and the Post’s Bill Turque) had treated him unfairly by lumping him in with the developers. Of course, I first turned sour on Glass based on his horrific mailing about the transit center debacle. Only after that did Turque’s piece about the developers’ embrace of Glass come out. Anyway, I was mulling Glass’s point as I was on my way to Elrich’s victory party last night. Just then, I drove past Developers’ Row, the Lee (big developers) property at the corner of Colesville and East-West Highway, where they put up huge signs for their best pals. There stood a mega Glass sign, right next to Nancy Floreen’s and George Leventhal’s. One doesn’t get these gifts from developers without being in their pockets. I stopped wondering then and there whether Turque and I had been unfair to Glass in any way.

 

Developer'sRow

 

Full disclosure: I ended up voting for Hucker, notwithstanding my endorsement of Terrill North. I knew that the Hucker-Glass race would be very close and that my friend Terrill didn’t stand a chance.

I am delighted to see Morales beat Crutchfield in D19, given Crutchfield’s association with Ben Kramer and Alec Stone.

©2014 Keith Berner

06.20.14 Big business is for Evan Glass (which is why I’m not)

June 20, 2014

If you’re still wavering about your choice for Montgomery County District 5, this Washington Post article — Business community rallies behind Evan Glass in Montgomery District 5 race — should provide all you need to decide that Even Glass ain’t your man. Bill Turque writes:

Since mid-May, Glass has received about $22,000 from real estate, land development and construction groups. It includes a total of $12,000 from two real estate PACS: the Greater Capital Area Political Action Committee and MD RPAC, a Maryland Realtors group.

Glass also got $4,000 from Paul Mahon, executive vice president and general counsel for the Silver Spring -based United Therapeutics, and $1,000 from Michael Ford, a top executive at DPR Construction. Smaller donations came from JBG and the Chevy Chase Land Company, two major Montgomery developers.

As I have previously written, my vote in this race goes to Terrill North. But I can now say unequivocally that Tom Hucker is my second choice, notwithstanding his dirty campaigning and bullying.

©2014 Keith Berner

06.20.14 Which endorsements are worth considering?

June 20, 2014

Dear Readers, at this time of year you not only get barraged with mailings that tell you surprisingly little about the candidates running (and, if you’re like me, you hit overload at some point and just toss all the stuff in the recycling bin), you also get news about which candidates have been endorsed by whom. How do you sort through all this often-conflicting information and make good choices? Here is a brief guide.

The Washington Post has good writing and the capacity for decent analysis. But for local races, it is important to remember that the Post is obsessively pro-development (at the expense of the environment) and is so virulently anti-labor that it colors everything they do. This years’ endorsements for Montgomery County Council at-large are downright disgusting; their endorsees — except for Marc Elrich — never met a piece of concrete they didn’t love. Elrich slips by the Post’s ideology because of his advocacy for bus rapid transit and his willingness to dialogue with developers. I think the Post’s endorsements for state and national races are very good to excellent.

The Montgomery Gazette used to be at least as pro-big business as the Post, but seems to have toned it down a bit this year. But you have to wonder about a publication that is willing to toss aside a powerful champion like Sheila Hixson with the comment “longevity’s no substitute for the passion that’s abundant elsewhere.” If they disagreed with Hixson’s positions, that would be one thing, but to blame her only for what they (incorrectly) see as a lack of fervor is just plain ridiculous. For me, that lack of serious analysis discredits everything else they write.

Progressive Neighbors (PN) produces a quality questionnaire for evaluating candidates, even if their presentation and processes are a bit amateurish at times. Apart from me, this is the only organization in Montgomery County I’m aware of that judges candidates based on their actual positions on progressive issues. Since PN is all-volunteer, they lack the resources to cover the whole county or to produce more professional-looking materials. I sure wish they would provide some analysis to go with their endorsements.

Public employee unions and big business endorse candidates based entirely on their self-interest. Perhaps you should follow them if you are a member of the union or the business. Otherwise, you are selling your soul by trusting their endorsements. Of particular note is the Montgomery County Education Association — the teachers’ union — which publishes the “Apple Ballot.” You’ve heard it here first: the Apple Ballot is rotten. This union, which sued the county (this is, you and me) twice during the recent fiscal crisis isn’t really about quality education, but rather only about getting their own at the expense of everyone else. Their big-money involvement in county politics is nearly as bad as the big developers — distorting the process in service to themselves. All MoCo candidates claim to be in favor of good education and most really are. But remember that county elected officials other than the county executive and members of the school board don’t actually have a role in creating school budgets and policies.

Sierra Club does a very good job of comparing candidates on their issues of concern and pointing you towards the truly green candidates (as opposed to greenwashed ones). Here’s a summary for those in my area:

  • Maryland Governor: Heather Mizeur
  • Maryland Attorney General: Brian Frosh
  • Maryland District 20: Jamie Raskin, Sheila Hixson, Will Smith, Darian Unger
  • Montgomery County District 5: Tom Hucker
  • Montgomery County At-Large: Marc Elrich and Beth Daly only

Women’s rights and gay rights organizations’ endorsements in most Montgomery County races are utterly meaningless, since 90% of the candidates agree on these issues. All these organizations are doing is cherry picking tiny nuances of difference between the candidates or, even worse, playing inside baseball and picking favorites for reasons they won’t reveal. I urge readers to ignore these endorsements entirely, unless they live in conservative parts of the county.

Elected officials’ endorsements can be very helpful in selecting candidates. If you know, for example, that you agree with Marc Elrich’s politics, seeing that he has endorsed Beth Daly can help you get comfortable with her, even if you don’t know very much about her.

Candidate slates (i.e., candidates who have agreed to run together) are a poor way to select whom to vote for, except to the extent that you trust some of the slate members (per the previous point). I was very disappointed to see that D20 candidates Raskin and Hixson put together a slate with Will Smith and David Moon (even though I think highly of them), as I was that Jonathan Shurberg countered by slating with D’Juan Hopewell. I see slates as an attempt to manipulate voters and disincent them from thinking for themselves.

Left-Hand View: Would it surprise you, Dear Reader, that I consider my own views damn near brilliant? Well, my candidate review process is hardly methodical and complete (mostly, all I write are my opinions, hopefully grounded by some facts) and my coverage of the county hardly extends beyond MD D20 and MoCo D5. There are plenty of good reasons to disagree with me. But, if you don’t have another basis for sorting through your choices, I hope that you find my analysis helpful (or, at least, amusing).

©2014 Keith Berner

06.15.14 Keith Berner’s Biennial Voters Guide/Primary 2014 (for Takoma Park & Silver Spring, MD)

June 15, 2014

Election Day is Tuesday, June 24. Early voting is underway now.

For a summary that lists my endorsements with minimal annotations, see: 06.11.14 Voters Guide 2014/Primary Edition Summary (for Takoma Park & Silver Spring, MD)

The theme this year is disappointment. Dear Reader, you will see in my commentary below just how unenthusiastic I am about most races and candidates this year. Where I think all the candidates in a race are bad news, I recommend voting against all of them by casting a write-in vote. In other races, I don’t actively oppose all the candidates, but can’t make myself recommend any, either. In those cases, I indicate “no endorsement.” I just can’t fathom how our progressive state and county can’t find more noble human beings and solid progressives to run for office.

In each race, I list candidates in my order of preference. An asterisk before the name indicates my endorsements.

For Maryland Governor

Write in “Mickey Mouse.”

It’s hard to believe that Maryland could not produce a single decent candidate for governor this year. Last year, I felt sorry for Virginia, with its choice between 13th-century theocrat Ken Cuccinelli and venal operative Terry McAuliffe. Well, now ’tis the season to pity poor Maryland.

Heather Mizeur, is an ego-driven politician for whom tactics replace principles. She’s a darling to many on the left this year for staking out positions that most of my readers will agree with. Everything Mizeur does is calculated, though (there’s not a genuine bone in her body). If she thought she could get more attention by running as a centrist, she’d do so in a minute (I dare you to ask her about her support for Lockheed-Martin tax breaks). Mizeur’s blind ambition is demonstrated by her twice abandoning her responsibilities as a public official. The first time was when she quit her two-year post as a city councilwoman in Takoma Park after a year. She had only run in the first place to burnish her credentials. She quit as soon as she thought she had gained enough attention to begin planning her next campaign. The second time was the past two years, when she nearly completely stopped showing up at events related to District 20, where she is still officially our delegate. In fact, her former “dream house” (as she called it) is sitting vacant in Takoma Park, while she spends most of her time at her other house on the Eastern Shore. She’s bored with D20, you see, and this little run for governor is just for her own amusement. I mean seriously, she can’t possibly think that a back bencher with few substantive accomplishments and with no executive experience of any kind is ready to run a state. And she has insulted voters by selecting as a running mate a Prince George’s County preacher who is even less qualified than she is. This race is not about anything other than being in the limelight. Don’t reward the insult by giving Mizeur your vote.

Anthony Brown is an empty shirt whose only significant public accomplishment was completely screwing up Maryland’s health care exchange. He has refused to take positions on controversial issues and has run a nearly completely negative campaign against Doug Gansler (who deserves it), while getting an advance coronation from the entire Maryland Democratic establishment. If this man is able to accomplish a single positive thing as governor, I’ll be surprised. He is currently leading both of his opponents by a 2-to-1 margin, so you might as well get used to him.

Doug Gansler is a frat boy who thinks he’s above the law. The Washington Post exposés last year about his abuse of state police and disregard for traffic laws reveal Gansler as a danger to the public interest. If he already behaves this way, who is to say where the impunity would stop if he were to have executive authority over the whole state? Even worse are Gansler’s right-wing policy positions. A fan of the death penalty, Gansler’s main platform plank this year is a tax cut for wealthy corporations and he hammers constantly on current governor Martin O’Malley’s highly responsible fiscal policies that included (gasp!) tax hikes. Who needs the GOP when you have this crap coming from Dems?

See also:

For Maryland Comptroller

Write in “Mickey Mouse.”

Peter Franchot (incumbent), who is running unopposed, is an arrogant man who long ago gave up on his Takoma Park progressive roots.

For Maryland Attorney General

*Brian Frosh is a principled progressive with a long record of accomplishments in the Maryland legislature. I often disagree with the Washington Post on local politics, but their re-endorsement of Frosh yesterday does more justice to Frosh (while highlighting the flaws of his opponents) than I can possible do. I encourage my readers to give it a close look.

Jon Cardin is best known for improperly commandeering a police helicopter to propose to his girlfriend and, more recently, for missing 121 out of 164 committee votes in the just closed 2014 legislative session. If this man’s uncle weren’t a US senator, he would’t be so much as blip on public radar. Because of his name, though, he could win this race, which would be a disaster for Maryland.

Aisha Braveboy is another 13-century theocrat opposed to gay rights, reproductive freedom, etc. She is now pretending never to have held those views. Yeah, right.

For US Congress – Maryland District 8

No endorsement.

Chris Van Hollen (incumbent) used to be my hero. No more. He lost me when he was among the bad guys on a House bill to rein in NSA spying that failed by only eight votes. Civil liberties are more important to me than nearly any other area of public policy. I cannot support anyone who loves the NSA. I know nothing about about Van Hollen’s two opponents in this race. Neither stands a chance, so you and I might as well flip a coin and vote for one of them to protest Van Hollen’s betrayal. Or, there’s always Mickey Mouse.

For Maryland Senate – District 20

*Jamie Raskin (incumbent) is running unopposed, so I don’t have to spill much virtual ink on him. Just the same, it’s fun to write that this budding national progressive hero is our very own. Raskin is a captivating orator, constitutional scholar, and progressive firebrand. He also knows how to reach out to and defang potential opponents (e.g., the very conservative senate majority leader, Mike Miller, with whom Raskin has a strong relationship) making Raskin not only a moral leader, but a highly effective one. Raskin is also just a great guy: accessible, down-to-earth, and humble. What’s not to love about Jamie?

For Maryland House of Delegates – District 20 (select up to three)

*Sheila Hixson (incumbent) used to be my favorite politician whom I didn’t vote for. She had a record of being disappointingly centrist, a go-along-to-get-along Democrat. This began to change with the disappearance of bad influence Ida Reuben and replacement by Jamie Raskin in 2006. Hixson realized just how progressive her constituents were and responded. She has built a powerful partnership with Raskin and they are quite the dynamic duo, helping each other pass progressive milestone legislation in their respective houses of the Maryland legislature. Hixson is one of the most powerful politicians in Maryland, as chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, which makes her a rare treasure: How often do progressives get to have not only a representative voice for their views, but one that can deliver? And that partnership with Raskin is so much more than the sum of the parts. Any D20 progressive who doesn’t vote for Raskin and Hixson is a fool and a knave. Why was Hixson always a favorite of mine, even when I wasn’t voting for her? Because she (like Raskin) is another mensch — warm, engaging, and downright fun to be around.

*Jonathan Shurberg and I have known each other since we both worked on Raskin’s 2006 campaign. Talk about smart: Shurberg can discuss articulately the fine points of policy from economic justice, to civil rights, to education. He has spent lots of time in Annapolis writing and promoting legislation. He and his late wife, Rebecca, were major players in the county Democratic Party. My readers know I’m no huge fan of the party, but having elected officials who are plugged in and know everyone is a bonus. Shurberg will balance Will Smith’s inexperience. Last November, I described Shurberg as “the adult in the room” and “a passionate fighter for progressive causes.” I stand by those words.

*Will Smith is a born and bred Montgomery County resident. He is smart as a tack and itching to make a difference in the lives of D20 and Maryland residents. Smith has an impressive record of service in our district, having run Raskin and Hixson’s 2010 campaign, raising substantial funds for local young scholars, and serving with IMPACT Silver Spring and the local chapter of the NAACP. Smith is relatively inexperienced, but the fact that he knows the Annapolis players and has been endorsed by Raskin and Hixson is significant. I expect he’ll be able to hit the ground running, working with his mentors to make a mark in the House. As an African American, officer in the Naval Reserves, and the first in his family to graduate from college (and graduate school), Smith adds much-needed diversity to the D20 delegation. It is high time for this extremely diverse district to send a capable person of color to Annapolis.

Darian Unger was so amateurish at the November D20 forum, that I disregarded him completely in my write up of the event. He has come a long way, baby. I have been blown away by his ability to captivate the public and political observers with a grass-roots, pure elbow-grease campaign. His service as a volunteer firefighter and chair of the Silver Spring Citizens Advisory Board shows his commitment to the community.  I particularly like Unger’s green credentials: an environmental engineer by trade, he lists “sustainable development and environmental protection” as his top priorities, the only candidate to do so.

David Moon matches Shurberg for smarts, knowledge, and probably has even greater encyclopedic knowledge of county and state politics. Moon is also a fighter — absolutely fearless about speaking truth to power. (I also know Moon from that first, magical Raskin campaign — as campaign manager, Moon gets credit for creating the strategy to beat Ida Reuben by a two-to-one margin.) There may be some concern that Moon’s record of truth telling would make it hard for him to work with the powers that be in Annapolis, but endorsements by Raskin and Hixson provide him with needed cover. If elected, Moon will make his presence felt very quickly.
So, why haven’t I ranked Moon second, just behind Sheila Hixson? Because of his longstanding ties to Valerie Ervin, perhaps the most destructive force in county politics. I believe Moon when he tells me that he won’t let Ervin tell him what to do if he’s elected. But the fact that his first campaign brochure put her picture and quote front and center, concerns me, as does his recent declaration to me that he considers Ervin among the most important local politicians. Make no mistake, Ervin plans to run for county executive, governor, or congress. I would hate to see one of my elected delegates endorsing her pursuit of power. Just the same, Moon looks likes like a winner in this race and I would shed no tears over this result.

Will Jawando deserved the apology I recently issued. He is not a bad guy, by any means. He’s smart, articulate, experienced with (federal) legislation, and — just like everyone else in the race — a solid progressive. But my strongest criticism of him remains valid: though he was born here, he has not provided any direct service to our district, unlike his fellow native Will Smith. If there weren’t so many more captivating choices, I could see getting really enthusiastic about Jawando. But in this fine field, he just doesn’t rise to the top.

See also:

For Montgomery County Executive

No endorsement.

Phil Andrews wins the integrity race easily. He is a class act of the boy scout variety, a politician who is in it for all the right reasons and cannot be bought. Sadly, Andrews has tacked right in the past four years. He was the lone council vote against raising he minimum wage and remains steadfast against indexing the wage to mitigate the impact of inflation. Some of my environmentalist friends are backing Andrews, but insiders tell me he has been less cooperative on land-use issues than he used to be. I had sent “dear neighbor” letters to my precinct in support of Andrews, but have come to regret it because I disagree with Andrews so strongly on key issues.

Ike Leggett (incumbent) is, at best, a big disappointment. I was an enthusiastic supporter when he first ran for executive in 2006, but his opposition to progressive state taxation on millionaires lost me a couple years later. Among the list of Leggett “foibles” is, of course, the misbegotten Silver Spring Transit Center, millions over budget, already more than two years late, and a potential danger to all who use it. Other items include tax breaks for Lockheed Martin, subsidies for Costco, and joyfully accepting bribes contributions from the development industry.

Doug Duncan’s toxic legacy from his tenure as county executive remains with us, in a county woefully short of infrastructure to match growth-without-thought and in our poisonous personal politics. While serving as front-man for the development industry, Duncan also oversaw unsustainable giveaways to MoCo’s public employee unions that worsened the fiscal crisis of 2008-12. Why return to office someone whose dream is to pave everything and enrich the powerful?

For Montgomery County Council – At Large (select up to four)

Marc Elrich and Beth Daly (vote for only two)If you cast a vote for any other candidates, you risk knocking Elrich or Daly into fifth place. That’s why I recommend “bullet voting” (selecting fewer than candidates than there are seats).

I recommend highly Bill Turque’s recent analysis of the MoCo at-large race in the Washington Post. Turque does an excellent job of showing who is in the developers’ pockets and who isn’t.

*Marc Elrich (incumbent) has been serving the public interest and society’s underdogs for decades. He has been the county council’s lone voice against unrestrained development, pointing out that what the other incumbents call “smart growth” is just rhetoric for more traffic on the roads, more school trailers, and more environmentally hazardous runoff from impervious surfaces. What is truly astounding is how Elrich has traveled from being the radical whose very name the Washington Post refused to mention to getting the Post’s endorsement for the second time in a row. Why? Because Elrich is more smart than ideological. His plan for bus rapid transit has won over the Post and even many developers (even while he refuses to accept the developers’ bribes contributions). Elrich is that rare politician who is 100% about public service, not personal glory. Even while he has enough respect to have come in first in the 2010 at-large race, though, he can’t get any respect from the rest of the council incumbents, who not only block him from formal leadership, but also prevent him from forcing discussion about their pave-it-all politics. If only there were some means to throw the rest of the incumbents out. Sadly, the best we can do is to toss one out (please, let it be Hans Riemer!) by putting Beth Daly in office.

*Beth Daly is the real deal: smarts, values, articulateness, and genuine warmth. Daly is as committed as Elrich to sensible land-use policies and protecting the environment. She promises a high level of transparency including (can you believe it?!) voting the same way on final legislation as she does in committee. She also promises to be a second when Elrich raises topics the other council incumbents want to bury and to champion a term for Elrich as president of the council. Daly is the most exciting newcomer to MoCo political campaigns since Jamie Raskin appeared in 2006. But she is no novice, having been an engaged and effective civic activist and creator of legislation for years (see her experience list).

George Leventhal (incumbent) is by far the second best of the incumbents. His constituent service is incredible and he has an admirable commitment to the disadvantaged. I keep wanting to endorse and vote for Leventhal, but I just can’t get there. This year, he’s attacking Marc Elrich and Beth Daly as he continues to serve the developers. Even if he weren’t playing this actively destructive role, it’s just far more important to have Elrich and Daly on the council than to keep Leventhal, so I cannot risk having my vote for him doom the others.

Nancy Floreen (incumbent) is 100% pro-developer, pro-chamber of commerce. At least what you see is what you get with Floreen, which can’t be said of . . .

. . . Hans Riemer (incumbent), who is a perpetual liar and deceiver, a carpetbagger who never belonged in our region’s politics to start with. He lives on taking credit for others’ work and claiming to support policies he doesn’t. The most egregious example of this was when he worked hard to kill last year’s minimum wage bill and then claimed to have led the fight for it. (Watch this must-see 30-second video showing Riemer holding back on the final vote for the minimum wage until he sees that it has the five votes necessary to pass.) He also says he’s an environmentalist, even while he gleefully takes money from the developers. Hans Riemer wins my 2014 award for Most Despicable Politician. This year’s MoCo voters owe future generations a service: stop Riemer’s political career right now, before rises through the ranks to become a lying empty shirt with actual power.

See also:

For Montgomery County Council – District 5

What hope I had when Destructive Force Valerie Ervin got bored with her seat on MoCo council and quit last winter! Sadly, my hopes have been dashed. This race is almost as bad as the one for governor, providing little hope at all for progressives who want good government.

*Terrill North is the only really good human being in the race. He is a solid progressive with experience in almost every area of policy we care about, from serving the poor, to environmentalism, to civil liberties. So why am I not more excited as I repeat my endorsement of North? Because his campaign has never seemed to get off the ground. He has no significant endorsements, beyond Progressive Neighbors (who also endorsed Tom Hucker for the seat). North is not going to win, so voting for him is more of a protest against the others than a practical choice. Sigh.

Tom Hucker is a bully and dirty campaigner. He has voted the correct way on nearly everything while serving as D20 delegate in Annapolis, but he is going to be wrong on everything involving public-employee unions if he serves on MoCo council. Just as most of the other council incumbents would be nowhere without developer money, the same goes for Hucker and the unions. My main concern about Hucker, though, is not about policy (again, he has a voting record any progressive would be proud of). Rather, it is that his bad temper and drive for dominance will eventually make him our very own Chris Christie, imploding and bringing his agenda (and ours) down with him. Hucker will win this race. I can only hope that the few of us speaking out about his flaws will bring about some introspection and humility on his part. If Hucker were to tame his demons, he could be an excellent progressive leader for years to come.

Evan Glass seemed to be the other good guy in the race (in addition to North) until his horrific mailer this week in which he granted himself magical powers to cure all that ails us. He has now shown himself to be just another ball of arrogance, willing to lie to his potential constituents to get a job. What’s amazing is that Glass slipped and revealed his inner truth when he had absolutely no reason do to so. He had already secured some plum endorsements and was running a solid campaign.

Chris Barclay is a petty thief who didn’t even live in the district until the past few weeks. He wouldn’t be wasting our ink and oxygen if Valerie Ervin and her Coalition that Only Cares about Color (Cherri Branson, Nancy Navarro, and Craig Rice) hadn’t foisted him upon us. (See my discussion of race in this race in my original endorsement of Terrill North, who is African American.) After being caught with his hand in the cookie jar, Barclay lost the endorsements of the two largest MoCo public employee unions, so I can’t believe he remains a factor.

See also:

Other Races

In races I don’t follow closely, I’ll let Progressive Neighbors be my guide.

Not My District: Brief Comments on Races Beyond My Neighborhood

  • For Maryland Senate – District 18: *Dana Beyer is not shy. We can count on her to stand up and be counted in Annapolis. I have known and been fond of Beyer for a long time, but still wondered why she — as a transgender woman — was taking on Sen. Rich Madaleno, who championed passage of Maryland’s marriage equality law. The answer? Because Madaleno might as well be a Republican on fiscal policy. Beyer will be a progressive hero in Annapolis, showing us what has been missing from D18 up until now.
  • For Montgomery County Council – District 1: *Roger Berliner (incumbent). I’m not a big Berliner fan; though, he is better than most of the other council incumbents. What compels me to endorse him is just how bad Duchy Trachtenberg is. Her pursuit of personal attention has led her to ditch principle entirely this year, flip-flopping on issues that were previously central to her politics: standing up to developers and public employee unions. If you are still tempted to vote for Trachtenberg, see my recent post about her.
  • For Montgomery County Council – District 3: Marc Erlich’s choice in the race to succeed Phil Andrews is *Ryan Spiegel. Progressive Neighbors has endorsed Tom Moore, but I’m more inclined to follow Elrich’s determination of who can best support his agenda on council than I am any outside observers.

See also: 05.30.14 How your blogger chooses candidates to love (and hate)

©2014 Keith Berner

06.10.14 Vote your conscience in MoCo Council D5

June 10, 2014

I endorsed Terrill North in this race a few weeks ago. At the same time, though, I understood the argument that it could be necessary to vote for Tom Hucker — notwithstanding his bullying and subservience to the public-employee unions — in order to stop Chris Barclay. Well, now that Barclay has been caught with his hand in the cookie jar and lost his major endorsements, he is no longer is any threat to win. Therefore, you can safely vote for North without fear of putting Barclay in office. I urge you to do so!

©2014 Keith Berner

05.30.14 How your blogger chooses candidates to love (and hate)

May 30, 2014

Dear Readers, you may just be wondering what happens in the mind of your blogger, as he writes about candidates for public office. Some of you might be surprised that much is going in there at all. Anyway, I do indeed have some criteria for selecting good guys and bad guys in politics.

  1. Ideology and values. If you’re not a progressive, at least in a substantial part of your agenda, you cannot win my love. (I’m not going to define “progressive” here — most of you know pretty much what I mean.) On the county level, I go for environmentalists over developers. Thus do Doug Duncan, Nancy Floreen and 99.9% of Republicans lose my consideration. Oh yeah, those who run on tax-cuts for the wealthy (that’s you, Doug Gansler) also get no love from me. Chris Van Hollen — NSA lover — also no longer gets my vote.
  2. Relevant knowledge and competence. Does the candidate know anything about the issues at play, the other players, and the process? I’m sorry, you can’t just show up suddenly in Rockville or Annapolis and be a hero, without knowing anything. By the same token, you can’t declare yourself ready to run a state, when the largest previous operation you have ever run is a political campaign: sorry Heather Mizeur.
  3. Previous service to the community. Don’t show up here suddenly demanding glory if you haven’t paid some dues. I want to see a resume of engagement — a record of caring about this place and its people. This is where Hans Riemer (the Liar) lost me at the start of his quest for glory — he hadn’t even lived here long enough to know anyone’s name when he declared his first run for office. This remains a valid criticism of Will Jawando, who certainly has experience, but not serving our area.
  4. Diversity. I don’t think diverse communities should be served by a non-diverse set of elected officials.
  5. Tempered ambition. I get that nearly all politicians are ambitious. Heck, your blogger is ambitious in his day job. But I want to vote for people who intend to do the job they’re running for, rather than plotting their next advancement from Day 1 in office. Empty ambition, thy name is Heather Mizeur.
  6. Putting power in perspective. Power is necessary for the accomplishment of anything. Power ought never be the end in itself. Beware these cynics for whom power is the only thing. If your fundamental political views are malleable and subservient to your pursuit of power, you won’t get my support — sorry, Duchy Trachtenberg (more on this soon!). And Valerie Ervin is the poster child of a power-hungry pol.
  7. Ability to work with other elected officials. If you and those you’ll be serving with can’t get along, this is a black mark against you.
  8. Stopping the worst of two evils. Sometimes, I do the pragmatic thing and vote primarily out of disgust with the other guy (rather than love for mine). When I vote for Democrats at the federal level in general elections, this is usually what I’m up to. That’s what I’ve decided not to do in MoCo D5 this year (Hucker vs. Barclay).
  9. Character. If you behave with impunity (Doug Gansler), steal from the public (Chris Barclay), or treat people badly  (Tom Hucker), you have a hill to climb with me.
  10. Personal. If I know you personally and like you, it certainly helps drive my support for you. Great examples include Sheila Hixson, Jamie Raskin, Marc Elrich, and Terrill North. But they are not the only ones — in a year of depressing politics, I have met some really nice people who are running for office.

So, am I 100% consistent in applying these criteria? Yeah, right. As you have previously accustomed yourself to, Dear Reader, your blogger is flawed. But he takes comfort knowing that those who criticize inconsistency are hoboglined by little minds, or some such.

©2014 Keith Berner

05.29.14 A dilemma of riches in MD D20

May 29, 2014

With two open seats in the most progressive part of the most progressive county in one of the bluest states in the US of A, voters in Takoma Park and Silver Spring, Maryland are blessed with some very difficult decisions in the June 24 primary (which given the local ideology, is the only election that matters).

Our incumbent state senator, Jamie Raskin, is a bonafide national progressive leader in the making. He is running unopposed, so there’s no dilemma there.

The dean of our three-seat delegation to the House of Delegates, House Ways and Means Chair Sheila Hixson is so deserving of reelection, that I sometimes have almost forgotten that she is running. Well, she does need to be reelected and D20 voters are going to make that happen. No dilemma.

The other two incumbent delegates, Tom Hucker and Heather Mizeur, are gunning for other offices. Which leaves (by my count) six worthy contenders for two seats.  I’ve now met with all of them. They are (in alphabetical order):

  • D’Juan Hopewell
  • Will Jawando
  • David Moon
  • Jonathan Shurberg
  • Will Smith
  • Darian Unger

Yes, your blogger has thought long and hard about how he will vote in this race. His mind has at times been made up and at other times, not quite so.

Here is your chance to weigh in, Dear Reader. Would you like to make your case to me for your chosen candidates? Do you want to share secrets with me that you think others should know? Do you sense that I’ve been on the wrong track in what I have revealed of my views thus far? Would you like to prognosticate about the outcome of the race?

Please leave your comments on this blog, write to me, or (if you know my number) give me a call. If you want me to keep confidential anything you share, I will. If you want it to be published, but just not have your name on it, that’s fine too.

I’ll publish my views soon and may very well take your views into account.

©2014 Keith Berner

05.29.14 Chris Barclay brings a little PG to MoCo

May 29, 2014

Thanks to WJLA-TV and the Washington Post for revealing that Montgomery County School Board Chair and County Council D5 candidate Christopher Barclay has repeatedly used his School Board credit card for personal expenses. Yeah, Barclay has paid back the money, but (of course) didn’t do so until he got caught.

We’re familiar with venal politics in Prince George’s County and DC. So far, we have been spared this kind of financial scandal in MoCo (at least in recent memory). For me, stealing public money is an unpardonable offense, even for an otherwise worthy candidate. But, there is really nothing redeeming about Barclay’s campaign, even looking beyond petty theft. From his campaign manager’s being caught snooping in opponent Tom Hucker’s office to the fact that Barclay hasn’t even been living in D5, where’s the case for him? (As I have previously written, MD law requires residency only by election day. Do any readers know if Barclay now has an address that qualifies? Has anyone actually seen him living there?) If Valerie Ervin and her Coalition that Only Cares about Color (Cherri Branson, Nancy Navarro, and Craig Rice) weren’t backing Barclay, would he be even be on our radar screens?

Don’t vote for Christopher Barclay. Let’s keep MoCo (somewhat) clean.

©2014 Keith Berner

 

05.12.14 In which an elder statesman disagrees with yours truly re Hucker

May 12, 2014

Friend, neighbor, and decades-long progressive activist Mike Tabor, has a thing or two to say about Tom Hucker and my view of Tom Hucker. Mike’s points are at least as worthy of consideration as mine. Here’s what he has to say:

Keith,

I’ve been haunted by your condemnation of Tom Hucker reducing his entire career to that easy word, “bully”.  Taking cues from Heather Mizeur at her first televised Governor’s debate, he could be more polite and modest.  Yes, he could have run at large, but that was his decision.  However, a lifetime of effective commitment to social justice can’t be dismissed, discounted and written off that easily by some of his neighbors who don’t necessarily hold office.  

Rather than using the term “bully”, an easy disparaging term, how about “passionate”, “angry”, “impatient”, “insistent”…think about it, if I were a foot taller, all of those descriptions might fit me, or you!  And what’s the alternative? Let’s face it, Terrell North, as good as he is and would be, unfortunately doesn’t seem to have the apparatus to win the seat.  The other alternative is Barclay, the pick of conservative Dems (and the Apple ballot choice) and other moderate voices.  We can’t afford to lose that seat.

Do you picture Barkley giving Marc Elrich the “second” he needs (and so eloquently pleaded for at the recent Progressive Neighbors forum) on issues like rent stabilization on the County Council?  Yes, it would be good if Tom was less provocative, and maybe he’ll grow into a more diffidence as he continues to mature in office.  

Perhaps we need more progressive Dems with the passion Tom has.  I don’t think we should be so ready to write off Tom and his lifetime of good work.  

Michael Tabor

My reply to Mike’s comments:

I did not mean to reduce Hucker’s  career to one characterization. The totality of the good he has done exists, is worthy of praise, and Mike is right to remind us of that. Mike’s also correct that Hucker would be a far better partner to Elrich on council than Barclay. The very fact that Barclay must be stopped argues pragmatically for supporting Hucker.

But to toss off bullying, just because the bully is on your side, is a cop-out: bullying means intimidating, harassing, threatening retribution. None of Mike’s proposed euphemisms accurately describes Hucker’s behavior. Letting Hucker off the hook is reminiscent of the classic: “He’s a son of a bitch, but he’s our son of a bitch.”*

Well, guess what? I have a philosophical issue with SOBs. But it’s not just about ideals. Bad behavior has real costs. At the least it introduces unnecessary friction into relationships, making progress come at higher costs. At the most, it creates toxicity or scandal sufficient to bring down the perpetrator and any chance of progress. Think Christie, who killed the entire brand of “centrist” GOP with his nasty hubris. Think Spitzer, whose different expression of hubris destroyed him and set back his agenda. Supporting those who engage in bad behavior is risky.

I totally get why Mike supports Hucker on his record. I understand a pragmatic decision to vote for the guy who can stop Barclay. This year, though, I’m rebelling against politics as usual, just a wee bit. My vote is going to the best person for MoCo D5: Terrill North.

*The “he’s our son of a bitch” line has been attributed to several potential authors about several potential unsavory characters. Here’s a brief discussion from Washington Monthly.

–Keith

05.03.14 Terrill North for Montgomery County District 5

May 3, 2014

The District 5 race for Montgomery County Council makes me very sad: two very decent and qualified candidates have had all the oxygen sucked out of the race by two bad guys. First, the good guys.

I’m proud to endorse Terrill North for this seat. North is the most consistent progressive in the race. I have known him for about a decade and am a fan of his integrity and passion for economic and social justice. You just have to love a VP of ACLU Maryland, long-time activist with Progressive Neighbors, former advocate with Earth Justice, and leader of a Silver Spring mentorship program for at-risk youth. Putting North on county council will ensure that local hero Marc Elrich (At-Large) will have a partner for the things we care most about.

Give other good-guy Evan Glass credit: while everyone was else cowered in fear, Glass declared his candidacy for D5, before Destructive Force Valerie Ervin quit her post mid-term. Glass is a serious and capable candidate with a long history of community leadership in Silver Spring, including service as chair of the Silver Spring Citizens Advisory Board. Just like North, Glass advocates for closing the educational achievement gap, sustainable environmental practices, and bus rapid transit (thanks to Elrich for that plan!).

If North and Glass were alone in this race, we could expect an uplifting campaign in which voters might end up having to flip a coin. I am going with North, because he has direct experience with a broader range of progressive issues than Glass. But I expect that Glass would also do a fine job on council.

Alas, these two good guys have been eclipsed by two politicians you should not vote for.

Tom Hucker served MD D20 well as delegate since 2007. As one progressive political leader puts it, “I agree with Tom on the issues 90% of the time.” Tom was going to remain a delegate until Valerie Ervin quit her council post. I get why Hucker wasn’t interested in taking on Ervin (fear), but don’t respect it. When it became apparent that Hucker was going to jump in the race after Glass and North had been working it for weeks, I and others pleaded with him to run for an at-large seat instead, creating an opportunity for progressives to take two seats: D5 and one of the at-large slots. His name recognition and connections with political leaders across the county would have made him a favorite to knock off an incumbent like Nancy Floreen or Hans (The Liar) Riemer. Hucker’s response (not verbatim): You can’t expect me to do that. It would be too hard.

Notwithstanding the selfishness of taking an easier road, I was prepared to back Hucker enthusiastically, until I started hearing about the nasty, underhanded campaign he was running. Yes, Hucker is the bully I was referring to in my recent post on the state of local politics. His 2006 campaign for delegate was widely considered to be unsavory, which I had put this out of my mind in recent years. But when I started hearing that Hucker was spreading false rumors about his opponents this year and publicly attacking their backers (driving one of them to tears), it revived unpleasant memories and revealed that this is Hucker’s default modus operandi, not an aberration.

I made about a dozen calls about Hucker to community leaders, elected officials, and political observers, seeking reassurance about his character. Instead, every single person I spoke to — none of whom was associated with his opponents’ campaigns and some of whom expect to vote for Hucker — described him as a bully. I heard not only about campaign tactics, but also about strong-arm behavior in Annapolis that had alienated allies and reduced his effectiveness.

When I called Hucker to tell him why I would not be endorsing him, he angrily described himself as the victim of “scurrilous hearsay” spread by “desperate” opponents who “have nothing to offer.” When I repeatedly pointed out to Hucker that this stuff was coming from neutral observers and even political friends, he just couldn’t hear me. This is classic bully: playing the victim of the very sorts of behavior he engages in.

I really wanted to endorse Hucker, at the very least in order to stop Chris Barclay (see below). But I decided that I just could not ethically attach my name to his style of politics. And here’s the practical aspect of my decision not to back him: Can you think of the other bully who has been in the headlines? That’s right, Tom Hucker is a Chris Christie in the making. How long will it be before Hucker’s behavior results in scandal that takes him down and a part of the progressive agenda with him? I don’t think progressives should take the risk.

I also oppose Hucker for two substantive reasons. He is a union guy first and foremost. There have been other labor backers — people like Elrich, Ervin, and county executive Ike Leggett — who, in the midst of the county’s recent budget crises, demanded that the public employee unions share the pain with other county residents, rather than be given a pass. Hucker has promised the unions never to ask them again to contribute to a sustainable county budget. County residents voted in 2012 to put an end to “effects bargaining” by the Fraternal Order of Police (FoP), under which the union could object to impositions of simple workplace rules (like a requirement to check email). Hucker has promised the FoP that he will fight to restore their stranglehold on common sense.

More surprising is Hucker’s opposition (in two recorded votes) to indexing the state’s new minimum wage to the rate of inflation. Indexing is essential for assuring that newly increased minimum wages don’t end up as poverty wages a few years later. When confronted with this at a recent Silver Spring Democratic Club forum, Hucker hemmed and hawed and finally admitted to having voted against indexing, saying that he was doing what the party leadership in the House wanted him to. That is, Hucker was more concerned about his political future than he was about good policy in support of working women and men.

Rounding out the D5 field is school board member Christopher Barclay, who doesn’t even live in D5 (and is the only one of the four candidates never to have done any work on the ground here)! That’s right, Dear Reader, Maryland law doesn’t exclude carnet baggers if they move to the district by election day, which Barclay promises to do. Why does Barclay even stand a chance? Because a Coalition only Concerned with Color — Ervin and current county-councilmembers Nancy Navarro (D4), Craig Rice (D2), and Cherri Branson (interim D5) — have endorsed him. His apparent prime qualification? He’s African American. His apparent secondary qualification? He’s needy, which means he would be indebted to politicos who help him. Word on the street is that Barclay has no money for this campaign or for moving into our district. This means that Ervin & Co. will be raising or giving Barclay the resources he needs for the campaign and for house-hunting. I can’t prove this point, but it seems to be a logical supposition.

(Barclay is also the politician I referred to  whose campaign manager was found rummaging around Hucker’s Annapolis office in the dead of night.)

For those of you who thought we might be rid of Ervin when she up-and-quit her Council seat mid-term, here is your wake-up call. Ervin got bored because she didn’t have sufficient power or limelight. So what she is doing is cultivating easily manipulable candidates in preparation for eventual runs at county executive, governor, or dictator of the universe. As part of this effort, Ervin has declared D5 a black seat. She is backing empty shirts like Barclay and Will Jawando (empty-shirt candidate for MD D20 delegate — more on him later), all in service to building a political empire. Ervin is seeking to remake the political fault lines in our county from developers/Chamber of Commerce vs. environment/slow-growth to people of color vs. white. All in service to her ambition.

I’m 100% in favor of affirmative action. And there is no question that people of color have been underrepresented in Montgomery County politics. But, in a year when the US president is black, the likely governor of Maryland is black, the current and likely future county executive is black, and four of nine current county council members are of color, is race really the most important criterion for selecting candidates?

In case you missed it, Terrill North happens to be African American. I don’t know why Ervin didn’t settle on him (though, she evidently promised a bunch of candidates her support this year, only to ditch them when push came to shove). Perhaps Ervin decided that North has too much character to serve her future empire. I have settled on him because he is the best man for the job. Period.

PS. In my recent post on dirty local politics, I referred to a political consultant who used blatant anti-Muslim hysteria and Nazi imagery as a campaign tactic. This is David Goodman, who used such horrific themes on behalf of then-MD D19 senator Mike Lenett in 2010 in a losing effort against Roger Manno. (The Gazette cited Goodman as “the architect of Mike Lenett’s aggressive direct mail campaign, which received low marks and helped contribute to one of the nastiest primary races [in 2010].”) He is working for North in this campaign. It turns out, sadly, that other local politicos like Jamie Raskin and Sheila Hixson have given this despicable man work. This sucks. It is also the nature of politics and ultimately not reason enough for me to punish North.

©2014 Keith Berner

09.09.10 Biennial Voter Guide

September 9, 2010

Quick Guide

  • Governor write in Mickey Mouse
  • US Senator write in Mickey Mouse
  • US Congress-District 4 Donna Edwards
  • US Congress-District 8 Chris Van Hollen write in Mickey Mouse
  • Maryland Senate-District 20 Jamie Raskin
  • Maryland Delegates-District 20 Sheila Hixson, Tom Hucker, Heather Mizeur (select up to 3)
  • Maryland Delegate-District 18 Dana Beyer
  • County Executive write in Mickey Mouse
  • County Council – At Large Marc Elrich & Duchy Trachtenberg only (select up to 4)
  • County Council – District 1 Roger Berliner
  • County Council – District 2 Sharon Dooley
  • County Council – District 3 Phil Andrews
  • County Council – District 4 no recommendation
  • County Council – District 5 Write in Mickey Mouse
  • Other Races: see Progressive Neighbors


Governor

How can any progressive vote for a guy who loves slots and the ICC and wants to provide tax cuts to the wealthy in support of religious schools (the infamous BOAST bill)?  I guess we’ll have to vote for Martin O’Malley in November, but we don’t have to in September.

Recommendation: Write in Mickey Mouse

(There are two unknowns running against O’Malley, but I never recommend voting for an unknown, because one has no idea what he/she stands for!)

US Senator

Barbara Mikulski is the classic go-along-to-get-along machine Democrat. She’s also famous for horrendous treatment of her staff.  Send the same message to her as to O’Malley.

Recommendation: Write in Mickey Mouse

US Congress – Maryland District 4

You have such a progressive gem in Donna Edwards. Vote for her with utter joy in your heart!

US Congress – Maryland District 8

Some in the progressive community blast the incumbent for not being as pure as the driven snow.  I say that Chris Van Hollen is the closest thing to a true progressive in the national Democratic leadership.  We may not agree with every vote he casts, but it is essential to have someone like him in the central power circles.  Vote for him!

With the news that Chris Van Hollen is considering a deal with the GOP to extend Bush tax cuts for the rich, I am withdrawing my endorsement and urging a write in to express opposition.  I am also I urging all Van Hollen constituents to contact the congressman and express outrage over his comments.

Recommendation: Write in Mickey Mouse

Maryland Senate and Delegates – District 20

(Select one senator and up to three delegates.)

In Senator Jamie Raskin and Delegates Sheila Hixson, Tom Hucker and Heather Mizeur, the most progressive district in the state has the most progressive – and effective – legislative team.  Let’s count our blessings every day for their leadership and let’s give them another four years.

I have heard some progressives criticize Hixson for not being as left as we are.  I previously held this view myself and still disagree with the delegate’s support for slots and the ICC.  But I have also come to appreciate how much behind-the-scenes work she has done to stop the cesspool in Annapolis from being worse than it is and to increase Raskin/Hucker/Mizeur’s effectiveness.  Sure, Sheila Hixson is a bit to the right of her district, but we need her right where she is as chair of Ways and Means.

Other Maryland Senate and Delegate Races in Montgomery County

I recommend following the endorsements of Progressive Neighbors.

One candidate deserves special mention, though:  Dr. Dana Beyer, a challenger for delegate in District 18.  Beyer is the clear pick here in a field that includes two incumbents (Carr and Waldstreicher) who oppose the Purple Line.  More important, Beyer is about as committed, passionate, and articulate a fighter for progressive causes you’ll ever find.  Send her to Annapolis and she’s guaranteed to shake things up.

County Executive – Montgomery County

Ike Leggett, who is running unopposed, is a great disappointment.  He opposes progressive taxation, has behaved with utter malfeasance in the Live Nation debacle, and endorses nonprogressive candidates like Craig Rice.  Send him a message:

Recommendation: Write in Mickey Mouse

Montgomery County Council – At-Large

(Select up to four candidates.)

Marc Elrich is the most innovative and consistently progressive member of the county council.  His knowledge of (seemingly) everything, coupled with his willingness to talk with everybody, results in sound public policy.  We couldn’t ask for a better representative in government.

+++

Duchy Trachtenberg aligns with the good guys on the council in terns of good land-use policies and separation from the development industry.  She can be a schemer along with the worst of politicians, but she is also a champion on health issues and gender equality.

+++

As I have written previously, I am ambivalent about George Leventhal.  His temperament seems to be improving (he had been described as the most disruptive force on dysfunctional council), and he is a leader on issues like homelessness and health care.  But he is too tied to the development industry and too much in the Duncan/Silverman mold to merit a vote of support.  His cardinal sin?  Helping lead last Decembers “coup” that knocked off next-in-line Roger Berliner for council president in favor of Development Queen Nancy Floreen.

+++

Hans Riemer wants to be an elected official more than he wants to do anything with that privilege.  He has run a campaign of bromides and exaggerated tales of accomplishments that aren’t relevant to the county, anyway.  It’s impossible to tell what he would do — and whom he would follow — if elected and that might be reason enough to oppose him.  See my longer post on the Riemer campaign.

+++

The other viable at-large candidates, Nancy Floreen (incumbent) and Becky Wagner are classic End-Gridlock, chamber-of-commerce, big-business-at-the-expense-of-everything-else politicians.  Please don’t help put them on the council!

+++

Recommendation:  Bullet vote Marc Elrich and Duchy Trachtenberg. Bullet voting is when you select fewer than the number of candidates you are allowed to.  In this case, your votes for Elrich and Trachtenberg – and no one else – will assure that our two best county public servants are not knocked off by any of the others.  Remember, you don’t have to vote for four candidates in this race and I urge you not to.

Montgomery County Council – District 1

Roger Berliner is a common-sense progressive who supports the Purple Line and has been a close ally of good-guy Marc Elrich.  His opponent, Ilaya Hopkins, wasn’t even a Democrat until two years ago and opposes the Purple Line.

Montgomery County Council – District 2

This cliff-hanger of a race pits three known Montgomery County names against each other: community activist Sharon Dooley (who got 36% of the vote when she tried for the seat four years ago); Craig Rice, current state delegate for D-15; and Royce Hanson, former Park & Planning chair Royce Hanson.

Dooley is an environmentalist and health care advocate who will align with the other council progressives.

Though I’m told Rice is a nice guy and “not as bad as” outgoing councilman Mike Knapp, the company Rice keeps shows which side he would be on: the entire big-business bloc of the county council has endorsed him.

Roy Hanson is heartily disliked by several current council members, having fought many battles against them. He would be an ideal guardian of the Ag Reserve, which he founded years ago, but the price for him seems to be to accept sprawl everywhere else.

District 3

Phil Andrews is a model of integrity and advocate of good government. He’s unopposed, but deserves your showing up at the polls as thanks for he service.

District 4

Nancy Navarro is running unopposed.

District 5

Valerie Ervin is a purposely deceptive politician with contempt for the down-county progressive community. In a world of self-interested politicians, Ervin is a leader.  She’s running unopposed but is badly in need of a message that she is not universally loved.

Recommendation: write in Mickey Mouse

School Board

I recommend following the endorsements of Progressive Neighbors.

Other Races

It’s my practice not to pretend to know what I don’t know.  And I don’t know anything about the other races.  I must leave you here, dear Voter — henceforth, you are on your own.

©2010 Keith Berner