2010 Election Richard Falknor on 25 Sep 2010 12:49 pm
SCROLL TO BOTTOM FOR MORE RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
* * * * *
“Lawyers and other staff within the Voting Section also refused to work on the Brown case, Coates testified, because they did not believe the Justice Department should prosecute blacks or other racial minorities — no matter what law they violated. Coates testified [yesterday] that he had complained about this attitude and unwritten policy to Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Thomas Perez, a political appointee. When Perez testified before the Civil Rights Commission, he said no such policy or problem existed.” (Underscoring Forum’s.)in “Time for Change: Gov’t Must Address Lawlessness Uncovered by Christopher Coates“
Last Thursday, 13 House of Delegates GOP incumbents (out of 37 House of Delegates GOP incumbents), and 36 other GOP House of Delegates candidates signed a “Prosperity Pledge” for Maryland. This apparently Tony O’Donnell-inspired document declared – –
“We believe a government of the people, by the people, and for the people should operate in the full light of day, and be accessible and accountable to the people.”
Fine. Admirable sentiments.
But Will Mr. O’Donnell Reveal Why He Supported Tom Perez?
Will Republican leader O’Donnell bring into the “full light of day” his purpose in sending a letter on House of Delegates letterhead (and thus implying that he was speaking for the House of Delegates Republican Caucus) to the chairman of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in support of the confirmation of Mr. Tom Perez. Mr. O’Donnell submitted this confirmation support in the face of opposition to Mr. Perez from Republican U.S. senators and Judiciary Committee members Jeff Sessions and Tom Coburn.
After all, Mr. O’Donnell’s communication was not a personal letter to, say, the Senate Agriculture Committee chairman and ranking Republican endorsing for confirmation a long-time friend from childhood for some plain-vanilla position like, maybe, an assistant agriculture secretary for county extension work and practical research.
Mr. O’Donnell endorsed a major Obama Administration player.
Coincidentally or not, former Maryland state chairman (and husband of Mary Kane, GOP lieutenant-governor nominee) John Kane wrote an effusive letter around the same time to the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman and ranking Republican member urging the confirmation of Mr. Perez. Both Kane and O’Donnell were prominent members of governor Bob Ehrlich’s team when he was in office (2003-2007): O’Donnell was House of Delegates Republican Whip (Republican leader since 2007); John Kane was Maryland GOP chairman.
Real transparency, in this case, would seem to indicate that the public learn:
- Did Mr. O’Donnell coordinate his letter with Mr. Kane, or vice versa? If so, what were the details?
- Did Mr. O’Donnell discuss his letter with former governor Ehrlich?
- Did Mr. O’Donnell tell the House of Delegates GOP Caucus what he was going to do? If so, what did they say?
We have been posting about these two letters, Mr. O’Donnell’s and Mr. Kane’s, in support of Mr. Perez since October 7, 2009:
Yet we have heard nothing from any GOP member in the House of Delegates. Must we then presume Mr. O’Donnell’s 2009 support of the confirmation of Mr. Perez expressed the position of the Maryland House of Delegates GOP Caucus as well?
We keep returning to the subject of Mr. Perez as more abuses in the civil-rights division of the Department of Justice come to light. Marylander Perez is among those at the center of a national political storm.
For the record, we would like to hear from any House of Delegates Republicans who were not in agreement with Republican leader Tony O’Donnell’s support for the confirmation of Tom Perez.
Quick Review of the House of Delegates “Prosperity Pledge”
More coming on the “Prosperity Pledge for Maryland” and the several conservative watchdog(s) that weren’t allowed to bark, and the Pledge signers’ view that Democratic tax hikes are toxic (they are) but that it is best for GOP leaders to leave Republican tax hikes unrepealed and to leave regulatory tax hikes supported by many GOP lawmakers unmentioned.
On the positive side, the Pledge is certainly an improvement on the policy-starved Ehrlich Road Map.
Most important the document says: “We categorically reject any new taxes or tax increases and will vigorously fight them if introduced.”
The Pledge moves timidly to address Maryland’s “sanctuary state for illegals” problem proposing very limited e-verify.
On the debit side, the word “pension” does not appear in the Pledge which means discussions of the state budget crisis and its connection with public-employee pensions are so much professor Luftmensch.
At least the subject of pork is raised, but more is needed in the way of specific fixes.
Lip service is given to a Taxpayer Bill of Rights without specifying the elements of such a proposal. As we have written many times, a quick alternative to a such an unlikely constitutional amendment is for the House Republican caucus simply to agree not to vote for any operating budget in excess of population growth and inflation.
And let’s not overlook the Pledge’s other important “sleeper” – – “Maryland’s elections must be transparent and secure. We must ensure that those who vote in Maryland’s elections are legally authorized to do so by requiring voters to show valid photo identification in order to vote. Photo identification is required for so many mundane day-to-day activities, it is not unreasonable to require it to protect the security of our elections.”
Stay tuned on the Pledge.
ADD-ON September 26 via Election Law Center: From Washington Times last Friday “EDITORIAL: Black Panther case: Red hot Witness cites Obama team’s ‘hostility’ to the law”: “Mr. Coates now has confirmed sworn testimony from other witnesses that Mr. Perez‘s team did and continues to act in a race-biased manner. Mr. Coates swore that he told the same thing to Mr. Perez before Mr. Perez testified in May. Even before that, multiple press reports dating back to last September indicated this allegation of racialist nonenforcement of voting rights laws was a serious concern. Yet Mr. Perez seems to have questioned nobody about it, disciplined nobody over it or raised a finger to address the problem.”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.