Old Line Elephant Maryland Conservative Blog

14May/1281

A Question


Serious question: How is Barack Obama's position on same-sex marriage different from Dick Cheney's position? Both support legalization of same-sex marriage. Both view it as an issue each state needs to decide, not a federal issue. I see no difference.

EDIT: I've heard the argument that it was bolder for Obama to say something because he's President and that Cheney said nothing as Vice President. That is false. First, Cheney did say he supported same-sex marriage on the state-by-state level while Vice President. Here's an excerpt from an article in August 2004 from Associated Baptist Press:

During a morning campaign stop in Davenport, Iowa, Cheney indicated that he was maintaining the same position on legalizing same-sex marriage that he espoused during the 2000 presidential campaign -- that the decision should be left up to individual states. He also publicly acknowledged, reportedly for the first time, that his daughter, Mary, who works in his campaign, is a lesbian.

When an audience member asked him what he personally believes about gay marriage, according to a White House transcript of the event, Cheney responded: "Lynne and I have a gay daughter, so it's an issue that our family is very familiar with…. With respect to the question of relationships, my general view is that freedom means freedom for everyone. People ought to be … free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to."

Second, for a Republican Vice President with a President who supports a Federal Marriage Amendment to come out on this issue is a gutsier move than Obama saying, "It's a state issue..." among a party more supportive of the issue. So, I ask again - what's the difference in their stance on the issue? None.

11May/1262

Quick Hits – 5/11/12

I've read a bunch of random news articles recently - so decided to compile the ones I'm interested and hope that you are too. Here we go:

Other interesting news I miss? Let me know in the comments section.

1May/12Off

Retro Old Line Elephant: In Defense of Term Limits

Originally posted February 10, 2010 - I still support term limits, although this specific legislation is a little outdated

In 2010, Delegate James King (R) proposed HB660, which would bring up to a vote a Constitutional amendment to implement 2 term limits for the General Assembly, Comptroller, Attorney General, and Governor. Over at Red Maryland, Brian Griffiths made some valid arguments about term limits, but I respectfully disagree.

The central point to Mr. Griffiths; argument is that Maryland will become like California, where deficits are out of control because the only memory left in the system is that maintained by unelected political insiders. While partially true - it fails to note a few key elements of the term limit proposal. First, the assumption is that Maryland will automatically fall into the trap that California has fallen into - he fails to note the number of other States which are doing just fine with term limits. Only 30% of States have legislative term limits, yet in 2010, 4 of the lowest unemployment rates in the US are from States with legislative term limits. The number one and number four lowest State budget deficit as a percentage of their general fund...have legislative term limits.

Second, the system does not work well as is. We have the same people in office for decades voting the same way in a rarely changing legislature. With term limits it allows people the freedom to enter into office with their own individual agenda to hope to accomplish, and not be as beholden to the party establishment. People will be able vote based on their conscience and not merely based on party whipping. The concept of citizen legislators is something to which we should all strive. Politics should not be a career path - politics can not be the only thing that defines ones life. But, I've discussed this before, so I digress.

Third, I agree with Griffiths on his other proposed reforms. Single member legislative districts and independent redistricting are great ideas. I feel that a combination of reforms are necessary to fix our legislature and our government. Term limits will minimize permanent politicians; single member districts would make each legislator more directly accountable; and independent redistricting will prevent the Democratic establishment from removing all the Republican leaning districts.

Now, to deal with the undue influence of lobbyists? I propose that we require State legislators to publicly declare any relative, former staff member, or personal connection who is a declared lobbyist on any level of government. By publicly declare, I mean that they should list those connections on the official webspace provided them by the State of Maryland. Also, we should require that State legislators and their staff are required to wait at a minimum of 24 months following the end of their service to the State to become a State or federal lobbyist. These are just two proposals, but I am sure there are other common sense, Constitutionally sound reforms we can come up with reasonable limits and open information.

Preventing undue influence by "professional staffers" I think is less of an issue than Mr. Griffiths seems to appear. Historic Congressional data suggests that the average staff person serves in office for approximately 5 to 6 years, compared to the average term of a Congressman of 10 years. I've never worked in a legislative office, so I can not discuss with confidence on the culture. All I know is that if I were a newly elected legislator that I would only want minimal carryovers and staff that was dedicated to assistance with legislative research. With term limits, aides would be focused less on those activities that many legislators do to bolster reelection bids (the press releases, mass mailings, etc) and more on the job of helping the legislator...legislate.

Now, this is not the perfect proposal, I think bringing this idea forward is the right idea. I would be more supportive of 3 terms for State Legislatures to allow for more memory in the Legislature, but even openly discussing the possibility is a step in the right direction. Openly debating the pros and cons of term limits is good and healthy.

23Apr/12Off

Baltimore County Petitions Go Online

Baltimore County conservatives fought hard to try to overturn recent legislation. They failed in that endeavor, but learned a lot about the process - also about how flawed the current process is. For Statewide referendums you need 3% of voters from the previous election to sign - that number is 10% in Baltimore County. Oddly enough, it's easier to change the charter than to overturn legislation on the ballot in Baltimore County. So, the group BaltoCoPetitions is online now with downloadable petitions. Here's their press release:

A non-partisan group of Baltimore County citizens have launched a new website, baltocopetitions.com, to support their petition efforts. The site is modeled after the statewide website, mdpetitions.com, which successfully petitioned the Maryland Dream Act to referendum last year partly through the use of an online
petition form. The group?s leaders believe the website will help citizens have a viable petition process on referendums of county bills and charter amendments.

The baltocopetitions.com website allows petition signers and circulators to enter their identifying information and have access to a printable blank copy of the petition. The site will allow for multiple petitions to be posted. One of the two primary organizers, Ann Miller of Phoenix said, “Baltocopetitions.com supports the citizens? role in the system of checks and balances by allowing the people to have the ?nal say at the ballot box on legislation passed on the county level.”

The group formed in February after the passage of a controversial county bill despite fervent public input. The group then organized to petition the bill to referendum. Ms. Miller said, “We discovered at that time that the requirements for referendum petitions in the county is over three times more stringent than it is on the state level, making referendums virtually impossible in Baltimore County.” It was this, coupled with the fact that no county referendum has ever succeeded in Baltimore County history, that prompted the other primary organizer, Al Nalley of Catonsville, to initiate a charter amendment petition to lower the referendum requirements. The organizers say that the development of the website was just a natural progression from that point. Mr. Nalley said, “The petition process will become increasingly important to protect our rights in a county where one party has an overwhelming majority of the elected positions.”

The group is looking for county voters interested in signing the charter amendment as well as those willing to go a step further and collect petition signatures for the effort, which will run through early July. Circulators do not need to be county residents, but must be over age 18. The website is www.baltocopetitions.com. The coordinators can also be reached by email at baltocopetitions@comcast.net or by phone at 443-595-7020.

18Apr/12Off

On Whether the MD General Assembly Should Hold a Special Session

No, the'll just raise our taxes and not actually deal with the deficit.