Maryland

Short Term Weakening Of Potential Democratic Presidential Nominees

Ronald 1 Comment

The midterm elections of 2014 have had the effect of creating a short term weakening of many potential Democratic Presidential nominees.

Hillary Clinton was involved in a lot of campaigning for fellow Democrats, who mostly lost their Senate and Gubernatorial races.

Joe Biden also was hurt, simply by association with President Obama, as the loss of the Senate was a blow to the administration and the Vice President.

But other potential Democratic nominees also suffered from the midterm elections.

Virginia Senator Mark Warner, considered a moderate alternative to most other potential Democratic candidates, struggled to win a close victory over Ed Gillespie, when polls indicated he would have an easy ride to reelection, so this might have affected any plans he had to run for President.

Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, also considering a Presidential bid, was hurt by the surprise defeat of his Lieutenant Governor, Anthony Brown for the Governorship. losing to Larry Hogan, the Republican nominee in a very “blue” state. Maryland has had only two previous GOP Governors in the past 50 years, Spiro Agnew and Bob Ehrlich.

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, also flirting with running for President, was not helped by a surprising Republican victory in the Gubernatorial race, with Charlie Baker defeating State Attorney General Martha Coakley, who also lost the 2010 Senate race to Scott Brown, who succeeded Ted Kennedy. Massachusetts has been strange in the reality that it has elected a number of Republican Governors, while the Democrats dominate the state legislature, and House and Senate races, with the brief exception of Scott Brown for three years.

It is likely that these temporary blows, to five leading potential nominees on the Democratic side, will have no long lasting effect, with the Democrats still having an overwhelming edge in the Electoral College for the 2016 Presidential election.

A Rational, Sensible Proposal: Two Californias, Two Texases, Two Floridas, Two New Yorks, Northern Virginia And Washington DC Unified As A State!

Ronald Leave a comment

There has been a lot of speculation and discussion about the creation of new states, and this was discussed in a post on July 4 on this blog.

However, despite the move toward a ballot measure to create SIX Californias, it will NOT happen, and neither will five Texases, nor three New Yorks, nor two Marylands, nor two Illinoises, nor two Pennsylvanias, and even another suggestion, two Colorados!

However, it is NOT unreasonable to suggest that there could be a division of the following states into two states each–California, Texas, Florida, and New York.

A Northern and Southern California would make sense, as the state is overly large, with 38 million people, with a division being the North California state would include San Francisco and Sacramento and the Silicon Valley, and Central California, while South California would include Los Angeles and San Diego, and the heavily populated areas around LA and San Diego.

A Northern and Southern Texas might be divided along the following lines—North Texas being the Panhandle and West Texas along with Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area; and South Texas including East Texas, Austin, Houston, and San Antonio and down to the Rio Grande River boundary line except for the Western area around El Paso, which would be in North Texas.

A division of New York would be the New York City counties, along with Long Island, and Westchester and Rockland Counties, a total of nine counties, with the other 53 counties North of the city of New York (including Albany, Buffalo, Syracuse, Rochester) being named New Amsterdam, the original Dutch colony name.

A division of Florida would be Northern Florida and Central Florida as North Florida, and South Florida being the counties of the Keys, Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach Counties.

Finally, a good idea would be to add Northern Virginia to Washington DC, name it Columbia, and revive the old failed amendment for statehood for DC, by adding those northern Virginia suburbs to the nation’s capital, and ending the discrimination against the 700,000 residents of DC, by making them part of a state, with the state known as North Virginia!

No more Congressional seats in the House of Representatives would be created, except for the addition of the District of Columbia to the Northern Virginia suburbs, so there would be 436 House members, instead of 435. However, there would then be 55 states, creating ten new US Senators; requiring 56 instead of 51 Senators to be a majority; 61 instead of 55 to end filibuster on executive branch nominations; and 66 instead of 60 Senators to end all other filibusters.

Commentary on this is welcome!

Nations Breaking Up: Could It Happen Among American States?

Ronald 1 Comment

We are living in a world where nation states have broken up, and where the potential for more such breakups is increasing.

Yugoslavia broke up into multiple nations in the 1990s, as did the old Soviet Union, and Czechoslovakia.

Sudan broke up into two nations in 2011, and Iraq seems on the road to a similar breakup, sadly through religious revolution, fanaticism and loss of life.

There has been the threat in the past of Quebec breaking away from Canada, although that seems less likely now.

Scotland will decide whether to split from the United Kingdom in a referendum this September.

There are threats of the breakup of Belgium and Spain, where strong nationality groups wish for independence.

At the same time, there has been secessionist talk by right wing groups in Texas, and even outgoing Governor Rick Perry talked up the idea a few years back, and then abandoned such talk.

But seriously, without violence, not like the Civil War in the 1860s, there are ideas floating out on the political wilderness of the possible future breakup of eight states, and the theoretical creation of an additional 16 states as a result, requiring an additional 32 US Senators, making the total possibly 132, instead of the present 100, in the upper chamber, while not changing the number of members of the House of Representatives.

These possibilities are as follows:

California–six states instead of one—Jefferson (rural Northern California); North California (centered about Sacramento, the state capital); Silicon Valley (San Francisco and San Jose); Central California (Bakersfield, Fresno and Stockton); West California (Los Angeles and Santa Barbara); and South California (San Diego and Orange Counties).

Texas–five states instead of one—New Texas (Austin, the present state capital and College Station); Trinity (Dallas, Fort Worth, Arlington and Tyler); Gulfland (Houston, Corpus Christi, Galveston); Plainland (Lubbock, Amarillo, Waco, Abilene); and El Norte (San Antonio, El Paso, Brownsville).

New York–three states instead of one—Suburban counties of Southeast New York (Westchester, Rockland, Dutchess and Orange Counties) and Long Island (Nassau and Suffolk); New York City (Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, Bronx, Staten Island); and Upstate New York (including the rest of the state, including Rochester, Buffalo, Syracuse, Binghamton).

Florida—two states instead of one—South Florida (the Keys, Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach); and Northern Florida (the rest of the state).

Illinois–two states instead of one—Chicago and near suburbs; and the rest of the state.

Pennsylvania–two states instead of one—Philadelphia and near suburbs; and the rest of the state, including Pittsburgh and Harrisburg).

Virginia–two states instead of one—Northern Virginia suburbs of Washington, DC; and the rest of the state.

Maryland–two states instead of one—Baltimore, Annapolis, and Washington DC suburban counties (including Montgomery and Prince George’s County) and three rural eastern shore counties; and Western Maryland.

Is any of this likely to happen? Probably not, but great food for thought. It would require revolutionary changes in the US Senate, and would create new issues of which party would benefit, the Democrats or the Republicans, since the major metropolitan areas would be separate from the more rural counties in these eight states, and it would create a new dynamic in American politics hard to predict long term!

Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley Goes To New Hampshire And Iowa: Sign Of Presidential Planning, Despite Hillary Clinton!

Ronald 2 Comments

Just as almost everyone imaginable seems to think Hillary Clinton is running for President, and will be the next President, we are seeing the emergence of Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley as a potential challenger to Clinton for the Democratic Presidential nomination.

O’Malley makes the case that he is simply preparing If Hillary, ultimately, does not run, and he is boning up on domestic and foreign policy issues, and emphasizing his broad experience as an executive, as Mayor of Baltimore for eight years, and now finishing up eight years as Governor of Maryland.

But is is certainly possible that O’Malley might decide to challenge Clinton if she does run, and that would place him on a short list of potential Vice Presidential nominees, and therefore, the possible heir apparent to Clinton after eight years as Vice President.

O’Malley’s candidacy is, certainly, more legitimate than that of former Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer, who has seemed more of a long shot, and just did a lot of damage in the past week with his comments about Eric Cantor and Dianne Feinstein.

All the other potential challengers on paper are officeholders, making the job of running for the Presidency a lot more difficult, with the list including New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, New York Senator Kirsten Gillbrand, Virginia Senator Mark Warner, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders.

Of course, there is also Vice President Joe Biden, who would become the immediate frontrunner in the Democratic battle for President were Hillary Clinton to shock just about everyone, and announce she was not running for the Presidency.

Meanwhile, Martin O’Malley is drawing attention by making appearances and speeches in the early caucus and primary states of Iowa and New Hampshire, and is making a good impression upon citizens!

Marco Rubio Hints At Running For President No Matter What!

Ronald 2 Comments

Florida Republican Senator Marco Rubio has hinted very broadly that he plans to run for President in 2016, come hell or high water!

He has indicated that if he runs, he will not consider dropping out and running instead for another six year term in the US Senate, that he will be in the race for the duration.

One can be sure, however, that there would be a move in the Florida legislature to allow him to run for President and the US Senate, similar to what was offered Lyndon B. Johnson in 1960 and Joe Lieberman in 2000 when they ran for Vice President and for another Senate term, so that seems like not a true statement that Rubio is making about his commitment to the Presidential race.

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul has tried to arrange that Kentucky would allow him to run for both President and re-election to the Senate, but so far has been unable to accomplish that goal.

Rubio is challenging the establishment in both parties, seemingly ignoring the fact that former Florida Governor Jeb Bush may yet run, and is favored by the “Establishment”, and attacking Hillary Clinton on her performance as Secretary of State, declaring he would give her an “F” in that role.

Rubio points out his ten years in the state legislature of Florida, including being House Speaker, and his four years in the Senate, and his age, reaching 43 later this month.

Rubio has the advantages of good looks, his youth, his Hispanic heritage as the son of Cuban refugees, and his looking less objectionable in his statements, actions, and persona than either Ted Cruz or Rand Paul, his major Tea Party rivals.

But he also comes across as not overly bright, and as much too extreme for the majority of the American people.

A worry, though, is that, were he to be the GOP nominee, representing the third largest state, and the ultimate swing state in a Presidential election therefore, and running against Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden, the most likely Democratic nominees, he could argue his youth against their ages of 69 and 74 respectively, and that he represents the 21st century (the future), against the 20th century (the past).

For a 45 year old against a 69 or 74 year old opponent, those factors COULD be a major problem for the Democrats, and argues for a younger nominee, such as Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley!

The Worst Governor In Florida History: Rick Scott!

Ronald 1 Comment

Florida Governor Rick Scott may have gained less attention than other “Bully” Republican Governors elected in 2010, but he is, in many ways, the absolutely worst governor in America, and easily, the worst Governor Florida has ever had in modern history!

Florida has had some really outstanding Governors, including Leroy Collins (1955-1961); Reubin Askew (1971-1979); Bob Graham (1979-1987); Lawton Chiles (1991-1999); and Charlie Crist (2007-2011). Republican Governors Claude Kirk (1967-1971) and Bob Martinez (1987-1991) both lost re-election and were controversial. Jeb Bush (1999-2007) had his controversies, but did an excellent job dealing with eight hurricanes during his time in office.

Rick Scott came into office with the record of having paid a record fine for his Medicare corruption as the leader of the nation’s largest hospital chain, and should have gone to prison instead, for his misdeeds. He won the Governorship by only 50,000 votes, the smallest margin in Florida history.

Scott spent $73 million of his own money to get himself elected, despite a personality that was and is a turn off to most people who have any intelligence or compassion for others. It was an example of how backward Floridians were, that they would allow a convicted felon to become their Governor.

Scott has done massive damage on voting rights, privacy rights, public schools and higher education, environmental protection, and health care. His party controls three fourths of the seats in the legislature, and has taken Florida backwards at a time when it is about to become the third largest state in population.

Scott has made it harder for Florida citizens to vote; for those who are unemployed to gain unemployment compensation; for renters to avoid eviction; and made it easier for borrowers to be charged high interest rates on short term loans.

Scott has refused to accept Medicaid money for the poor, despite the fact that the federal government will pay all the costs for three years, and 90 percent after that. He fought ObamaCare tooth and nail, and still makes it difficult for citizens to apply for it.

Scott rejected federal money for high speed rail, while creating another state university, Florida Polytechnic University, which undermines the University of South Florida market for students. His administration spends less per public school student than when he took office, and promotes private charter schools over public schools. He has undermined respect for a liberal arts education, and teachers at all levels have been treated with disrespect by his education policies.

Scott has undermined the environment protections put into effect by his predecessors, and sees Florida as equivalent of a corporation that needs to be given freedom to abuse in every way possible, including health insurance rates, higher electric rates, and tax breaks for businesses that have not created the promised number of jobs.

Scott has demonstrated little concern for individual rights, wanting drug testing for state employees and welfare recipients; purging voter rolls, and restricting early voting. Luckily, there has been reaction against these ideas by courts, county elections supervisors, and the public.

The man has no compassion or empathy, and comes across as a cold, calculating individual, and it makes one wonder how Floridians could possibly consider him for a second term, but Scott is willing to spend whatever it takes to fool people, and to keep the vote numbers down by any means he can conjure up.

Scott gains less attention nationally than Scott Walker of Wisconsin, Rick Perry of Texas, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, and other “Bully” Governors, all of whom are considered Presidential possibilities, but IF Rick Scott is re-elected, do not be surprised if he tries to bring his corruption, mean spirit, callousness, and lack of empathy or compassion to a national campaign for President.

One might say, wait, there is already Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio as potential candidates for President from Florida! The answer is: So What? Scott has never let ego or ethics get in his way in the past, and do not be surprised he might mount a national campaign if he defeats former Governor Charlie Crist, who has switched parties, and faces a massive challenge to be elected Governor as a Democrat, in a state with such a large Republican dominance in the state legislature!

The problem is that, even if Crist were to win, he is likely to face a hardline legislature, where only his veto might sometimes be effective, as Florida politics now represents one of the most backward agendas of any state, despite the fact that the state has nearly 20 million citizens, including many elderly, poor, sick, and disabled!

This is NOT a state where anyone who has a choice to move would decide to remain. YES, the weather is great, but the future for the elderly, the poor, the sick and the disabled, and for children in general, is gloomy!

Maryland, anyone?

The Ideal Alternatives For The Presidential Election Of 2016–Martin O’Malley Vs. Jon Huntsman!

Ronald 16 Comments

It seems clear that Hillary Clinton is the likely Democratic choice for President in 2016, and that Jeb Bush might be able to overcome Tea Party opposition in the Republican Party, if he decides to announce for President.

Both Clinton and Bush are certainly “qualified” to be President, but is the best choice to go back to two families that have already dominated the White House, with five times a Bush on the national ticket and two times a Clinton, and with Hillary being a national figure in the Senate and the State Department since her husband’s Presidency? Even Barbara Bush, the former First Lady, stated that there are more than a few families that are qualified to give us Presidents!

And with Hillary being 69 and Jeb Bush 63 in 2016, and both being nationally known personalities for 20-25 years each, is this the “ideal” choices to oppose each other? And adding to this, is Joe Biden, as wonderful as he is, but 74 in 2016, and being on the national scene as a potential Presidential candidate since 1987, and in the Senate beginning in 1973, an ideal alternative either?

The answer is NO, that the American people really deserve a “new generation” of leadership, as this author has stated numerous times, despite his admiration of Hillary and Joe, and respect, if not admiration, for Jeb!

So, looking elsewhere, and reiterating what this author has said numerous times on this blog, who would be the BEST alternatives for 2016—giving America a truly REAL good choice, of two qualified, new generation leaders, who are totally competent, accomplished, sane, decent, proven ability, and a record, both as Governors of their states, which shows their exceptional training and background to be the 45th President of the United States?

That “ideal” election would be:

Maryland Governor and former Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley for the Democrats

Former Utah Governor and Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman for the Republicans

These two candidates, competing against each other for the Presidency, would restore faith in the two party system, as they are, without question, the BEST of their newer generation to be President of the United States!

Yes, there are other alternative Democrats, such as Senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Cory Booker of New Jersey, Mark Warner of Virginia, and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, along with New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, and former Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer.

But none of these have the qualities of leadership that O’Malley has demonstrated in sixteen years of executive leadership! And O’Malley would be only 53 if he ran in 2016, turning 54 just before the inauguration in 2017! O’Malley has hinted that he might run, even with Hillary Clinton far ahead, and Joe Biden a distant second in polls, but both a generation older than O’Malley. Remember that O’Malley heads a state rated number one in education, and a center of real growth and prosperity!

Huntsman, as this author has stated innumerable times in the past few years, is superbly qualified, having been a very successful Governor of Utah, a basically conservative state which benefited from his leadership in state government. And then, Huntsman was patriotic enough and superbly qualified enough to be Barack Obama’s Ambassador to China, and not just as a political appointment, which ambassadorships often are, but as a brilliant diplomat and master of the Mandarin Chinese language and culture! He would be only age 56 when he would be campaigning for President, and be 57 about two months after the inauguration, so he also represents a “new” generation of leadership, as O’Malley does!

This man is highly intelligent, a moderate and mainstream conservative, who would be a credit to the historic Republican Party, which has fallen upon hard times, and now has lunatics and whackos and demagogues as its so called “leading” Presidential figures and spokesmen in Congress and the state governorships! All other Republicans considered candidates for the White House in 2012 and 2016 are true embarrassments, and give one a nightmare thought that any of these characters might be President! Only Jeb Bush does not fit into this category, other than Huntsman himself.

The odds that Huntsman can somehow end up as the GOP nominee for President are as long, if not longer, than O’Malley overcoming Hillary and Joe. But it would be good for the nation, and for the party system, and we could sleep at night, confident of strong, principled, competent leadership with a President O’Malley or a President Huntsman taking the oath as President on January 20, 2017!

September 17: A Day To Honor And A Day To Mourn!

Ronald 10 Comments

As we wake up on September 17, we mourn the deaths of 12 people in the US Navy Yards in Washington, DC, by a crazed gunman, who loved violent video games and had access to guns despite two incidents in his past, that should have made him ineligible for buying or possessing firearms, another example of the violence and insanity that permeates American society, and endangers all of us, including our President, who has had more death threats and plots against him than any occupant of the Oval Office!

And we awaken to the anniversary of three historic events that stand out, two that we can be proud of, and one which we continue to mourn!

On this day, in 1787, 226 years ago, the Founding Father generation, the true statesmen of our history, signed the Constitution, and we were on our way to the creation of the greatest government ever to walk the face of the earth, with the understanding that compromise had been necessary to achieve progress, something we have lost sight of in these difficult times we are living through.

On this day, in 1978, 35 years ago, President Jimmy Carter finished the accomplishment of bringing together the leaders of Israel and Egypt in the Camp David Accords. These were two nations that had gone to war against each other multiple times, who now engaged in a peace treaty that still endures in these unstable times in the Middle East.

Sadly, this is also the 151st Anniversary of the bloodiest battle in American history, the Battle of Antietam in Maryland in 1862 during the Civil War, which led to the death of almost 4,000 soldiers, and a total of 23,000 casualties in total.

So there is a lot to reflect upon and think about on this historic day, September 17, as we mourn the death of more gun violence victims!

The Kennedy Half Century Began 53 Years Ago Today!

Ronald 2 Comments

On this day in 1960, John F. Kennedy was nominated for President by the Democratic Party at their national convention in Los Angeles. He went on to a very tight and much debated close victory over Richard Nixon, including widely accepted accusations that his election was fixed in Chicago by Mayor Richard J. Daley!

Kennedy’s impact on the nation was massive, and made greater by the fact that he was assassinated, and even though we learned about his controversial sex life in the White House, and he has faced growing criticism on his policies and actions in office as the years have gone by, it is still a reality that he is adored by vast numbers of the American people, and made out to be an icon!

His brother, Robert Kennedy, was also martyred after a controversial career as Attorney General under his brother, a short Senate career, and his assassination while seeking the Presidency in 1968 to finish the work of his brother.

And then, there was Ted Kennedy, the youngest brother, who was first seen as a lightweight in the Senate, had the scandalous Chappaquiddick incident in which a woman died in his car as it was being driven by a drunk Kennedy, and was totally defeated in his later attempt to take the 1980 Presidential nomination of his party away from President Jimmy Carter.

But Kennedy went on to a distinguished, record setting career of 47 and a half years in the Senate, honored as the “Lion” of the Senate, and regarded as one of the greatest Senate giants in its more than two century history as an institution.

And then there was Joseph Kennedy II, son of Robert Kennedy, who served in the US House of Representatives from Massachusetts for 12 years; Patrick Kennedy, son of Ted, who served in the House from Rhode Island for 16 years; and now Joseph Kennedy III, grandson of Robert Kennedy and son of former Congressman Joe, who serves in the House of Representatives from Massachusetts since the beginning of this year.

And there have been other Kennedys or Kennedy relatives who have been in public office, including Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, daughter of Robert Kennedy, who served as Lieutenant Governor of Maryland; and JFK brother in law Sargant Shriver, who headed the Peace Corps, the War On Poverty, and was Ambassador to France.

So the Kennedy half century of influence is marked today by the JFK nomination for President in 1960, and it continues in politics and in history!

The “New” Generation Of Democrats: Led By Andrew Cuomo Of New York And Martin O’Malley Of Maryland!

Ronald Leave a comment

As the next Presidential term begins in a few days, the focus has been on Vice President Joe Biden and outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as the two most likely front runners for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 2016.

While certainly that is possible, it is also conceivable that a “New Generation” of leadership may be emerging to contest their front runner status, and just might be the alternative to either Biden or Clinton.

Two Northeastern Governors have likely plans to announce for President, and both are working very hard to establish their credentials in similar fields of endeavor.

These two gentlemen are New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley.

Both have become leaders in promoting gay rights and gay marriage in their states, and both have taken leadership in the area of gun regulations in wake of the Sandy Hook Massacre in Connecticut.

Both are very bright, articulate leaders of the future, whether or not they enter the contest for the Presidency, and both have extensive executive experience in public office.

Both will certainly be heard from in the future, and will be discussed regularly over time on this blog! So stay tuned!