Listening to the choir

I know that Elbert has a number of religious themes in what he writes, but this post isn’t a case of the choir being in a church – unless you consider government a religion.

This was yet another blog idea which landed in my mailbox; as always it took root in my fertile mind and began the questioning process. I haven’t talked a whole lot about Delaware lately, but this item was chosen especially for my friends there:

Governor-elect Jack Markell will host a public town hall meeting, Tuesday, December 16, to solicit ideas from Delawareans as to how his administration can make state government as effective and efficient as possible. Due to the national economic downturn, Delaware is facing significant revenue shortfalls over the next two fiscal years, and Gov.-elect Markell is looking for innovative, out-of-the-box ideas to cut spending.

The meeting will be held from 5 to 6:30 p.m. in the DART/DTC auditorium on 119 Lower Beech St., which is in the Wilmington Riverfront area.

Please feel free to share this invitation with persons who you think would be interested in attending.

All right Jack, consider your request done. Now I have a question on the philosophy of this townhall meeting that your incoming administration should consider.

First of all, this announcement of yours brought to mind something that you said when you first announced to be Governor of the First State. I’ve been on Jack’s e-mail list since his Treasurer run in 2006, and it didn’t take me long to comb my archives to find this nugget from June 19, 2008:

I didn’t want to play favorites. I care about every inch of this state, and I will be governor for every single Delawarean. It only makes sense that my campaign will kick-off in every single town. We have great momentum. Up and down the state, my fellow Democrats are telling me they are ready for new ideas, and a new direction. I’m ready to bring new leadership to Dover, and bring bold Democratic solutions to the problems we are facing in cities and towns all over Delaware.

Yet when it’s time to begin to consider what you’re doing to combat Delaware’s budget shortfall, you schedule this town hall meeting in an area where you drew most of your support, at a time hard-working Delaware residents would find inconvenient at best. Perhaps this will make a good backdrop for the on-the-scene news report during the 6:00 evening local news (with film at 11, as the old television saying goes) but to me it would be more like preaching to the choir. Maybe budget cuts aren’t the “bold Democratic solutions” you were thinking about when you signed up to run for the gig, but it’s the hand you’ve been dealt by your Democrat predecessor. Certainly states aren’t alone in having to make hard choices – ask the half-million plus Americans who went to sign up for unemployment benefits a week ago.

Nor is this the example I would expect from a campaigner who made outstanding efforts to reach out to everyone in the state by scheduling 57 campaign events in 57 hours and through his Tour de Delaware. I may disagree with the ideas Jack has, but can’t fault the hard work involved in getting them out on a personal basis (especially as a guy who’s rediscovered the joy of getting the bike out when the weather’s nice over the last summer as my physical shape improved.)

In order to be a governor for everyone in Delaware, I would hope that your budget-cutting meeting isn’t just a one-time deal and that you seek to spend more time listening to your opposition and considering good counter-arguments as they apply to what they have to propose. Had I decided to locate my abode just a few miles north of where I live now I would be one of those you govern over, and you do directly affect many good friends of mine who live just across the Mason-Dixon Line in Sussex County. I’m sure a good deal of the residents at the southern end of the state already have the “red-headed stepchild” complex of being the forgotten part of Delaware.

Here in Maryland Governor O’Malley preaches a “One Maryland” concept but only seems to govern in the interest of those who live within a few miles of the I-95 corridor between Baltimore and Washington. Governor-elect Markell, if you truly want to be a different kind of Democrat it behooves you to meet face-to-face with voters all over your state as you did while campaigning, not just give the time to those who gave you the votes to be elected.

Crossposted from monoblogue.

Fighting words for Big Labor

Since I know there’s friends on the other side of Delaware who have an interest in how the bailout goes, I decided to crosspost my article here too.

Dan Ikenson of the CATO Institute asks a valid question: why do we need a Big Three?

This video is a compilation of the longstanding libertarian group’s argument that the bailout isn’t necessary. In a minute and a half there’s several compelling arguments that there’s more wrong with the Detroit automakers than billions in federal aid can fix. After all, if the Big Three are collectively losing billions a quarter doing things as they have, how long will it be before they’re either back asking for more from the taxpayer or the companies become fully-owned subsidiaries of the federal government? Or both?

Perhaps a better question is why are several other automakers succeeding in manufacturing good-quality cars and trucks at a profit for their respective corporations? It’s not just venerable American nameplates like Ford, Chevrolet, and Dodge being manufactured in America – over the last couple decades they’ve been joined by Honda, Toyota, Nissan, BMW, and soon Kia will open a plant in Georgia. Most of these plants are in the southern part of the country and pay wages which are a fraction of their UAW-organized competitors but still provide a solid living for their workers. And that seems to be where the answer lies.

While it is important to note that the United Auto Workers union has relented to some degree on wages for workers just starting out, the trouble is that with shrinking sales and fewer plants remaining open for more than one shift (if at all) the seniority-laden union work rules simply mean that the newer workers are the ones being laid off; this means wages on the average aren’t dropping significantly. Thus, in order to compete with imports the Big Three has to skimp on some aspect of their lineup. Perhaps the quality is one to two degrees less than their Japanese or Korean counterparts or the items found standard on the imports become expensive (read: profitable) options on the American models. They also may run a year or two behind on design trends, and let’s face it – there’s too many similar models in the Big Three lineups to pique interest.

In years past, automakers expired with nary a peep from Washington. In my youth Detroit actually had the Big Four but the former American Motors Corporation went out of business in the 1980’s leaving the Jeep nameplate the lone survivor as it was absorbed by Chrysler. (They first attempted a merger with the French automaker Renault. We see how well that worked.) AMC was a victim of tough competition from Japanese imports, shoddy workmanship (we used to call them AlMost a Car), and generally odd design – while I think the AMC Javelin is/was a cool-looking car, the appropriately-named Gremlin, Hornet, and Pacer only drew snickers and not buyers. The more senior among us probably remember well the DeSoto or Studebaker, two other long-time nameplates that ran out of buyers and folded their tents decades earlier.

While Detroit thinks that the Big Three are collectively “too big to fail”, the market seems to be dictating otherwise. And without the government bailout, it may be that bankruptcy and merger looms for at least one of the Detroit automakers – however that may also bring a dose of sanity to the labor market and bring the costs for the revamped survivor(s) down to be more competitive with the American-built import nameplates. Let’s allow the market to run its course; yes, there will be some bitter medicine to swallow but that may be the only long-term cure.

Crossposted on monoblogue.

Tough questions for the left (for once)

I have fellow blogger Bob McCarty to thank for this, and it’s definitely something to share with my friends across the line in Delaware who get to see this guy on the ballot twice.

On Thursday, anchorwoman Barbara West of WFTV-TV in Orlando cornered Vice-Presidential nominee and Senator Joe Biden with some great questions regarding ACORN, “spread the wealth”, and Biden’s recent comments about a crisis to test Barack Obama should he be elected. The interview is about 5 minutes long and you can tell that it was all Biden could do to not storm off the set.

Needless to say, this was probably not the best career move for Barbara West, who actually looks like the “bubble-headed bleach blond” for which TV news is famous – those who run the network news outlets certainly won’t take kindly to someone disrespecting their chosen One’s chosen one. Nor would it surprise me if there weren’t a death threat or three in her e-mail from ardent Obama supporters. But you must admit West did her homework and wasn’t content to lob softball questions at a guy who could be a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

I tip my hat to Barbara for doing what the drive-by media should be doing for everyone, not just Republicans.

Crossposted (with the video) on monoblogue.

Does Delaware know Jack?

Not according to a radio ad that I’ve heard on occasion here in Salisbury. Being close by Delaware and with Salisbury being the main media market for the southern end of the state, we do get a lot of spillover from the First State campaigns. (I’m not aware of a companion TV ad; then again I don’t watch the local news channels when many political commercials are aired.) In this case, GOP candidate for Governor Bill Lee questions whether Jack Markell’s business experience that he touts is all that valuable since he ran the ship at what would become the ill-fated Nextel – key among the accusations is that Markell used inside knowledge to dump nearly $2 million in stock. (The site likes to call him “Wall Street Jack”, and given the tanking of the market at-large that might be an effective tactic.)

Obviously the site is a smear site, but it does call into question the costs Delaware taxpayers will shoulder if Markell is elected. (Some of this I went over about a month ago when Delaware held its primary election.) In essence, Markell had two selling points – his terms as State Treasurer and his business experience. It was enough to get him through the primary against the favored candidate of the Democrat establishment (Lieutenant Governor John Carney) but in part this was because Carney didn’t make an issue of Markell’s time in the private sector during the 1990’s.

Still, Bill Lee has an uphill battle in Delaware because, like Maryland, state politics is dictated by a small geographical area with a large population (in their case, New Castle County which is mostly Wilmington and its suburbs.) And while Lee has solidly conservative credentials on the issues, he’s running in a state where Democrats have the advantage in both numbers and money.

(Once in awhile we on the Eastern Shore think out loud about what politics would be like in a greater Delaware that includes our part of Maryland. Maybe we’d be the red state of the region because Wilmington would finally be outvoted.)

Unlike some Republicans higher up the ticket, though, it’s good to know that Bill Lee and his Delaware cohorts are bringing up relevant character issues in the race. While I call it a “smear” website, there is legitimacy in questioning the selling point of your opponent. (Here on the Shore, Andy Harris similarly questions the “independence” of his Democrat opponent knowing that nearly $2 million has come from Democrats inside the Beltway. This is a similar tactic.)

So, my friends in Delaware, I haven’t forgotten you. I’m hoping that the more middle-of-the-road types won’t fall for Jack Markell’s pie-in-the-sky promises and decide to elect someone with a more conservative approach given these times we’re in.

Crossposted on monoblogue.

The First State races: Governor

Once again, I appreciate Elbert allowing me to take some of his space. Feel free to add your two cents if you’re a Delaware voter, and even if you’re not like I’m not!

The third and final part of my look at Delaware’s upcoming election focuses on their highest state office, that of Governor. With current Governor Ruth Ann Minner forced out by term limits, the office is opened up for the first time since 2000.

Four people are on the ballot to succeed Minner, according to the Delaware Department of Elections. However, it’s my understanding that Mike Protack, shown by the DDE on the GOP ballot, is also going to be on the November ballot under the auspices of the Independent Party of Delaware – not without controversy, though. Bill Lee is the second candidate on the Republican site, while State Treasurer Jack Markell and current Lieutenant Governor John Carney make up the Democrat field.

Unlike the last two installments, which dealt with federal offices and were shaped to conform with my personal pet issues, in this edition I’m going to look at issues the candidates themselves emphasize in common, with at least three of them having positions on the issue which I can study and evaluate. Moreover, with the exception of Lee, I can simply link to the appropriate webpage. (Protack has a particular webpage to address issues but it’s more convenient in his case not to blockquote and just paraphrase his main points.) It leaves less for me to clip in and more opportunity for my two cents. There are six common issues which meet the criteria, and it’s also worth noting that the four seem to prioritize their sites according to the importance they deem the issue to the voting public – so I’ll place their ranking with the sextet of common issues.

• Education – except for Markell, all the others had this first. Markell listed it seventh.
• Jobs – Markell had the issue ranked first, Lee and Carney second, and Protack ranked it third.
• Health Care – Protack made this issue second-highest, Lee and Markell third, and Carney placed it fourth.
• Energy – Markell placed this second, Carney third, and Protack sixth. Lee did not go into the issue.
• Government Reform – Lee made this his fourth priority and Protack his third, while Markell placed a similar category of Fiscal Responsibility tenth. Carney did not address the issue, which sort of makes sense because the others are speaking of the current team in charge.
• Public Safety/Crime – Markell laid this in his sixth spot, while Lee and Carney made this seventh.

These are the six issues I’ll compare and contrast the positions on today. Instead of a numerical system, I’ll simply point out who I think has the advantage in each party when I summarize at the end.

Education:

Carney: John divides his education platform into Early Childhood Education, K-12, and Higher Education.

Regarding the ECE proposal, let’s say right up front that I don’t see a real reason to extend formal schooling any earlier in life. Unfortunately, too many parents think of school as a babysitting service which raises their kids from 8 to 3 each weekday and gives them a break to work their job. Carney vows to make this a “priority” and wants to form yet another committee to deal with the issue and (of course) throw more money at the problem. I do applaud the nod to private and non-profit providers at the end, in fact there’s already many that teach children the basics without a single change in the system in place. It’s simply up to the parents who need that service to find them.

Now let’s move up to the “normal” schooling which occurs in K-12. Carney goes through a laundry list of suggestions that seem to have been written by the Delaware State Education Association teachers’ union. For example, what would the criteria for a “master teacher” be, simple seniority? Obviously there would be a revised pay scale for master teachers and methinks it’s not one which saves local school districts money, nor would giving new teachers health benefits immediately. Carney also troubles me by wanting to see the Delaware Department of Education take a more active role in areas parents should control, while on the other hand paying lip service to wanting more parental involvement through enhanced communication. And why do the two Democrats in the race hate the achievement test so much?

Carney seems to think when addressing higher education that there’s not enough communication and opportunity for students, since much of his plan speaks to those concerns. But when he asks the state to create a continuous funding mechanism for Delaware Tech, it’s code for either a funding mandate which has to come from someplace else or a tax for Delaware residents and businesses to pay.

Lee:

Delaware’s school children need a Governor who has the political independence to say that we will pour no more money into a broken education system until we’ve fixed it, until teachers and administrators are held accountable, not just our children. Then we’ll spend what it takes to attract and retain our nation’s best teachers because quality teachers are the key to quality education. Then we’ll give them the authority and tools they need to do their job. One thing that we can do immediately is increase the percentage of our education dollars spent in the classroom, which means more resources for our students and teachers and a forced reduction in administrative costs. We will also protect and preserve a parent’s right to choose their child’s school. That right is under heavy attack from the special interests who thrive in our broken, status-quo, bureaucracy-driven education system. School choice and charter schools are a necessity for parents and children who have been failed by our current system and must be protected.

While it’s obviously more vague and less verbose than the others’ plans, I agree with several key points. Teachers and administrators should be held more accountable because they’re being paid with your money, whether through school taxes or private school tuition. Furthermore, that money should go as closely to the child who’s being educated as possible, not used to hire yet another paper-pusher. And I’m a huge fan of school choice, which is a great way to address the shortcomings of teachers’ unions. The only scary part is talking about spending “what it takes” because I’m doubtful the money is there as things stand now to do so.

Markell: Like Carney, Jack subdivides his educational program but in different order, beginning with higher education, then addressing high-school age children with the concept of workforce education before turning to early childhood. Markell also points out his ideas to attract teachers and deal with special education in this paper and, finally, discusses accountability. In total, it’s about 20 pages of reading so Markell has done his homework.

Much of what Jack advocates has been tried in other states with some success, and imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. But what works in one state may not do so well in Delaware, and it’s worthy of mention that Delaware’s per-pupil spending ranks 8th in the nation but results lag that spending level. Markell believes he can bring more bang for the buck with his plans and also wishes to reduce the amount of control at the state level, which is admirable. Jack is firmly in favor of bringing the worlds of business and education together.

In theory, aligning the interests of business and the learning institutions which train their future employees makes sense. But education shouldn’t be completely about training for the working world; my contention is that true education isn’t complete without a dose of teaching critical thinking. That’s the missing piece of the Markell plan insofar as education is concerned. I do applaud one of Markell’s higher education ideas, though, and that’s the introduction of what he terms early and middle college. Ohio adopted this some years ago and it became possible for some sharp students to bypass two or three semesters of college by taking the courses as part of their high school work.

Protack: Mike places his educational ideas in the form of questions (in this case under “Education” here), and this political game of Jeopardy brings up some good things to ponder. (One thing I’d like him to ponder is a separate web address for each category.) In essence, Protack would prefer a revised testing system, increased accountability of tax dollars through streamlining bureaucracy, more local control, and my favorite, year-round school. (If adults work throughout the year, kids should too.)

The education of Delaware’s students will likely be impacted the most if Protack or Markell are elected. To me, Lee’s ideas are a slightly more efficient status quo while Carney is far down in the tank of the teachers’ unions with much of his educational platform. But because he wants to protect charter schools, Lee probably has the best ideas with Markell and Protack both a close second. (A weakness of all four is a failure to address or embrace homeschooling.)

Jobs:

The First State races – U.S. Congress

Today I shift focus to the Congressional race. There’s only a handful of states where the number of Congressmen is fewer than the number of Senators, but Delaware is one of them. This means all federal races are statewide.

Currently on the ballot are incumbent Republican Congressman Michael Castle and three Democrats who are seeking to oust him: Karen Hartley-Nagle, Mike Miller, and Jerry Northington. The issues I’ll discuss will be in the same order and point scale as yesterday’s post, beginning with eminent domain and property rights. Unlike yesterday I’m predominantly going to go by the campaign websites since all four are available to me (I’ll add the link to Miller’s after I complete this post.) And with the exception of Miller, fortunately I’m able to simply link to the issue positions instead of the long quotes I needed to use in the Biden/O’Donnell race. So let’s get cracking, shall we?

Eminent domain/property rights (5 points):

Castle: Mike doesn’t mention the issue on his site; however, there were two Congressional votes where the question of eminent domain came up and Rep. Castle voted against the interests of private property holders in both. I’m deducting three points.

Hartley-Nagle: Karen doesn’t bring the subject up on her site. No points.

Miller: Again, the issue doesn’t come into play there. No points.

Northington: Apparently none of the candidates find this as important as I do, but bear in mind Delaware received a failing grade on the eminent domain issue from the Castle Coalition (no connection to the Congressman, it’s a subgroup of the Institute for Justice.) No points for Jerry.

Second Amendment (7 points):

Castle: As part of the “Keeping Communities Safe” portion of his site, Mike talks about his work on a couple gun-related issues. Unfortunately, that work is on the wrong side and the two key pro-Second Amendment groups (National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America) have regularly given him failing grades. Deduct all 7 points.

Hartley-Nagle: Karen doesn’t discuss the Second Amendment on her site, so no points.

Miller: The same goes for his site. In fact, his site is very limited as far as issue stances go with the exception of some broad-brush philosophies.

Northington: Conversely to his two Democrat opponents, Jerry has a section devoted to firearms issues. Northington skirts the line between being a gun-grabber and a pragmatist, noting that individuals should be allowed to have firearms for personal use but not be able to have so-called “assault weapons”. (The trick is what is defined as an assault weapon?) Of the four candidates, his position is the best of a bad – or nonexistent – lot so I’ll grant him two points.

Election reform/campaign finance (9 points):

The First State races: U.S. Senate

[Elbert says: Michael at Monoblogue is a frequent contributer to That's Elbert. He will be examining some of our races coming up in the Frist State, so they will be present here as well as his blog.]

In honor of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s selection as the nominee for Vice President, I’m going to lead off this three-post look at Delaware’s three major election races with the ladies first: the U.S. Senate tilt between incumbent Senator (and Democrat Vice-Presidntial pick) Joe Biden and Republican hopeful Christine O’Donnell. In truth, this is sort of a courtesy to those interested in the race because neither Biden or O’Donnell have any opposition in the upcoming September 9th primary, nor are any minor party candidates currently on the ballot for November.

Additionally, with his elevation to a national stage the JoeBiden.com website has been absorbed into the website for Barack Obama, which to me means Joe’s treating the Delaware race as the red-headed stepchild in comparison to the run for VP. Fortunately, having ran for President Biden has already established positions on a number of issues I care about and Delaware voters should too. It’ll be a little bit of a recycling job on his side because I’ve already written about Biden’s positions.

Because this is a race of national scope, most of the pet issues that I used for the Presidential race are applicable to this one. Longtime readers [of Monoblogue] also may recall that I did a point system to compare candidates, but for those who are newer or who forgot, here is a refresher course:

• Eminent domain and property rights (5 points)
• Second Amendment (7 points)
• Election reform and campaign finance (9 points)
• Trade and job creation (11 points)
• Education (13 points)
• Military/veterans affairs (15 points)
• Energy independence (17 points)
• Social Security/Medicare (19 points)
• Taxation (21 points)
• Role of Government (23 points)
• Border security and immigration (25 points)
• The Long War (27 points)

I believe I can get all twelve parts into one fairly long post. These will be arranged by topic as listed above. Where I don’t have a statement already for Senator Biden, I attempt to look into his voting record through the VoteSmart.org website.

Property rights:

Biden: There was no relevant votes I could find regarding the issues of eminent domain and private property rights. No points given or taken away.

O’Donnell: Christine O’Donnell doesn’t address this issue on her website, so no points.

Second Amendment:

Biden: In seven votes cited by VoteSmart.org Senator Biden voted against gun owners on six. Gun Owners of America gave Biden an “F” in 2007. Because of that, I’ll deduct all 7 points in this category.

Unfortunately, Christine O’Donnell doesn’t address this issue on her site. No points.

Election reform and campaign finance: