Showing posts with label dream act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dream act. Show all posts

Friday, December 6, 2013

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW: Attorney General Candidate Jon Cardin Talks About His Dream Act Vote, Brian Frosh & More!

Below, Maryland Juice writer Dan Furmansky provides an in-depth Q&A with Delegate Jon Cardin, a Democratic candidate for Attorney General. NOTE: This is part 1 of 3 of Dan's fascinating interview with Cardin. Mr. Furmansky explains the context for this interview below:
DAN FURMANSKY: In October, I was proactively contacted by Jon Cardin’s campaign manager, Andy Carton, who requested that I sit down with the Attorney General candidate to conduct a more rigorous and challenging interview than what Del. Cardin has thus far experienced in his interactions with traditional press. 

Prior to Thanksgiving, I met Del. Cardin at a Caribou Coffee in Bethesda to ask him a range of questions touching on what he feels makes him the progressive choice for Attorney General to his votes on the DREAM Act and Lockheed Martin bill to his thoughts on the best way to address agricultural pollution in Maryland.

We also discussed where he stood on proposals to legalize and regulate marijuana in Maryland, his attitude about tying a corporate tax cut to a minimum wage increase, whether he thinks we need a new process for redistricting in Maryland, and even my own feelings that he has mischaracterized himself as a “strong and early supporter” of marriage equality in Maryland. Del. Cardin was incredibly generous with his time. Here is the 1st of 3 parts from my robust conversation with him.

ARTICLE 1 OF 3: CARDIN VS. FROSH, WHY CARDIN BELIEVES HE IS THE PROGRESSIVE CHOICE, THAT PESKY DREAM ACT VOTE, AND MUCH MORE

SECTION 1: JON CARDIN'S BACKGROUND

DAN FURMANSKY: You bring unique experience with you to this campaign, including your time in the House of Delegates, an impressive array of academic degrees, experience as a non-profit executive director, and your experience running a law practice. For starters, can you tell our readers a bit about your non-profit experience?

JON CARDIN: Sure. Out of graduate school in public policy and Judaic Studies, I got a job for a foundation called the Project Judaica Foundation, which focused its time…on a Department of Defense grant they got before I started on doing research on Eastern European culture, pre and post Holocaust artifacts, and Cold war era, cultural phenomenon. And it was geared towards the Holocaust survivors and Holocaust victims, and sort of, the culture that they left behind. It also focused on everything else…the president of the foundation wanted to do.

So another thing we did, we worked on art exhibitions based on the life and death of Yitzhak Rabin, and we worked in partnership with the Smithsonian Institute on an international exhibition of the Dead Sea Scrolls, an international exhibitions of the Library of Congress' Judaic collection. That was…the more museum, research side of the Foundation. The other side of the Foundation dealt with American legislative process, which is where I spent most of my time. Because we had our researchers and grant person doing the other work, and I was bringing in groups from foreign countries and states, and from all places, Indian reservations and Indian tribes, to learn about the American legislative process and the uniqueness of American democracy. And we would do everything from visits with elected officials, with lobbyists, with press, with administration officials, with agency heads, with heads of museums, and other groups, in order to inform people on…how the American system works, of…law, diplomacy and policy works.

One specific example would be the country of Namibia, which was a just-developing democracy from Africa, was looking to learn how to set up governmental systems. And we brought them in and we actually connected them with researchers and developers from Israel to learn how to create drinkable, potable water, which is of their major issues that they had, is how do we create a safe environment for our people? So in terms of, if there is one major accomplishment…the Hopi Indians, by the way, from Arizona and New Mexico, we also worked on a desalinization program with them and Israel. Those kinds of connections probably created and save the lives of thousands of people, which is really, really exciting work that we did. So those are some examples of my non-profit work.

DAN FURMANSKY: Thank you. Tell me about your law practice. What kind of law do you practice? Who makes up the bulk of your clients?

JON CARDIN: I have a general practice where I deal with multiple legal issues. Everything from probate and estate planning…finalizing the estate and making sure that they are terminated appropriately, to criminal defense, to civil litigation, contract work, personal injury work, a little bit of workers' comp, and other…I’ve done some work in community associations, helping representing them, and other issues that come up that other members of my law firm either give to me or can’t handle because of timing or because of the nature of the issue. I have my own law practice, but I work very closely with my father’s firm, Cardin & Gitomer.

SECTION 2: JON CARDIN ON HIS UNCLE, US SENATOR BEN CARDIN

DAN FURMANSKY: Some people say in this political campaign, the Cardin name is equivalent to having more than a million dollars in the bank. How do you respond to that?

JON CARDIN: I'm blessed to have a mentor like my uncle. I have, starting with my grandfather, I have more than a hundred years of public service dedicated to the state of Maryland, including my own 11 and a half years during which I have been so honored to be able to serve the citizens of the state of Maryland. But the fact is that I’m running to represent every citizen of the state of Maryland and I think that I have a vision…a focus to do just that. And if my last name lends anything to me, it’s the ability to remember how important it is to serve every Marylander. That's what I think it adds.

SECTION 3: JON CARDIN ON VOTING AGAINST THE DREAM ACT

DAN FURMANSKY: The question that most progressives in Maryland want to know is: why did you vote against the Maryland Dream Act?

JON CARDIN: When we were in the legislature, I had a choice. My choice was—well, let me start off by saying this: when the opponents of the DREAM Act came to me with the petition to put to referendum and asked me to be the poster child, I emphatically refused. I refused because I actually don't oppose the DREAM Act. I believe we had a choice, and the choice was between voting for the DREAM Act and voting for the disabled community—the most vulnerable among us. And I chose to vote for the most vulnerable among us. I made it clear in committee, and then in the General Assembly on the floor that the Governor had pulled out $6 million from DDA—the Developmentally Disabled Administration [Developmental Disabilities Administration]—and had put $6 million into the cost of doing the DREAM Act. And I saw this as a zero-sum game and I made it clear that if he reinstated that money, I would support the bill, and if he didn’t, I wouldn’t. And I tried to get my committee to see that it is all about voting for the most vulnerable among us. That's what being a progressive is all about. That’s what running against the grain, being willing to go against the good ol’ boys is all about, and I think that I did that. I knew there would be political consequences. I was well aware and I think I made the right vote. Actually, as Attorney General, first of all, as a human being I support the DREAM Act.

DAN FURMANSKY: How did you vote on it at the ballot in November?

I voted for it. Not for the referendum, but for the DREAM Act. My issue was not philosophically about the DREAM Act. It was about priority funding as a member of the Ways and Means Committee who is tasked with being fiscally responsible and making sure we are looking out for the most important first.

DAN FURMANSKY: Doesn’t that pit the immigrant community against the disability rights community?

JON CARDIN: Look, my goal was not to do that. My goal was to say let’s…we can find…I have been progressive with my votes on taxes. I don't like voting for taxes, for increased taxes, but if you look at my record, I am willing to put my money where my mouth is. So I don't think this is about pitting anybody against anybody. I think it's about the fact that the Governor and the legislature need to take a leadership role and say we're not willing to make this decision. And I wanted to make it clear that when you have an 8,000 person waiting list, the most, most vulnerable, the most sensitive, people who can't even feed themselves, and need help, and they can't even get the state services that we are required to give…the Attorney General is required to make sure that the DDA is providing these services. But when they have a wait list of thousands and thousands, nearly 10,000…this is about fighting as a progressive for the most important among us. And so, I actually would, as Attorney General, I would enthusiastically enforce the law, because I believe in it. I just want to make sure that my opinion was known.

DAN FURMANSKY: In 2011 your colleague Delegate Jill Carter took a walk on marriage equality legislation in the House Judiciary Committee and essentially held it up. The bill didn’t pass that year, and part of her logic was that she didn't have an issue with the bill, which she was a co-sponsor of. Her issue was around school funding in Baltimore and issues that she thought were more urgent and dealt with more vulnerable people. Did you support that tactic?

JON CARDIN: The difference, I would say, is that there was...I was not the 13th vote. I have been the 13th vote on a number of things. I could have held up, for example, the millionaire's tax. I could have held up the increase in sales tax, because we had 13 votes in the Ways and Means Committee for those. I would have loved to have been able to tell my certain members of my community that I voted against those taxes. I know that there are political consequences for voting for increased taxes, especially in Baltimore County where I reside. Much more so than in Montgomery County. And I was willing to take those tough votes. The issue here was about making sure that I made a statement and trying to get folks to follow along. And this wasn't going to be…what we were talking about here was something that was very, very manageable. It was an issue that I…I mean, when you’re talking about an incidental $6 million from once place, $6 million from another place, it is very different than $1 billion or the amount of money that they we’re talking about for Baltimore City schools.

DAN FURMANSKY: Okay. So, as Attorney General, you'd have the power to challenge unlawful local government against immigrants and interpret a string of pro-immigrant reforms. What faith should the immigrant community have in your capacity to do that?

JON CARDIN: The Constitution of the State of Maryland…the United States Constitution…says that you shall not deprive "any person of life and liberty and property without due process of law." That's any person. And…I believe that not only the Constitution but fundamental principles of fairness that dictate that we should not be depriving any person, regardless of their immigration status, of being treated equally. I believe that sincerely and I would say that… the Constitution gives me the ability to do that. In just last year in Arizona v. United States, the Supreme Court determined that there is very, very limited role in enforcement of immigration, federal immigration laws by the state. So essentially, I believe the question has some pointed issues, that aren't really relevant. But…

DAN FURMANSKY: Well…Frederick County has been a good example of a case that just got decided in Federal court, and who knows what that county sheriff is going to do…he looks like a Sheriff Arpaio grandstander…

JON CARDIN: The Attorney General is tasked with making sure that every single person in the state of Maryland is treated fairly and that's what I'll do. My great grandfather came to the United States, started a business with nothing more than a horse and buggy, and that business has moved our family, my parents, my grandparents, to be able to follow their dreams, follow their educational pursuits and really be successful people, and the state of Maryland gave my family a chance. It would be my honor as the next Attorney General to make sure that the next generation of immigrants have the same opportunities.

SECTION 4: JON CARDIN ON PROGRESSIVE POLITICS

DAN FURMANSKY: The vast majority of Maryland Juice readers have a strong progressive political bend, as you know. You’ve no doubt been asked many times what makes you stand out among the candidates in this race, what makes you the best person for the job of Attorney General. But my question is this: what do you believe makes you the progressive candidate?

JON CARDIN: Well, I think that, you know, you not only need to be a progressive candidate, which I believe I am, you need to be someone who can get the job done as well. Just standing up on principle but not having anyone pay attention to you is not a legitimate legislator or attorney general. I have fought for, and will continue to fight for a public funding campaigns program. It has been my bill, my issue, and my bailiwick for the last 10 years, and before that for two years [former Delegate] John Hurson, who was one of my mentors in the General Assembly, allowed me to be the #1 lead sponsor, or the #1 cosponsor, and then handed it off to me when he went on to do bigger and better things.

As the Chairman of the Election Law Committee [Election Law Subcommittee of the Maryland House Ways & Means Committee], I have been an advocate for fighting against voter ID laws that are taking away every single person… disenfranchising every single person, but particularly those most vulnerable among us. I have been proud to sponsor bills that re-enfranchise voter rights. I was a lead sponsor for a bill that expands early voting, that allows and protects people's ability to register to vote during early voting, which is something I’m proud to say I came up with late night in Annapolis and was going over it with the likes of Senator Jamie Raskin…because we both know the constitutional ramifications of registration…on election day, and we found the loophole. I don't want to take full credit, but let’s say we found a loophole together and I was fortunate enough to be the lead sponsor on the bill.

In terms of, I would say, I have a 100 percent record with the environmental community. I think 95% or 96% lifetime, 100% in 2013, that I stand for principles of intrinsic environmental protection for…for intrinsic purposes, but also for the benefit of the entire state of Maryland. Every single person deserves to have a place where we have clean water, and free, clean air. And, I also require my community, and environmental protectors, to justify our positions and if they can't, then we need to revaluate. And I think that's the sign of a good legislator. Not just do stuff for the community because someone tells me to, but to say that we're working together on this, we all are taking ownership of it. We have to be able to justify what we're doing. I think that’s the sign of not only a progressive, but a person who can actually get the job done.

I can go on… with other legislation that I have been interested in, and focusing on… reduction of sexual assaults on college campuses—something we just, we just have been focusing on for… the anti cyber bullying legislation that we passed last year. I will tell you that any proud progressive is one who makes sure that we are not only defending the first amendment of the Constitution of the United States, but we are also protecting our most vulnerable among us.

SECTION 5: JON CARDIN ON DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HIM AND RIVALS

DAN FURMANSKY: Thank you. We'll dig a little deeper into some of the issues as we move forward with questions. So, with all due respect to Delegate Bill Frick and Aisha Braveboy…

JON CARDIN: …They deserve tremendous respect.

DAN FURMANSKY: Absolutely. At this point in the race, your primary challenger appears to be, among political pundits, Montgomery County State Senator Brian Frosh, who is a 19-year-old veteran of the state senate, and has been chair of the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee for much of that time. Senator Frosh is racking up a long list of endorsements.

I know you will likely indicate that you are not running against anyone but for the office of Attorney General, but people do want to know what differentiates you from Brian Frosh, and why you believe that you are better suited for the job than Senator Frosh?

JON CARDIN: We live in a rapidly changing world. I’m running for Attorney General to keep Maryland two steps ahead…of the threats facing our families, and…we can talk about where we were 30 years ago, and where we are today. Thirty years ago…cleaning the environment was about keeping trash out of the ocean. Now it's about getting trash out of the ocean, and out of the Bay. It’s also about reductions of carbon emissions and their impact on climate change. You’re not going to find anybody any more interested in dealing with those kinds of issues than I am.

Thirty years ago, public safety was about violent crime on the streets. It’s still about violent crime on the street, but also now it’s about hacking and online privacy, cyber security and cyber crime. Somebody needs to be two steps ahead of those new issues that concern our families. The road to civil rights thirty years ago…thirty years ago I was in middle school, and I remember the debates about equal pay for equal work. Well, we still face that issue today, but now we are also facing issues of voter ID laws. I have been a leader on trying to fight against voter ID laws. I have been a leader fighting against domestic violence, child abuse. These are civil rights. Nobody deserves to live in a community where they don't know…if a website is legitimate or trying steal your credit card information. If they are facing a problem with somebody abusing their children right next door. And I think that I have made those new, next generation issues a priority, and dealt with the old and persistent problems.

A perfect example is…who is sponsoring a bill to try and reduce child abuse? I mean, the most vulnerable among us: young kids who are being abused by their parents. And who is not focusing on those issues? I just think that as an Attorney General, your job is not only to determine the constitutionality of law, which is your primary job, but it’s to make sure every Marylander feels protected. It’s not about being a lawyer for every single person in the state, it's about figuring out and working from a legal perspective and as advisor to the legislature and the governor, from a public policy perspective. How do we best do that?

And I think that, I think, that we provide business opportunities, and opportunities for employers to stay or come to the state of Maryland. That is something that the Attorney General needs to be involved in…needs to focus on…because if we don't have an employment base, we don't have jobs.

So, you cannot be focusing your efforts on simply going after bad actors. But also creating good actors. And I think that I have done that, both from a legislative history, historical perspective, I have done that, and my platform demonstrates that. So I think that in those areas, I’m different.

DAN FURMANSKY: In some of your language, I sense buzz words around “next generation” and “thirty years ago,” and I'm wondering if there is some sense that you are trying to appeal to voters that you are a younger candidate…that this is a job that sometimes people stay in it for decades at a time and Senator Frosh has…several years on you?

JON CARDIN: The answer is no. I believe that Marylanders want, should deserve to have someone who is out there thinking about the issues that they are going be facing and making sure that person is protecting every single Marylander to the best of their ability. The question is, what are the issue that we are facing today, and tomorrow? Are we spending more than fifty percent of our time on cyber security, and identity theft, and online privacy? And the answer is, I think we are, and I think we're going have to. I think we have to figure out a way to balance all those issues, which I have spent a tremendous amount of time, and understand what kind of challenges we are facing with environmental protection, with consumer protection, with…making sure that people are getting equal pay for equal work. And I just think that I have a balance and…age is not the issue. The issue is a question of vision, passion, conviction and energy, and I'll leave it open. That’s really the issue.

STAY TUNED FOR PART 2 OF 3 OF OUR EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH JON CARDIN SOON!

Thursday, October 3, 2013

OOPS: Doug Gansler Campaign Video Highlights Unusual Endorser: Illegal Immigrants "Rapidly Depleting Tax Dollars"

Today a Maryland Juice source highlighted unusual support for Attorney General Doug Gansler's gubernatorial bid. You see, a few weeks ago Gansler released a kickoff video for his campaign, and among the testimonials was a statement of support from former Montgomery County police officer Mike Mancuso (see screenshot below):


But what's strange about Gansler's decision to highlight him in his campaign kickoff, is that Mancuso's extracurricular activities apparently include immigrant scapegoating in local newspapers. You can read excerpts from his musings below:
Washington Post (3/29/10): The Real Drag on Montgomery's Budget, By Mike Mancuso - "No one from Mr. Leggett on down has seriously addressed the No. 1 budget problem: an ever-increasing population of illegal immigrants that is rapidly depleting our tax dollars and services..... While these residents can no longer get a driver’s license, there are no restrictions on enrolling their children in schools, qualifying for in-county college tuition, obtaining medical, dental, mental health, prescription drug, housing, food and energy assistance, job opportunities and training, and more. Yes, there is a free lunch and a lot more in Montgomery.... Why should dedicated employees and taxpayers of Montgomery County suffer because of the county’s ineffective approach to illegal immigration?" 
Washington Examiner (4/6/10): MontCo's Immigration Policy is Real Budget Buster, By Mike Mancuso - "Leggett's and the council's policies have caused a huge influx of residents without 'legal presence' here.... When arrested for drunken driving or other serious offenses, many do not show up in court. Because of Leggett's refusal to fully cooperate with federal immigration agents, thousands of offenders become fugitives in our community. Police officers are limited in doing their best to protect the community. The problem is so bad that numerous illegal aliens are living in virtual shantytowns in Rock Creek Park, safe from police prosecution. The park has been trashed...."
Mancuso's views on immigration may be "informed" by his interactions with residents while on the job. A year before Mancuso began his letter-writing campaign, he made the following remarks about crime rates in The Gazette (excerpt below):
GAZETTE: To stem a surge in bench warrants issued for minor crimes and traffic citations, Montgomery County police are putting together a campaign that will ask Latinos to come forward to resolve their charges.

Police want to use $135,000 in federal stimulus money to launch a Spanish-language outreach campaign and to help cover overtime hours of police setting up "turn-in days" on evenings and weekends, said Lt. Mike Mancuso of the county's fugitive section....
As of the end of May, the number of active District Court warrants reached 14,465, Mancuso said. While that is not far above the norm, most of the increase is attributed to warrants issued on people with "Hispanic names," Mancuso said — in all, accounting for 46 percent.... Because many immigrants tend to move frequently or give the charging officer incorrect contact information, Mancuso said, making them difficult to find....

Police introduced the idea at a meeting of Police Chief J. Thomas Manger's Latino advisory committee last month. Some committee members worried that police were targeting the campaign on Latinos. They were also skeptical of how well the campaign would work because of the Latino community's fear of police because of immigration status....
After Gansler was embarassingly caught on candid camera claiming that Lt. Governor Anthony Brown was trying to win the Governor's race by campaigning on his race, this seems like another unforced error. Oy vey!

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

Time for Maryland Democrats to Speak Out for End to Mass Deportations // U.S. Ejecting Residents At Fastest Rate Ever

Below Maryland Juice presents a new article from our writer Dan Furmansky regarding the record  setting mass deportations of residents under the Obama administration:

After the heaviest of lifts, the comprehensive immigration reform bill that passed the Senate is now languishing in the House of Representatives. It’s easy to see why, since House Republican leadership is already awful busy giving the middle finger to the Affordable Care Act and proposing a renewed food stamp program that cuts $40 billion from SNAP and effectively leaves millions of Americans hungry at night. With these noble endeavors at the forefront of the House’s agenda, and Iowa Congressman Republican Steve King telling the world that undocumented youth aren’t really hungry for an education, but drug smugglers with “calves the size of cantaloupes,” I think it’s safe to say that the “new and improved” Republican Party rashly promised to us in a series of post-November news headlines is also languishing.

In June the House sent a clear signal to the country with a mostly party-line vote of 224-201 to discard President Barack Obama's rule allowing deferred deportation for some young undocumented immigrants. Only six House Republicans, none in GOP leadership, voted against Steve ‘the Cantaloupe’ King’s amendment. Advocates will not be deterred, and with the August congressional recess upon us, the broad coalition pushing for immigration reform is urging the grassroots to lobby members of the House in their home districts.

Meanwhile, there is work that we here in Maryland can do with our own congressional delegation. We need our members of Congress to urge President Obama to halt deportations now.

As the clock ticks on achieving any meaningful and compassionate changes to our woefully broken immigration system, tens of thousands of families will be ripped apart because President Obama continues to deport more immigrants—aka future citizens—than any other president in our nation's history. Consider this:
  • The United States is now deporting people at a faster rate than at any time in our modern history—an estimated 1,100 people per day. 
  • More than 410,000 undocumented workers were deported last year, an all-time high.
  • A report from the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute released earlier this year found that the United States spends more money on immigration enforcement—nearly $18 billion in the 2012 fiscal year—than on its other law enforcement agencies combined. 
  • The government spends about 15 times more on immigration enforcement than it did in the mid-1980s, adjusted for inflation, the report found. 
  • According to data obtained by the news website Colorlines, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security deported nearly 205,000 parents of U.S. citizen children from July 1, 2010 to Sept. 31, 2012.

Given these numbers, what does this mean for immigrant communities right now, as House Republicans obstruct any progress and endorse the continued separation of parents and children?

During the August recess alone, an estimated 44,000 people will likely be expelled from the country.

Pres. Obama has the power to stop this. He already chose through his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) memorandum to allow for deferred deportations for young immigrations, aka DREAMers. But this only happened after tremendous, sustained pressure on the Administration to take action, and the failure of the passage of the DREAM Act in the U.S. Senate due to Republican obstructionism, since the DREAM Act had majority support, but lacked 60 votes to end debate.

Many people believe that halting all deportations could put key pressure on the House of Representatives to move.

Pablo Alvarado, of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, has strong words for President Obama in The Hill (excerpt below):
PABLO ALVARADO (VIA THE HILL): Luckily for the president and for those victimized by the current broken system, such cruelty is optional.  Building upon prosecutorial discretion and the deferred action for childhood arrivals program, the president has it in his executive authority to expand the relief he’s granted dream-eligible youth to their parents, neighbors, and the other potential citizens who are watching the Congressional debate closely.

In fact, if and when the president will stop prolonging the suffering of people in deportation proceedings and use his authority has become a repeated question any time he addresses Spanish language media. As limitations of the Senate bill are being reported and a few obstructionist legislators seek to imperil progress, hundreds of organizations have looked to the administration to take action and help break a possible logjam. His response to whether he will step in: “Probably not. I think that it is very important for us to recognize that the way to solve this problem has to be legislative.  I can do some things and have done some things that make a difference in the lives of people by determining how our enforcement should focus.”

Imagine how different the conversation would be and how much stronger reform's prospects would look if the president told obstructionist Republicans that deportations are suspended until a legalization bill is passed, as some of his own advisors have recommended.

To some people, the idea that the President might simply halt all deportations—not just those of DREAMers—may seem radical. No doubt it is aggressive, but is aggressive really such a bad idea when dealing with obstructionist Republicans? The President has worked ferociously over the years to prove he is “tough” on illegal immigration while wasting untold government resources, and he has absolutely zero to show for it from conservatives who clamor for more deportations and continue to parrot the words “border security” over and over as a talking point for their standing in the way of any pathway to citizenship.

Sadly, the President is unlikely to take bold action and expand the scope of his deferred deportations:
"I think it is important to remind everybody that, as I said I think previously, and I'm not a king," Obama told Univision's Maria Elena Salinas in January. "I am the head of the executive branch of government. I'm required to follow the law."

Yawn.

As with most issues, the President requires a strong push to exercise greater authority in this debate. He needs the same type of robust, concerted pressure that led to his decision to defer deportations for DREAMers.

Across the country, activists are asking lawmakers and local and state Democratic Parties to put pressure on the President to halt deportations until comprehensive reform passes. Resolutions are being drafted. The Maryland Democratic Party and Maryland’s congressional delegation can and should call for a change in the terms of the debate by asking the President to halt all deportations.

Reps. Raúl M. Grijalva and Rep. Yvette Clarke are circulating to their colleagues a sign-on letter to President Obama, urging him to suspend any further deportations and expand the successful deferred action program to all those who would be potential citizens under immigration reform. The letter to the President reads:

“As we have seen with deferred action for childhood arrivals, such relief brings with it the benefit of active participation in the debate by undocumented people themselves. When their stories are known and voices are heard, we have witnessed how the debate shifts. The fear and xenophobia that block progress only shrink in the display of their courage. But left unchecked, the threat of deportations will prevent so many from coming forward and contributing to the national conversation. Instead, the specter of deportation removes the human and grounding element in any political discussion—those individuals who are most directly impacted.”

If you agree that we need a bolder strategy to move immigration reform, then call up your member of Congress and ask them to sign on to Reps. Grijalva and Clarke’s letter to the President.
To call your Member of Congress:
US Capitol Switchboard (202) 224-3121
To locate your Member on-line:
U.S. House of Representatives: www.house.gov

Maryland Juice will be following this story and will keep you posted next month on which members of our Congressional delegation chose to sign on and take a stand for an end to deportations now.

- Dan Furmansky

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

GUEST ANALYSIS: Maryland Lawmakers Who Are Out of Step With Their Voters // PLUS: Baltimore Election Results Mapped

UPDATE: Delegate Galen Clagett sent us a response to the post below, where he explains that though he voted against final passage of the Dream Act, his objection was to any bills that required money that year. See his message below:
DELEGATE GALEN CLAGETT: Dear Juice, I wanted to respond to your posting on December 12 regarding Md lawmakers being perceived as "out of step" with their voters. I saw my name listed as voting against the Dream Act and wanted to clarify something not contained within a simple accounting of votes, that is, a fiscal note.

To be sure, I supported this important legislation when it came before the House previously (and had no fiscal note), I also voted for it as a citizen in November. However, as a member of the House Appropriations Committee, I was unwilling to vote for any legislation this year that contained a fiscal note given our current budget situation. As you probably know, sometimes it is not the issue itself but the collateral impact thereof (esp. when it concerns the state budget) that determines how we have to vote.

I am proud to be know as a moderate Democrat and I work very hard to make sure that I represent my constituency in 3A when in Annapolis. As anything, numbers have stories, and those stories provide a great deal more information and perspective than the numbers alone. I would hope that you and your readers keep that in mind when reviewing actions taken during Session.

Sincerely,

Delegate Galen R. Clagett, 3A

Two Maryland Juice sources forwarded us worthwhile items about our state's recent Presidential Election results. The first tidbit is about Maryland lawmakers who may be out of touch with their voters, while the second discussion item is a series of maps depicting how voters in various parts of Baltimore voted in the November elections. We highlight a few of the interesting results below.

JUICE #1: POLITICIANS WHO MAY BE MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN THE VOTERS IN THEIR DISTRICT - An anonymous Maryland Juice source forwarded us a list of lawmakers who may be out of touch with their constituents. In particular, they sent us a spreadsheet of election results highlighting politicians who voted against the Dream Act and/or marriage equality, but who represent districts where a majority of voters supported either Question 4 or Question 6. In other words, these politicians may represent districts where the voters are more liberal than the elected officials. For at least some of these officials, these misfires might serve as warning signs that a challenge in a party primary could be more fruitful than they realize. Do elections have consequences?

POLITICIANS WHO OPPOSED THE DREAM ACT BUT WERE OVERRULED BY THEIR BOSSES (AKA THE VOTERS) - The two lists below show politicians who may be out-of-step with their districts. In particular, these politicians voted against the Dream Act but represent districts where a majority of voters voted "for" Question 4 at election day precincts. In short, these politicians misfired on one of the hottest issues in state and national politics this cycle. The Democratic Dream Act opponents below live in districts where voters supported in-state tuition for all Maryland students:
  • Sen. James Brochin - [ Democrat ]
  • Sen. Anthony Muse - [ Democrat ] - ( also voted against marriage equality )
  • Sen. Bobby Zirkin - [ Democrat ]
  • Del. John Bohanon - [ Democrat ]
  • Del. Jon Cardin - [ Democrat ]
  • Del. Galen Clagett - [ Democrat ]
  • Del. Pete Hammen - [ Democrat ]
  • Del. Sally Jameson - [ Democrat ] - ( also voted against marriage equality
  • Del. Steve Lafferty - [ Democrat ]
  • Del. Brian McHale - [ Democrat ]
  • Del. Dan Morhaim - [ Democrat ]
  • Del. Dana Stein - [ Democrat ]

These Republicans live in districts where voters supported the Dream Act:
  • Del. Sue Aumann - ( also voted against marriage equality )
  • Del. Gail Bates - ( also voted against marriage equality )
  • Del. Bill Frank - ( also voted against marriage equality )
  • Del. Ron George - ( also voted against marriage equality )
  • Del. Patrick Hogan - ( also voted against marriage equality )
  • Del. Herb McMillan - ( also voted against marriage equality )
  • Del. Warren Miller - ( also voted against marriage equality )

POLITICIANS WHO OPPOSED MARRIAGE EQUALITY BUT WERE OVERRULED BY THEIR BOSSES (AKA THE VOTERS) - The two lists below show politicians who may be out-of-step with their districts. In particular, these politicians voted against marriage equality but represent districts where a majority of voters voted "for" Question 6 at election day precincts. These politicians are not keeping up with their constituents on a major civil rights issue. The Democratic marriage equality opponents below live in districts where voters supported same-sex marriage rights:
  • Sen. John Astle - [ Democrat ]
  • Del. Sam Arora - [ Democrat ]
  • Del. Talmadge Branch - [ Democrat ]
  • Del. Steven Deboy - [ Democrat ] - ( also voted against Dream Act )
  • Del. Cheryl Glenn - [ Democrat ]
  • Del. Melvin Stukes - [ Democrat ]

These Republicans live in districts where voters supported marriage equality:
  • Sen. Ed Reilly - ( also voted against Dream Act )
  • Del. Gail Bates - ( also voted against Dream Act
  • Del. Ron George - ( also voted against Dream Act )
  • Del. Michael Hough - ( also voted against Dream Act )
  • Del. Tony McConkey - ( also voted against Dream Act
  • Del. Herb McMillan - ( also voted against Dream Act
  • Del. Warren Miller - ( also voted against Dream Act
  • Del. Kathy Vitale - ( also voted against Dream Act )


JUICE #2: SEN. BILL FERGUSON'S MAPS OF BALTIMORE ELECTION RESULTS  -  The second politico tidbit is that State Senator Bill Ferguson of Baltimore City has an interesting new series of maps on his website. Visitors can look at how different neighborhoods of voters in Baltimore weighed in on various ballot items, but we highlight a few interesting examples below:

Question 4 - Dream Act Results in Baltimore: (Green/Yellow = Support, Red/Orange = Oppose)



Question 6 - Marriage Equality Results in Baltimore: (Green/Yellow = Support, Red/Orange = Oppose)



You can check out more maps at Senator Ferguson's website.

Tuesday, November 20, 2012

Del. Jon Cardin Announces 2014 Attorney General Fundraiser // HMM: Democrat Applauds Dream Act Win But Voted Against It

An anonymous source tells Maryland Juice that today Delegate Jon Cardin announced a fundraiser for 2014 Attorney General. So far, the Baltimore-area Democrat would be taking on only Senator Brian Frosh of Montgomery County, though others are known to be thinking about the race. In the email blast below, Cardin announces a December 4th "Jon Cardin for AG cocktail reception," but our source also points out that strangely, Cardin applauds passage of the Maryland Dream Act. This is unusual, because Jon Cardin voted against the Dream Act in the Maryland House.

DELEGATE JON CARDIN HAILS DREAM ACT BUT VOTED AGAINST IT: In what doubles as a "post election 2012" report, Cardin states that "by supporting the Dream Act, Marylanders advanced the State’s longstanding principle that access to education is the key to strengthening the State. I am proud of Maryland voters, and I am confident that Maryland will continue to lead the way in providing equal rights and equal opportunities to all of its residents."

Too bad Marylanders can't rely on Cardin to lead the way on these issues. Our source points out that Delegate Jon Cardin joined Tea Party members and voted against the Dream Act during the House of Delegates floor vote last year. Prior to the floor vote, the Dream Act was debated in the House Ways & Means committee where Cardin is a member. He abstained from voting on the bill in committee. This is hardly a profile in legislative courage, and it borders on outrageous for him to now applaud passage of something he opposed. See Cardin's email blast below, followed by a few excerpts from the legislative record for the Dream Act:


Jon Cardin 11th District State Delegate
Cardin Annapolis Reports:
Post Election 2012
 
November 20, 2012

Dear Juice,

After two years of hard fought campaigning on both the State and federal levels, the election is finally over. Maryland has approved every ballot question including expanded gaming, affirming same sex marriage, and passing the Maryland Dream Act. On the federal level, President Obama has been re-elected with a mandate to balance the budget and return bipartisanship to Congress while Maryland again elected a strong delegation of Congressmen, including one new Representative, John Delaney, to Maryland’s 6th District.

In approving all ballot measures, Marylanders sent the Governor and General Assembly two clear messages. First, by affirming the Dream Act and becoming the first state in the Union to pass same sex marriage by referendum on their first try, Marylanders have spoken for equal rights and fairness for all Maryland’s residents. Further, by supporting the Dream Act, Marylanders advanced the State’s longstanding principle that access to education is the key to strengthening the State. I am proud of Maryland voters, and I am confident that Maryland will continue to lead the way in providing equal rights and equal opportunities to all of its residents.

Second, by approving expanded gambling, including table games, and a sixth casino site to be located at Prince George’s County’s National Harbor, Marylanders reminded government that when citizens are choosing where to spend their disposable income, government should not restrict their options.  Furthermore, they reasserted to lawmakers that they are serious about raising revenues in the State. This measure will keep Maryland money in Maryland while creating jobs for Maryland residents.


As a result of approving these ballot measures, Maryland looks forward to adding $200 million in revenues from expanded gaming, an estimated $66 million from the Dream Act and millions of dollars from new marriage licenses and the lucrative wedding industry. These new revenues have put Maryland in its strongest budget position in years with the real possibility of balancing the operating budget without significant cuts this coming legislative session.


The message is clear, and I plan to continue working to grow industry in Maryland to raise revenues and continue to get my constituents back to work. This session, I plan to introduce research and development legislation to spur business investment in Maryland, including incentivizing existing business growth and creating new business opportunities, particularly in green industries such as wind and solar power.


Finally, it is clear that voters in both our State and our country want to see lawmakers from both sides of the aisle working together to find and create innovative solutions to our big problems. I have always been committed to working with constituents and leaders from all sides and collaborating with the entire legislature to create solutions to our problems. Moving forward, please know that I am always open to new ideas and innovative solutions no matter where they come from.


DON’T FORGET TO ATTEND THE RECEPTION FOR MY EXPLORATORY COMMITTEE TO BECOME MARYLAND’S ATTORNEY GENERAL ON DECEMBER 4, 2012 AT THE HOME OR ROBB COHEN AND GAIL SCHWARTZ. PLEASE CONTACT STEVE HURVITZ AT (703) 340-4497 OR STEVE@STEVEHURVITZ TO RSVP, JOIN OUR HOST COMMITTEE OR WITH ANY OTHER QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. FOR MORE INFORMATION CLICK HERE.


You can always reach me at jon.cardin@house.state.md.us.  I am proud to be representing you in Annapolis and to be working with Delegates Dana Stein and Dan Morhaim and Senator Bobby Zirkin as part of the District 11 legislative team.

Sincerely,
 Jon Cardin
Delegate Jon S. Cardin 

Below you can see the 2011 House of Delegates roll call vote for the Dream Act, followed by the Dream Act Ways & Means roll call vote:

Voting Yea - 74
  Speaker Busch  Cullison  Hixson  Mitchell  Stukes
  Alston  Davis  Holmes  Mizeur  Summers
  Anderson  Dumais  Howard  Murphy  Tarrant
  Arora  Feldman  Hubbard  Nathan-Pulliam  Turner, F.
  Barkley  Frick  Hucker  Niemann  Turner, V.
  Barnes  Frush  Ivey  Oaks  Valderrama
  Barve  Gaines  Jones  Pena-Melnyk  Valentino-Smith
  Bobo  Gilchrist  Kaiser  Pendergrass  Vallario
  Branch  Glenn  Kelly, A.  Proctor  Vaughn
  Braveboy  Griffith  Kramer  Reznik  Waldstreicher
  Cane  Gutierrez  Lee  Robinson, B.  Walker
  Carr  Guzzone  Love  Robinson, S.  Washington
  Carter  Harrison  Luedtke  Rosenberg  Wilson
  Clippinger  Haynes  McIntosh  Ross  Zucker
  Conaway  Healey  Miller, A.  Simmons


Voting Nay - 66
  Afzali  DeBoy  Impallaria  McHale  Serafini
  Aumann  Donoghue  Jacobs  McMillan  Smigiel
  Bates  Dwyer  James  Miller, W.  Sophocleus
  Beidle  Eckardt  Jameson  Morhaim  Stein
  Beitzel  Elliott  Kach  Myers  Stifler
  Bohanan  Fisher  Kelly, K.  Norman  Stocksdale
  Boteler  Frank  Kipke  O'Donnell  Szeliga
  Bromwell  George  Krebs  Olszewski  Vitale
  Burns  Glass  Lafferty  Otto  Weir
  Cardin   Haddaway-Riccio  Malone  Parrott  Wood
  Clagett  Hammen  McComas  Ready
  Cluster  Hershey  McConkey  Rudolph
  Conway  Hogan  McDermott  Schuh
  Costa  Hough  McDonough  Schulz

Dream Act - 2011 MD House Ways & Means Roll Call

Saturday, November 10, 2012

GUEST POST: Del. Eric Luedtke Dissects Montgomery County's Marriage Equality, Dream Act & Gambling Results // SEE MAPS

PLUS: MARYLAND JUICE HIGHLIGHTS QUICK NOTES ABOUT DAMASCUS AND GOP VOTERS WHO SUPPORTED MARRIAGE EQUALITY

Below Maryland Juice is pleased to publish an interesting analysis of key ballot question results in Montgomery County. Our guest pundit, Delegate Eric Luedtke (D14 Democrat), looked at the precinct-level returns for marriage equality (Question 6), the Dream Act (question 4) and gambling expansion (Question 7). He also created some insightful maps showing how MoCo's neighborhoods voted on the various measures.
ERIC LUEDTKE: Below, I've attached precinct maps showing how Montgomery County voted on questions 4, 6, and 7. First, I should note that these maps only display the election day precinct level vote, and do not include early voting totals.

The Montgomery County Board of Elections data counts the early vote as a separate canvass, like they do with absentee votes. During early voting, MoCo supported marriage equality nearly six points more than the statewide overall vote for Question 6. On the Dream Act, Montgomery County voters supported the measures by four points more than the statewide vote. Lastly, on gambling expansion, Montgomery County supported Question 7 by four tenths of a point less than the statewide average.

Note that there were some geographical variations in the early vote due to the locations of the early vote centers. For example, the early vote probably included significantly more voters from Silver Spring precincts (folks who likely voted at the Silver Spring Civic Center) than voters from the Bethesda area, where there is no early voting center. But nonetheless, the maps below give a glimpse into the geographic and demographic patterns of the vote on the various questions.

NOTE: On all of the maps below, the bluest areas show precincts that "voted for" the ballot question in large numbers. The purple areas show precincts where fewer than 50% of voters supported a "vote for" the ballot question. See the explanation of the color-coding using the key to the right.


QUESTION 4 - DREAM ACT RESULTS IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY



ERIC LUEDTKE: The question 4 map is probably the most clear. Only six far upcounty precincts voted against it, including much of Damascus (except the central precinct which is entirely suburban rather than a rural-suburban mix like the rest of Damascus), parts of Laytonsville, and northern Gaithersburg outside the city limits. The heaviest vote in favor is concentrated downcounty, particularly in Bethesda and Silver Spring, and also has concentrations in parts of the county further north that have heavier immigrants populations. This includes most of the 29 corridor, which has significant populations of Latinos and continental African immigrants, the Wheaton area and its heavy Latino population, and precincts around Gaithersburg and Rockville with large Latino and Asian-American populations. It’s interesting to note the stretch of precincts voting strongly in favor up the 270 corridor all the way to the Frederick County line, likely due to a continued expansion of more urban and suburban areas in Germantown and Clarksburg. It’s also significant that nearly all of District 15 voted in favor, including the heavily rural precincts around Poolesville and Barnesville. District 15, you may remember, was the last MoCo district to elect a Republican, but its shift towards the Democratic column seems to be continuing.

QUESTION 6 - MARRIAGE EQUALITY RESULTS IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY

ERIC LUEDTKE: The question 6 map is similar to the question 4 map. Support is concentrated in Bethesda/Chevy Chase, lower Silver Spring, and Rockville, with concentrations of lesser support in Olney, Gaithersburg, Germantown, and Potomac. Many of the majority-minority portions of the county voted in favor, including the upper 29 corridor and Wheaton/Aspen Hill, although by a significantly smaller margin than they supported question 4. I think this reflects the fact that marriage equality supporters were successful in reaching out to many minority voters, but obviously still have work to do. Four of the ten precincts that opposed are in District 14, which had the lowest vote by district in the county, but still the vote was in favor in all eight legislative districts. 

QUESTION 7 - GAMBLING EXPANSION RESULTS IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY


ERIC LUEDTKE: The question 7 map is a bit of a cipher, in that for virtually every identifiable pattern there is an exception. Significant pockets of opposition cluster along the DC line in areas from Bethesda and Chevy Chase south and in Takoma Park and east Silver Spring, but a big chunk of the western side of Silver Spring voted in favor by a wide margin. More conservative upcounty precincts in Brookeville, Laytonsville, and Barnesville voted against, while most of Damascus voted in favor. Seniors at Asbury and Riderwood voted heavily against it, while seniors in Leisure World voted in favor. The vast majority of the county voted in favor of it by relatively slim margins, and we don’t see many geographic concentrations of support like we did on the other maps, although there is a significant concentration of support in Gaithersburg and Germantown, one in the Aspen Hill area, and a smaller one in Fairland and Briggs-Chaney.

DAMASCUS VOTERS: AGAINST MARRIAGE EQUALITY & DREAM ACT, FOR BOOZE AND GAMBLING - Maryland Juice has one interesting takeaway from Luedtke's analysis. It appears that Damascus voters may be the black sheep of Montgomery County. Notably, Damascus voters appear to have unusual moral priorities as demonstrated by their voting behavior. On November 6, Damascus overwhelmingly voted to begin allowing alcohol sales in their town (Note: it is currently a "dry" town). But while many Damascus voters also voted against marriage equality and the Dream Act, they also approved gambling expansion. Bottom line: Damascus rejected civil rights and college opportunity, but embraced booze and gambling. I'm no puritan about booze and gambling, but what kind of a message does this send? Oy vey!

SIDENOTE: SOME REPUBLICANS BUCKED PARTY TO SUPPORT MARRIAGE EQUALITY - Maryland Juice has one final note for this analysis of the ballot question results. Walter Olson of the CATO Institute today published an interesting op-ed in The Huffington Post noting that in some Republican-dominated parts of Maryland, the "vote for" marriage equality was higher than Obama's vote total in the same places. He surmises that this means Republican defections on marriage equality helped Question 6 pass in Maryland (excerpt below):
WALTER OLSON: In fact county-level results reveal that across wide swaths of Republican territory in Maryland, same-sex marriage actually ran well ahead of Barack Obama and the Democratic ticket. That means there were many, many Romney voters who voted for the same-sex marriage law -- enough, in fact, that without them the measure would almost certainly have lost by a mile....

Two major bulwarks of Republican strength in Maryland, Anne Arundel and Frederick Counties, went both for Romney and for same-sex marriage. The two counties have been home to some of the state's best- known anti-gay politicians, such as Del. Don Dwyer of Anne Arundel and former Sen. Alex Mooney of Frederick. Frederick County especially, where I live, is famed as a right-wing stronghold.... Romney carried Anne Arundel by a point.

In Carroll, Question 6 ran a remarkable 11 points ahead of the president, in Queen Anne's 10 points ahead, in Harford and Cecil 5 points, and in Frederick and Anne Arundel 3 to 4 points. Collectively these counties contributed tens of thousands more votes for Question 6 than if gay marriage had been, as you might put it, only as popular as the chief executive of the United States.....

Friday, November 9, 2012

JuiceBlender: Post-Election Analyses of Maryland Results // PUNDIT CONSENSUS: Maryland Republican Party Out of Touch

UPDATE: Maryland Juice just caught some interesting post-election musings from Joe Steffen (aka "the Prince of Darkness"). Steffen was a former operative for GOP Governor Bob Ehrlich. Like rightwing Gazette columnist Blair Lee, the Prince of Darkness compares the current state of Maryland Republicans to the now extinct Whig Party. Check out Steffen's thoughts below, and note that Maryland Juice agrees that a new focus on libertarian-minded views might present the GOP their only way to navigate social issues in Maryland (and perhaps nationally):
PRINCE OF DARKNESS: It’s very simple. The GOP must – MUST – Libertarianize itself as concerns the social issues. It must find a way to wean itself from the social conservative issues as many of the current stances taken by the Party are killing the Party with their demands for absolute purity....

Among a number of other issues the GOP simply MUST deal with is the Hispanic population.... And by “deal with,” I mean in ways other than sending Sheriff Billy Bob McDoughnut after them to check out their papers. The Latinos are here. They are not going anywhere. And they are growing – and voting Democratic in huge numbers. Deal with them, Republicans – or there’s another issue sending you the way of the Whigs.

Below Maryland Juice compiles a number of interesting analyses of the Free State's 2012 election results. The day after the election, we declared that the results showed Maryland Republicans are out-of-touch and have been living in a bubble, and it appears that most politicos agree. See a few comments about the Maryland election results below:

JUICE #1: BALTIMORE SUN CALLS RESULTS A "REALITY CHECK" FOR MD GOP - Yesterday, The Baltimore Sun published an editorial pointing out the numerous delusions that Maryland Republicans adopted as reality while they campaigned against the Dream Act and marriage equality. Their opinion piece blared that the "referendum mania in 2012 showed there is no silent conservative majority" (excerpt below):
BALTIMORE SUN: When Maryland Republicans, led by freshman Del. Neil Parrott of Washington County, succeeded in putting the Dream Act on the ballot, state GOP Chairman Alex Mooney called it a "game changer" and a counterweight to Democrats who "think that they can do what they want." When Republicans got the congressional maps on the ballot, Del. Steve Schuh, an Anne Arundel County Republican, called it a "major change to our democracy in Maryland," adding, "we have an arrogant majority...."

But as it turns out, the Democratic majority in Annapolis was pretty well in tune with the voters when it came to in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, same-sex marriage and the redrawing of the state's congressional districts.... The lesson here for the GOP is that Maryland is not a conservative state, and there is not a silent majority that disapproves of things like the Dream Act....

JUICE #2: PUNDITS SAY RESULTS SHOW MARYLAND'S PROGRESSIVE STREAK & DEMOCRATIC DOMINANCE - Capital News Service had an interesting round-up of post-election comments from various politicos. Their piece highlighted contrasting views on whether Maryland's election results were a function of a progressive streak in voters or simply Democratic dominance (excerpt below):
CAPITAL NEWS SERVICE: “(Gov. Martin) O’Malley and the Democrats have complete control,” said Blair Lee, political columnist at The Gazette newspapers.... “Republicans are almost now gone the way of the Whig Party in terms of influence and presence....”

Christopher Summers, president of the Maryland Public Policy Institute, a Rockville-based think tank, agreed that Tuesday night’s results emphasized one-party dominance in the state. “In terms of Republicans and messaging, they need to have a very serious meeting and realize their messaging is not working, their leadership is not working,” he said....

“Maryland is a more progressive state than any other,” said Todd Eberly, a political science professor at St. Mary’s College of Maryland....

JUICE #3: MARYLAND RESULTS DEBUNK MYTH OF BLACK VOTER OPPOSITION TO MARRIAGE EQUALITY - The Gazette yesterday published a piece noting that African American voters in Maryland were instrumental to the marriage equality victory. Contrary to popular belief, jurisdictions with dense black voter populations did not vote against Question 6 in the numbers opponents predicted. In Baltimore, voters appear to be more closely aligned with Maryland's progressive voter base (excerpt below):
GAZETTE: In Maryland, the measure, known as Question 6, received 57 percent support in Baltimore but just 49 percent support in Prince George’s County.... More than 60 percent of the population in each area is African-American, a group widely assumed to oppose same-sex marriage, observers say. Tuesday’s returns, including a stronger-than-expected-showing in Prince George’s, debunked that notion, said Del. Mary L. Washington (D-Dist. 43) of Baltimore....

The Baltimore win was particularly significant since many black church leaders from the city had spoken against the measure, said Donald Norris, chair of the Department of Public Policy at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County.... Overall the passage of Question 6 reaffirmed the image of Maryland as a deep-blue state, Norris said. “On social issues, the state is trend much more liberal than many others,” he said....

The measure’s victory in Frederick County also took some by surprise. “I am very surprised that in Frederick County people voted for it in the majority,” said Steve Gottlieb, chairman of the Frederick County Republican Central Committee....

JUICE #4: MARYLAND GOP CHAIR ALEX MOONEY TRIES TO CLAIM VICTORY AFTER PROGRESSIVE ELECTION RESULTS - Politicos are scoffing at a post-election message that Maryland GOP Chair Alex Mooney sent out declaring victory for Free State Republicans. Mooney pointed to Cecil County GOP victories as proof. Check out some of his delusions below (excerpt below):
ALEX MOONEY: Fellow Republicans, I would like to first thank you for all of your hard work during this election season. While November 6th didn't bring all of the results we sought, Maryland Republicans continued to succeed--notably in Cecil County where I am pleased to inform you that Tari Moore, a Republican, won the newly created County Executive position. Republicans Robert Hodge and Alan McCarthy also won both County Council seats in Cecil County which were up for election on Tuesday.

We now have over 1 million registered Republicans in Maryland--and that number is growing.... What's more, we were able to petition three of Martin O'Malley's signature pieces of legislation to referendum.... All of this success is a direct result of your efforts...

We had a great crop of candidates in this cycle ... their candidacies laid the groundwork for the 2014 elections and changing the conversation in Maryland, which has been one-sided for far too long....

The Maryland GOP's Executive Director also attempted to spin the results as a success for his party. Check out the remarks in The Capital Gazette:
CAPITAL GAZETTE: Despite going 0-for-3 in the Maryland GOP’s Tuesday referendum rollout, Republican Party officials say putting the Dream Act, same-sex marriage and congressional redistricting up for statewide votes was a successful strategy....

“When people say Tuesday’s election was a loss for the GOP, it absolutely was not. I didn’t expect the headline in the Annapolis Capital (Wednesday) to be ‘Maryland Republicans have overwhelming success,’ but it ought to be....”
“I don’t know how you could look through that narrow of a lens and think it was a good thing for the Republican Party,” said House Speaker Michael E. Busch, D-Annapolis....

Some Republican activists in Maryland are incredulous about the claims of victory from the state party and are placing the blame at the feet of Alex Mooney. See a couple of Tweets below:






More analysis of Maryland election results soon!