Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Newman's 2010 GOP Draft Suggestions

I've decided instead of putting together some new articles and to restate some of my previous suggestions, I've decided to post a list of people I suggest the GOP should draft for public office in a spattering of states (CT, MD, and NY). If I were in charge of national or local state GOP organizations, these are the people I would seek out to run for public office. Thoughts are always welcome.
Connecticut
Congress
CT-4 - Linda McMahon - CEO of WWE, Member of the CT State Board of Education, see previous article

Maryland
Congress
MD-3 - Susan Schwabb - Former US Trade Representative (2006-2009), President and CEO of the University System of Maryland Foundation (2003-2006), see previous article
Statewide Offices
Attorney General - Scott Rolle - 2006 GOP Attorney General nominee, see previous article
Comptroller - E.J. Pipkin - State Senator from the 36th District (2003-Present), vast financial background and has an MBA from the University of Virginia, failed GOP candidate for US Senate in 2004
State Legislature
HoD-6 - Matthew Newman - 26 year old environmental engineer, proprietor of Newman for Maryland and Old Line Elephant
HoD-6 - Paul M. Blitz - 2002 and 2006 GOP candidate, military veteran (VFW 2621), Historian for The Heritage Society of Essex and Middle River, dedicated to the district
HoD-8 - Rani Merryman - Professional homemaker and active blogger, currently looking into running - very close race in 2006

New York
Congress
NY-8 - Randy Daniels - Former NY Secretary of State, 2006 gubernatorial primary candidate, see previous article
NY-20 - John Faso - Former Assembly Minority Leader (1998-2002), 2002 GOP Comptroller nominee, 2006 GOP Gubernatorial nominee
NY-21 - Frank Merola - Currently Rensselaer County Clerk, see previous article
Statewide Office
Comptroller - Andrew Eristoff - Former New York City Councilman (1993-1999), former Commissioner of Finance of New York City (1999-2002), former New York State Comissioner of Finance and Taxation (2002-2006), see previous article
Attorney General - Michael Garcia - Former US Attorney, brought down Eliot Spitzer, prosecuted the terrorists involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and brought charges against politicians including State Sen. Efrain Gonzalez (D), former Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik (R), two staffers of NYC Council Member Kendall Stewart (D), and Assemblyman Anthony Seminerio (D)
US Senate (v. Gillibrand) - George Pataki - Former 3 term Governor of New York, never lost a statewide contest, excellent campaigner and fundraiser
As always, opinions are welcome.

Monday, July 13, 2009

Flat Income Tax Rate

I think we should have a flat income tax rate here in Maryland. I posted my thoughts on the matter over at Newman for Maryland along with a startlingly odd tax proposal from Delegate Olszewski. Please check it out.

Thursday, July 2, 2009

2009 Legislative Ranks District 6

During the 2009 legislative session, the Maryland Business for Responsive Government (MBRG) kept track of how each Senator and Delegate voted on a variety of issues that they felt were important. The Maryland Business for Responsive Government is a primarily fiscally conservative organization that focuses on issues of business regulation, taxation, and other fiscal issues. A link to their report can be found here. As a concerned citizen, I first reviewed the scores that were given for the 2009 legislative session to those representing me here in the 6th Legislative District. Here are the scores -

Senator Stone - 0%
Delegate Minnick - 50%
Delegate Olszewski - 20%
Delegate Weir - 20%
These scores are very low for each of them except for Delegate Minnick, who voted with the MBRG 50% of the time. To help explain how the MBRG came up with their rankings, let us review some of their critical pieces of legislation. For brevity, I shall focus on three - two from the House and one from the Senate.

SB 1072, also known as the "Preakness Bill," is a circumvention of bankruptcy law. This bill allowed the state to condemn and seize the following properties which were in the process of bankruptcy proceedings -
"(1) Pimlico, Laurel, and Bowie race tracks and training facilities and any and all property or property rights (including a catering company) associated with these facilities, wherever located; (2) the multi-million dollar Preakness trophy known as the Woodlawn Vase; (3) the name, copyrights, service marks, trademarks, trade names and all other intellectual property associated with the Preakness and the Woodlawn Vase; and (4) all property and property rights of the Maryland Jockey Club, and Laurel Racing Association, and their affiliates."
This bill allows for quick condemnation whereby the state calculates what they think the property's worth, gives that to the owner, and if the owner disagrees - they have to sue the state if they want the full value of their property. It also shows that property owner's rights are not the highest priority for the Maryland legislature. This bill passed the Senate with my Senator, Norman Stone, voting in the affirmative. When this bill reached the House of Delegates - all three of my Delegates voted in the affirmative. The MBRG opposed this measure. So do I.

Next is HB 1288. If an employer is found violating minimum wage laws, an employee is allowed to sue for the pay they deserve under the law. If a court finds an employer guilty of violating this statute - they may allow against the employer the cost of legal fees for the employee as well. This piece of legislation would require the employer who violated this statute to pay the owed money, legal fees, and an additional two times the income difference. While requiring the back payments owed is a fee befitting the crime. Adding on the legal fees is a reasonable addition. A total of triple the owed difference in income goes to the point of overkill and excessive. Also, what person remains in a position once they realize that their income is less than the minimum wage. If the person is a citizen, they should know their rights. If the person is an illegal immigrant, then the employer has committed a different crime and should be penalized accordingly. The MPRG opposed this measure, which died in committee.

The final is HB 902, which is an expansion of the Family Medical Leave Act. It requires employers to give people time off, FMLA time off, for the employee’s brother, sister, grandparent, grandchild, domestic partner, and the child of an employee’s domestic partner. I understand the inclusion of domestic partners, especially with the current state of same-sex marriage legislation in Maryland. Now, it would be nice to have time off for my grandparents or siblings - but I do not feel this needs to be mandated by law. I understand their motivation. I understand the sentiment. Yet, I and MRPG disagree with this legislation. Current FMLA requirements are adequate.

While each of these pieces of legislation in and of themselves do not individually pose a threat to business in the state of Maryland, the compiled impact of all this legislation is a net drag on employers and companies in the State of Maryland. In a State which needs all the help it can to boost business - we can not become more unfriendly to business. No excessive fines, no excessive requirements, and no more abuse of eminent domain / circumvention of bankruptcy law.

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Trust and the Right

The recent admission by Mark Sanford of his infidelity was incredibly disappointing to me. As a Republican who believes in limited government, I had watched Governor Sanford govern as such and was inspired by the way he articulated my conservative values. I thought for sure that he would be one of the top tier candidates for the 2012 Republican Party Presidential nomination. No longer.

I find myself incredibly disappointed and I've come to a realization as to why. I had this same feeling back in 2006 when the Republican candidate for Governor of New York that I had supported, Pat Manning, turned out to have been unfaithful to his wife and had done immoral and potentially illegal acts to obtain private information about his opponent when he ran for State Assembly. The reason is simple - because they betrayed our trust.

Why is trust so important to me? As a man who finds his home on the political right, I am a supporter of limited government - a government whereby the people have more freedoms and rights than the government has to over them. This type of a government requires an informed and responsible public; it requires us to trust each person to do what is right for themselves and their family. In order to have a limited government, you have to hold a great deal of trust in the average person. I trust that I know better for myself than my Senator or my President. I feel the same way about my neighbors and my friends. This is part of why I am a conservative. This inherent public trust carries over into our politicians. Ronald Reagan was a big time truster - according to Reagan speechwriter Peter Robinson, Reagan would trust those he appointed to do their job according to their ability and where they were the experts, he would trust their knowledge and their judgment. We on the right want to trust our political leaders. We are appalled when politicians prove untrustworthy and in most cases the grassroots will go after our own. Forgiveness for betrayal of trust takes a long time - hence why Newt Gingrich has only begun to regain traction as a viable voice in the mid-2000s.

Perhaps this above anything else is why we on the right are hurt so much when a politician shows an unsavory side. It has been ingrained in our psyche that trust is the foundation for good government - trust in the people and trust in our political leaders to not abuse what little power we have allotted to them. When they fall - when they steal, lie, cheat, or all around violate the public trust conservatives are heartbroken. At least, I know that I am.

We rally towards people who give the appearance of all around trustworthiness. This is why Mitt Romney faltered in 2008, conservatives did not trust that he was honest about his opinions. This is why Mike Huckabee failed to gain traction in 2008, conservatives did not trust him to be fiscally conservative. This is why even Republicans began to have a low opinion of George W. Bush, because he did not follow through on all the limits to our government that he had promised. This is part of why John McCain succeeded - he was trustworthy, always sticking to his opinion and his values even in the face of ridicule.

This is the problem with playing with the politics of trust. "Do as I say, not as I do" will never work for a Republican. It should not for anyone, for that matter - but it becomes especially problematic when you run on a platform of family values and trust in the people.

This has been cross-posted at Newman for Maryland

Sunday, June 21, 2009

On Political Views

A person's political beliefs change throughout their lives. Most people are more liberal in their youth and become more conservative as they age. Winston Churchill once said, "Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains."

Before I could vote, at 17, I flirted with anarchism. I believed in my heart that government does not matter, so long as the people are of a strong moral character. I believed that our nation could succeed without a government. I was mistaken - not everyone has a strong moral character. As such, we need laws to protect us from one another - straightforward laws protecting us from attack, murder, or theft. From there, the natural progression of my opinions shifted in an unnatural direction - directly to liberalism.

It may seem as an odd shift, from an anarchist to a liberal. Yet, I shifted towards the liberal end of the spectrum entirely because of my views on social issues. I was a "social progressive" at 18 who believed in legalization of anything and everything to a fault. My thoughts never visited the fiscal end of the spectrum and on foreign policy, I was mostly apathetic but leaned towards opposition to the views of the Republican President who our nation had just elected. I was angry and still felt that the election was stolen by the corrupt President Bush. If I had allowed my anger to subside and had thought about the situation I would have realized something important. Vice President Gore had served in office for 8 years of relative peace and economic prosperity - the fact that the election was close showed a weakness in his candidacy that should have made me, as a liberal, angry at him. But, I digress.

There are some who became neo-conservatives after September 11, 2001. I was not among those people, but the event did change me. I was a freshman in college when it happened. It scared me - and I was happy that we had a President who acted decisively in the face of danger. I still disagreed with him, but he was the President and I supported him in the defense of our nation. A few weeks after September 11th, I saw the media go from fawning over the President to attacking him at every turn. We had went from a nation united - into one being torn apart by unnecessary attacks on the intelligence and honesty of our President. It upset me and I began to feel sorry for this man whom I used to despise. I was not yet on the right, but I was moving there. Around this same time, my faith began to shift and be tested. I began to doubt the divinity of Jesus Christ. For a while, I believed that my Messiah was merely a man, not man and divine. What was interesting about that - I never once doubted the resurrection of Christ.

Towards the end of my sophomore year in college, I made a great many mistakes. I was in a relationship with a woman who consumed my life and it led to my ignoring the things which mattered most - my family, my faith, and my studies. After we broke up, I took inventory and had an epiphany. I realized there are certain important parts of my life and that they are to be treasured. The seeds of social conservatism were laid and I began to question much of what I thought about politics. My crisis of faith came to an end as well and I never again questioned the divinity of Christ.

As time progressed, my views became more and more socially conservative and hawkish in my views of foreign policy. My views on abortion became more complicated by the realization that I could not with a clean conscience define when a life began myself. My views on same-sex marriage became changed as I came to the mindset that the Constitution did not ban the act of legislating morality - merely it banned the intervention of the government into church affairs. By the 2004 election - I had changed my voter registration to Republican and voted proudly for President George W. Bush.

Through my introduction into social conservatism I began to look into all that I could read. I read about all manner of conservative thought - from libertarianism to modern Dixicrat thought. This continued as I joined the College Republicans my senior year of college and remained modestly active during my two years of graduate school. My march towards conservativism had become complete. Towards the end of my graduate career - I had begun shifting towards the view of that the government which governs best, governs least. I began to realize that private solutions always work better than public / governmental solutions. In that vein - certain parts of my social conservatism primarily with regards to my views on drug legalization and same-sex marriage began to subside and while my views on foreign policy had not changed much, I became more libertarian in my thinking on the whole. Which is where I sit today.

I consider myself a pragmatic strict constructionist. I believe in a stricter interpretation of our Constitution, but I believe we must be pragmatic in our approach to governence. My views on particular issues - they are defined here. Why do I tell this story? Because it helps to paint a picture and lets my readers know who I am as a person. I'm a man - I'm not perfect and my thoughts have changed over time. I have not always been the man I am today and I'm proud that I've been able to grow and change over time. I may not always hold the exact same views I hold today - but I have finally reached a point where I understand my values. I hope this helps my readers understand me a little better. Thank you.

Cross posted at Newman for Maryland

Thursday, June 18, 2009

Iranian Democracy


I support democracy in Iran. Every person across the world deserves the opportunity to elect their own leaders and to be free from tyranny. I stand with the protestors. I stand in support of the people on the street who are standing against the dictatorship that has held onto the people since 1979. As with the rest of the world, I will be watching the news closely to see if the will of the people can be discerned from the government run machine in Iran and be actually upheld. I also hope and pray that Mousavi, who has become a central figure in the fight for democracy, is the agent of change that he is trying to present himself to be.

If you are on Twitter, consider making your icon green to show solidarity in a subtle way with the people of Iran.

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Conservative Majority?

According to a recent Gallup poll, conservatives are the single largest ideological group in these United States. Conservatives are 40% of the population, with moderates at 35% and liberals at 21%.

There are a few interesting points to this poll. First - 18-29 year olds are just as likely to call themselves conservative as liberal (30% vs 31%). Also, both males and females are more likely to call themselves conservative than liberal.

This actually confirms that which Republicans like Mike Pence and Pat Toomey have been saying all along - if Republicans acted more conservative, especially fiscally, they would do better. Let's see if they learn from this.

Monday, June 1, 2009

On Dr. George Tiller's Death

One of three doctors in these United States who perform late term abortions was murdered over the weekend. Dr. George Tiller was a target in the past of protest and another assassination attempt. In addition to the damage this does to his community, his family, and his congregation (Tiller was murdered while at church) - this does major damage to the "pro-life" movement.

Any time an advocate of abortion is murdered, it damages the pro-life movement. Opposition can take the form of protest, letter writing, pushing for legislation, etc - but the taking of another person's life is contrary to the type of movement that pro-life supporters are endorsing. Taking a man's life in order to further your political agenda is never right. As the National Right to Life Committee puts it -
...the National Right to Life Committee unequivocally condemns any such acts of violence regardless of motivation. The pro-life movement works to protect the right to life and increase respect for human life. The unlawful use of violence is directly contrary to that goal.
It diminishes a movement when people use violence to intimidate or quell political opposition. It is especially detrimental when that movement relies on its strong support for the sanctity of human life. I hope that this act of senseless violence does not cause an ideology that in its purest form is based in love - to be diminished or destroyed.