MD4steve's Maryland 4th District idea page

Steve Schulin for Congress -
June 17 write-in - Maryland's 4th District

Steve Schulin tells public TV managers that the Constitution is not a prop

Steve Schulin, write-in candidate in the June 17 special congressional election, says "The Constitution is not a prop." The Montgomery County public TV managers did not allow their equipment to photograph Steve holding up his pocket Constitution, but a staffer took this shot with Steve's iPhone.

- - - - -

May 7, 2008

Maryland Independent Party - Proposed Platform

Maryland Independent Party has as its goal the return of our nation to the set of foundational principles clearly defined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. We call them "the American Principles." We believe that the American Principles are the "first things" that our country should consider -- in domestic policy, foreign policy, the internal functioning of government, and in using the "bully pulpit" of public office and the political arena to promote certain societal virtues and behaviors.

The protection of the life, liberty, and private property of the people is the primary reason for the existence of human government, and more particularly, of our precious American republican form of self-government. This is why we willingly accept no breach of the rights of the free exercise of religion, free speech, free press, free assembly, free association, and the right to petition government for the redress of grievances. We defend all of the enumerated rights listed in our Bill of Rights, and, in addition, all natural rights which are not enumerated, as per the Ninth Amendment.

We seek to restore the intended balance between the three separate branches of our government, and to strictly limit government to the enumerated powers granted and expressed by the will of the people of the United States in our Constitution. All existing functions of the executive branch that are outside of those enumerated powers must be eliminated. All spending and regulation by the legislative branch that lies outside the enumerated powers must cease. Judges who attempt to legislate from the bench, or who abandon the clear principles of our Constitution, must be checked if liberty and justice are to prevail in our society once again. We call for the restoration of adherence to the provisions of the Tenth Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

We believe in a supremely strong, prepared, and well-equipped civilian-controlled United States military, and a bold, visionary and intelligent program of principled constructive engagement with the rest of the world. For us, "peace through strength" is not a mere slogan. It is the means of survival for our country in a very dangerous and often hostile world. Our friendship should be a sought-after possession of all men and women of good will everywhere in the world. Our enmity should be something that all rightfully fear.

As Ronald Reagan opposed and defeated the designs and desire of the Soviet Union to dominate the world and place it under the tyranny of their Evil Empire, we oppose the Islamic extremists. This opposition is not based in opposition to their religion, but in a complete rejection of their political ideology and actions. Since the first principle of America is the protection of innocent human life, an ongoing state of war exists between us and any who would use acts of terrorism targeted at innocent civilians to forward their political aims.

We completely oppose any action that surrenders the political and economic sovereignty of the United States and its people, and support the immediate restoration of that sovereignty wherever it has been eroded.

We support the immediate securing and continuous vigilant maintenance of our sovereign territory and borders. We oppose any private or governmental action that rewards illegal entry into the United States in any way, and demand speedy and full enforcement of our laws concerning all such activities. To stop the so-called "anchor baby" practice, we urge that the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment be changed: instead of "born in the United States" it should read "born of a citizen of the United States."

We consider the federal income tax to be destructive of our liberty, privacy, and prosperity. Therefore, we are working toward its complete elimination and the repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We recommend that the current system be quickly replaced by a fair, simple, noninvasive, visible, efficient, consumption-based retail tax similar to the proposal popularly known as the FairTax. However, there are other constitutional tax reform proposals that are worthy of the people's consideration.

Because the stated ultimate purpose of our Constitution is "to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity," we recognize the personhood of all unborn children and their protection by the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments. The right to life of all innocent persons, from conception to natural death, is God-given and unalienable. For the principled man or woman, no compromise is possible concerning such a critical matter of life and death. We believe that violators of this supreme right, in their words and actions, are unfit for any office of public trust, since this constitutes the breaking of the oath of office and the destruction of the very basis of our liberty.

The right of self-preservation and self-protection is inherent in all persons, communities and societies, which is why we fiercely defend the indispensable provisions of our Second Amendment. Liberty cannot be defended if the people have been stripped of the physical means of doing so.

We also call for the repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment. Its enactment greatly reduced the power of our state legislatures and state governments -- which are much closer to the people -- and damaged our system of federalism.

While we do not acknowledge that our Constitution limits Congress in any way from protecting traditional marriage between one man and one woman, we support passage of a federal marriage Amendment to the U.S. Constitution for the purpose of removing any confusion or misunderstanding in the minds of judges.

Though in civic terms we call ourselves "independent," we fully acknowledge our utter dependence, as individuals and as a nation, on Almighty God and His divine Providence and Protection. We also recognize, and seek to actively fulfill, our obligations as individual citizens to the whole body of the people, as well as our responsibility to maintain standards of high moral character, both personally and in our public life.

Maryland Independent Party seeks a return to an approach to government that facilitates respectful and necessary debate, thereby drawing on the collective wisdom and knowledge of the entire body of the sovereign people. We truly do believe in government of, by and for the people, and our intent is to foster it by every means at our disposal. We believe that the American Principles work whenever they are practiced diligently. And so, we ask that you join with us in restoring and defending America and thereby securing the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

- - - - -

"Contemplating" ...

Your humble host
agrees with the signers of
Declaration of Independence
that all men are created equal,
endowed by their Creator with
certain unalienable rights,
including the rights to life,
liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness

- - - - - - - - - -

t-shirt
'I promise
not to talk politics
during dinner'
-------------------

Steve's favorite news links

* The Newseum's daily compendium of front pages from around the world

* Google News, Maryland election items, updated continuously throughout the day.

* nuclear.com - Steve's own site

* The Compleat Advocate - Steve's new public policy discussion site

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

* John Kerry took 78 percent of the district's vote in his 2004 challenge to President Bush.

* The Republican candidate in June 17 special election sent out post cards which state, in part, "Voter turnout for Maryland's 4th Congressional District special election to replace Al Wynn is expected to be under well 10% on June 17th. In May we had two special general elections in our district. The turn outs were 4% and 8%."

Older highlights
for newer items - see main page

June 17, 2008

And the winner is ...

It looks like the Democrat Donna Edwards dominated today despite abysmally small turnout. I spent much of the day at my precinct. I pulled 9% of the votes there as a write-in. That was clearly much higher than the 0.75% write-ins reported at the 65 Montgomery County precincts reporting as of 10:16 pm, and 0.5% write-ins reported by the 81 (of 110) precincts reporting in Prince George's County as of 9:34 pm.

The partial totals vindicate the estimate that 25,000 votes would be enough to win. It looks like Edwards' total could end up being less than 15,000.

The county boards are continuing to update their results -- see the Montgomery page and the Prince George's page.

I've enjoyed talking with many voters here over the past five weeks, and look forward to meeting many more between now and November. I'll be filing as a write-in again tomorrow, but expect to run in November under the ballot line of the Maryland Independent Party, to be earned by successful petition -- 10,000 signatures by August 4. I urge Keyes supporters in every Congressional District to do the same.

June 16, 2008

Candidates' Forum

Access Montgomery invited the candidates to come to their studio and record up to four minutes for broadcast every day during the week or so prior to the June 17 special election. The 14-minute video is also available for viewing online anytime at here.

Cable Channel 21 in Montgomery County will broadcast the 14-minute compilation of candidate statements tonight and tomorrow, as follows:

Tonight at 11:30 PM, and 11:44 PM

Tomorrow, election day, at 11:00 AM, 11:30 AM, 12:00 noon, 12:30 PM, 1:00 PM, 1:30 PM, and 5:00 PM

Polls will be open from 7:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. Best wishes and thanks to all who vote, and a special measure of appreciation to those of you who consider casting write-in vote for Steve Schulin.

June 12, 2008

League of Women Voters - Voters Guide

Thank you to the League of Women Voters for inviting the candidates to answer questions. Please compare Steve Schulin's answers to those of the other candidates. Voters Guides were published by both Prince George's County and Montgomery County.

May 28, 2008

Marriage - recent government actions threaten the very basis of our claim to the right of self-government

I've proposed a platform for Maryland Independent Party. It discusses the defense of marriage as follows: "While we do not acknowledge that our Constitution limits Congress in any way from protecting traditional marriage between one man and one woman, we support passage of a federal marriage Amendment to the U.S. Constitution for the purpose of removing any confusion or misunderstanding in the minds of judges."

Since then, the Supreme Court of California has issued its opinion that a similar defense of traditional marriage, adopted by vote of the people of California, is invalid. Whether or not this opinion is let to stand is a serious matter for many reasons. I'd like to discuss one that you will likely have heard only if you were participating in the Alan Keyes for President conference call last night. One of the things that I've long appreciated about Dr. Keyes is his thorough understanding of the importance of the concept expressed in the Declaration of Independence, that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. In other nations, your rights are determined by the government, or by your fellow citizens. But here in the USA, our founding fathers claimed the right to self-govern because our Natural rights trumped the sovereignty of the King of England. The King did not take kindly to that claim, and it took a hard war before our claim prevailed over the might of the crown. How we react to this California court opinion is a key component in whether we, as Dr. Keyes put it, "perpetuate or destroy our institutions of self-government". The court's opinion -- that government officials decide what a family is -- represents a rejection of that central claim of our founders, that there are self-evident truths which government must reflect, and which government may not justly countermand. There is no more self-evident natural institution than the family. The bonds between parents and children are not the product of government decree. If this court opinion is allowed to have the force of law, then we are rejecting the idea that government must respect the self-evident natural rights described in the Declaration.

There's a recording of Dr. Keyes' comments available on the audio archive page at www.alankeyes.com, but the recording is pretty poor. Here's my transcription of approximately seven minutes of the call:

...[T]his decision in California ... in which the Supreme Court in California expressed its view that the action that had been taken by the people of California to show respect for traditional marriage and make it clear that that was the form of marriage in California, that that was somehow unconstitutional ... [garbled]

And as usual, we have seen an ignorance, sadly, from people who profess to be supporters of the traditional family, and opponents of the abuses that take place in our courts. And yet, many of them, oblivious to what was actually written in the decision and what is actually possible ... [garbled] ... are actually acting as if what the Supreme Court of California said has the force of law -- which of course it does not. It was an opinion expressed. And an opinion expressed on a Constitutional question, contrary to the expressed will of the people by Constitutional means, obviously has no more ground than anything that is said by any other individual in this country. Since at the end of the day, though they want us constantly to forget it, it is the people who are the ultimate arbiters of constitutional [garbled], because each constitution, whether it's in California or at the national level, speaks for We the People. And when the People, directly, by vote, or amendment, have expressed their voice, [garbled] the court is subordinate to that voice. It does not have rule over that voice. And that is something that now of course is being totally ignored while our system is being transformed.

And it's being transformed from a government of, by, and for the people to a government that is essentially based upon the rule of the few. The few are favored with judicial appointments, with wealth and power. The ultimate decision as to the fundamental issues of justice and right in our society will no longer be taken by the People.

And I think it's also instructive that this abuse of power which overturns the Constitutional system of government comes on an issue that exemplifies the assault on the basic understanding of rights -- the basis of which as a People we claim our natural rights, our right to self-government, our right to liberty.

Many people, sadly, and I would have to tell you, all of the leaders that I see up there, do not understand the serious connection between this whole issue of homosexual marriage so-called and the question of whether or not we shall remain a self-governing people. ... [garbled]

The Declaration of Independence which stated in simple and clear terms the rationale for our system of government, ascribed our claim to self-government to an idea of natural rights, unalienable rights that come from the hand of God.

The paradigm of such natural rights is of course the family. And the relations -- and bonds of mutual obligation and respect and authority and caring, concern -- that characterize the relationship between parents and children, children and parents; a relationship that is respected by the law and in various ways the law has to deal with it and reflect it. The authority that [garbled] that relationship that establishes those obligations is not an authority that arises from human law or decision because the family is an institution grounded in our very nature. It is a natural institution. It is an institution that reflects a kind of belonging that does not rise from the creation of property by the state or the law or decisions of government. No. It is a kind of belonging that arises directly from the way that we are made. And from the bonds and relationships that arise [garbled] of a process of procreation that is inherent in our nature, and that reflects of course the will of God for us. In that sense the family is the paradigm of natural right. And the relationship that arises in a family, the sense of obligation and expectation; the fact that a certain kind of care to children is their due, and a certain kind of respect from children to the authority of parents is their obligation -- those things do not depend on humanly-made laws. They are a reflection of the deep decisions of God that inform and instruct our very biological functions and give rise to the first human community which is the family.

Once we have, however, gone down the road in which we accept the notion that the object of what constitutes marriage and family life can be arbitrarily determined by the decision of judges or even by the decision of legislatures, then by that fact alone we reject the very idea of natural rights that is the foundation of our claim to self-government, and to be a people respected in our right, therefore, to self-government.

That means that issue of homosexual marriage isn't just about individual behavior. It's not even just about how our families will be constituted in some formal and social sense. It is actually about the way in which we understand the universe itself, and whether we accept or reject the concept of God-ordained natural right that is the basis for our claim to liberty.

Once we decide that the most self-evident natural institution -- which is what the family is -- is in fact grounded in arbitrary human ... [garbled]

That idea represents the rejection of God, the rejection of natural authority, the rejection of natural right, and at the end of the day, the rejection of that which is the very foundation stone of the idea that makes us free.

I'm sad to tell you that you probably won't hear that exposition of this issue from anybody but me. It certainly hasn't been reflected in utter indifference -- of people like John McCain and others -- to the terrible enormity of what the court in California is doing. But it's no accident that -- in both the way in which these decisions are being made, and the substance of the decisions themselves -- we see, clearly, the image of the end of our system of government of, by, and for the people.

In the fact that the courts arrogate to themselves to overturn that which the people in their sovereign capacity have said and done -- and in the fact that the substance they decide upon -- utterly denies the very concept of natural right, without which we cannot sustain our claim to freedom.

In a sense, therefore, this issue of homosexual marriage is the paradigm of the crisis that seems now to be upon us, which is the crisis that will determine once and for all whether we perpetuate or destroy our institutions of self-government.

- - - - - END OF EXCERPT FROM ALAN KEYES COMMENTS LAST NIGHT - - - - -

One of the callers asked Alan what we can do to help ensure that we elect candidates to Congress who share his views. Well, I'd like to invite every one who can to help do just that in the June 17 special election in Maryland for the 4th Congressional District seat in U.S. House of Representatives. My name is Steve Schulin, and I am registered as a write-in candidate in this election, which means that votes for me will be counted. If five hundred folks will volunteer to spend election day at the various precincts here, informing voters about this unique opportunity to tell the dominant parties not to take their votes for granted, I can win this election. How about it? This one June election, in an overwhelmingly Democrat district, could easily end up affecting the August conventions, and might even help get Alan Keyes into the national televised debates in the fall. Please email me for details on which precinct to cover, and what you should bring. If you can't come, please consider helping out financially. Contributions can be mailed to Steve Schulin for Congress, PO Box 5652, Rockville MD 20855.

May 28, 2008

A survey of various candidates' positions on guns, and what those positions mean

I've proposed a platform for Maryland Independent Party. It discusses the right to keep and bear arms as follows: "The right of self-preservation and self-protection is inherent in all persons, communities and societies, which is why we fiercely defend the indispensable provisions of our Second Amendment. Liberty cannot be defended if the people have been stripped of the physical means of doing so."

I'd like to point out what other candidates have to say on the subject:

Start with the Democrats. In preparation for the June 3 primary, a Montana newspaper asked Senators Clinton and Obama the following question: "Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer has said he is skeptical a Democrat can beat John McCain here because of a real or perceived weakness on gun rights. Do you think Gov. Schweitzer is correct and how do you reconcile any need for gun law reforms in urban areas with the anxiety many Westerners may feel that their Second Amendment rights may be trampled?"

Here's their answers:

Sen. Clinton: "Well, I believe strongly in the Second Amendment and the right for responsible gun ownership. Obviously hunting and fishing are traditions that are especially important to generations of Montanans and I think it's important too that we look to strike the right balance that doesn't in any way infringe on the rights of lawful gun owners but endeavors to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and gang members and people who, unfortunately, have been adjudicated as in some way mentally fragile or disabled. And I don't see any contradiction between those two very important goals. So I'm going to work to preserve and promote responsible gun ownership. I want to make sure we preserve access to public lands for hunting and fishing and I want to see if we can support law enforcement in a constitutional manner to try to make sure that guns don't fall into the wrong hands."

Sen. Obama: "Well I think you just identified exactly the argument that has to be made. And that is that we have two realities when it comes to guns in this country. You've got illegal guns landing on the streets in the hands of gang-bangers in places like Chicago where children have been shot on the streets in astonishing numbers, and then you've got law abiding gun owners who are hunting, and sportsmen, and keeping a gun in the house to protect their family, and who have a tradition of lawful gun ownership dating back generations. It's part of a way of life. The key is to reconcile those two realities.

The voters of Montana need to understand that I believe in the Second Amendment, I believe it is an individual right and I will not encroach on their right to get firearms and to do everything that they're doing right now. What I do want to see is better enforcement when it comes to handguns that are pouring into the streets of urban centers and that means better background checks, it means being able to trace guns that are used in crimes back to gun dealers that may be violating our laws. It means closing the gun show loophole. Those are, I think, some common sense regulations that in no way will impede on the ability of lawful gun owners in Montana or anywhere else in the country from exercising their Second Amendment rights."

Steve Schulin's view of their answers:

You'll notice that both these Democrat candidates mention hunting. Obama mentions sportsmen, and families with tradition. Hillary even mentions fishing. It's important to stress that this emphasis on sports as a basis for the second amendment represents a serious misunderstanding; the word "silly" would be a fair way to begin to characterize their views, if it weren't so serious a matter. The second amendment is not about sports. It is about a free people having the means to repel those who would try to trample the unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I do appreciate that Sen. Obama states that the second amendment is an individual right. I recall Sen. Clinton saying the same thing in Pennsylvania recently. There are many advocates of gun control who vehemently disagree that second amendment is referring to individuals. I suspect that they will vote for Hillary or Obama despite this diifference, because they reasonably might conclude that the Democrats still in the race will pursue the same gun-grabbing policies regardless of their position on whose rights the second amendment describes.

Now, how about Sen. McCain? I urge you to check out the web page put up by the organization Gun Owners of America (GOA). Their McCain page is at http://www.gunowners.org/mccaintb.htm. They give McCain a failing grade in recent years. I especially recommend the GOA Alerts links shown at the bottom of the page, such as "McCain Still Trying To Gag Gun Owner Criticism Of His Anti-gun Record".

Alan Keyes is the candidate I enthusiastically support for President this year. His website alankeyes.com includes an archive of dozens of inspiring video and audio recordings of various speeches and interviews over the past twenty years or so, many with transcripts that can be searched for words and phrases online. Here's an excerpt that showed up in a search on "gun control". It's from an interview during the Illinois Senate campaign of 2004, and I agree with every word:

... the argument on gun control is very clear. The Second Amendment is there so that we never lose either the practice or the mentality of defending our liberty. Self-government, government by representative institutions, in human history went hand and hand with the willingness of common people to overcome their fear of weapons and take up those weapons in defense of their own rights. If we lose that mentality in which we are willing to stand fast in defense of our liberties, we will lose those liberties. So, the Second Amendment isn't just about gun bearing.

And also, gun control is absurd. If the law-abiding citizens can't carry weapons, and they obey the law, then the only people who will have the weapons are people willing to break the law--that is to say, the crooks. So, you'll have disarmed law-abiding people and armed crooks. That sounds like a real uneven match, and I think it's idiotic to suggest that a society should place itself in that position."

May 19, 2008

Caption contest

photo for political caption contest

This photo crop is the highlight on The Sun of Baltimore's "Images in the news" feature today. I instantly sensed that there's something about this shot that speaks to politics in the USA this year. I invite all to suggest captions for this photo -- and the best will get one of my eBay finds from over the years. Email entry to caption_contest@md4steve.org.

Addition to immigration plank of platform

I've added the following to the draft platform I propose for Maryland Independent Party:

To stop the so-called "anchor baby" practice, we urge that the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment be changed: instead of "born in the United States" it should read "born of a citizen of the United States."

May 12, 2008

Steve Schulin will be write-in candidate for the special election

Did you know that write-in votes are often not even counted? Well, that will not be the case this time, if you write-in Steve Schulin. Your write-in vote for me at the poll will count, or, if you will be absent or unable to vote in person in the election, you can write-in my name on absentee ballot. The form to request absentee ballot is now available here. Download the pdf file, fill it out, and send it to your county board of elections at the address listed on the form. The board of elections will then send you an absentee ballot. It's a good idea to request the absentee ballot as soon as you know you should. Applications must be received by the board by June 10 (4:30 pm if by mail, 11:59 pm if by fax). After the deadline, a late application must be submitted in person at local board.

We did not get the 10,000 signatures in 10 days in order to get the new Maryland Independent Party a slot on the ballot for this June 17 election. But the reasons to vote for Steve Schulin to serve the remaining six months or so in this Congressional term are every bit as valid regardless of the ballot access. If anything, the impact of the write-in win will be even more resounding in telling the dominant parties not to take your vote for granted. I respectfully ask each and every voter in the 4th Congressional District for your vote in this extraordinary election.

May 7, 2008

Steve's platform, as he proposes to be adopted by the Maryland Independent Party

May 1, 2008

Some numbers about electricity prices

The lead story in yesterday's The Sun of Baltimore noted that there's already been an 85% increase in electricity rates since 2006, and that BG&E last week got approval for an 8% rate increase. The story was about the increase in state funds this year used to pay benefits via Maryland's Electric Universal Services Program. State Dept of Human Resources officials estimate that during the fiscal year ending next month, 113,000 households will have received $64-million in benefits via this program. That's $12-million more than budgeted. Another story about electricity prices that caught my eye yesterday was from Alaska. The electricity demand in Juneau was cut by about 30% in a week without any new laws. The reason: folks were faced with the prospect of paying five times more than normal for their power because the transmission lines bringing in cheap hydropower got destroyed in avalanches. The article I saw in Anchorage Daiy Record reported such details as the local stores selling out of clothespins used to hang laundry to dry. One of the policy proposals I've been urging as part of a "no-regrets" approach to energy conservation is to nullify any covenant, common in homeowner association bylaws across the country, which prohibits folks from using outdoor clotheslines. The Alaska paper mused that many children in Juneau were seeing clothespins for the first time in their lives this week.

- - - - -

Special Congressional Election Here Will Affect Presidential Race
Maryland Independent Party asks 10,000 voters to sign petition in 10 days

Here's body of press release sent out Tuesday afternoon:

On June 14, voters in Montgomery and Prince Georges County can send a clear message to the dominant parties that they should stop taking people's votes for granted. Rockville's Steve Schulin is urging all Marylanders of good will to help by signing petition to allow a new political party, called Maryland Independent Party, to have a line on the ballot. The State Board of Elections has set May 9 as the deadline for filing such petitions.

"This special election to fill the seat being vacated by Rep. Wynn comes at a perfect time to put the national Democratic Party superdelegates on notice that people are steamed at the prospect of being treated like dirt", Schulin said. "If you wanted to design as innocuous a tool as possible for this purpose, you could not do better than this six-month Congressional term. An independent candidate win in this heavily Democratic district would get tremendous national buzz. There's no other election results to compete. Folks across the nation would be pointing to this for months as a sign that the public is not pleased with the leadership provided by both parties."

Schulin sees much on the national agenda of the major parties that doesn't bode well for Maryland. "Obama, Clinton and McCain all share an alarmist view on the climatic effects of carbon dioxide. And Donna Edwards, endorsed by Sierra Club for the House seat, also thinks the science is settled enough to mandate caps on carbon dioxide emissions," he said. "The science is not nearly settled enough for the kinds of drastic and expensive changes these leaders recommend. We've already seen big price increases for electricity in Maryland. My Democratic opponent supports a shoddy scheme that will raise prices more for no good reason. I will request special order speech time every day during this short term," he said, "and highlight a different exaggeration by the warmists in every speech."

The petition and address to mail it in can be obtained on the web at http://www.md4steve.org

About the candidate and the party

Steve Schulin, the founding editor at nuclear.com, chaired the Maryland delegation at last week's national nominating convention of the Constitution Party, the nation's third largest political party as measured by number of registered voters. Maryland cast its two votes at the convention for favorite son Alan Keyes of Montgomery County. The new party, however, is an independent state party, not affiliated with any national party.

For more information about Maryland Independent Party, or this particular news angle, please contact Steve ...

- - - - -

Congratulations to Peter James for removing Santeria story from his web page

My opponent has removed the Santeria story discussed below from his web page. He has also removed his disclosure of how he intends to spend most of his time if elected to be our Representative. I don't know if he has changed his mind about his priorities. I hope he'll publicly elaborate on the matter.

April 28, 2008

Marylanders please help

The only parties on the ballot in Maryland are Democrats, Republicans, Greens and Libertarians. You can help change that. Please download this petition, print out a few copies, and ask those registered voters you encounter today and tomorrow to support more choice on the ballot this year by signing. Write your county name in the top blank. If the prospective signer is from a different county, a different copy, with his or her county name on it, should be used. The signatures get validated on county-by-county basis, so signing under wrong county does no good. Other than that, the form is pretty self-explanatory. When you're done getting signatures, please be sure to fill out the information at the bottom about you, the circulator, and then mail the completed form to the address listed on the form.

April 22, 2008

A call to Peter James to back up what he says about the Santeria story

As part of trying to verify the interesting story offered by my opponent (as highlighted here a couple of days ago), I called up the Library and Legislative Services librarians at the state Department of Legislative Services in Annapolis. A very nice librarian named Anette found no evidence for the specific claim about the 1987 rider or the 1992 repeal. She also looked through the entire record of who had served in the state legislature and there is no Charles Highweather amongst them. She also searched her Department's clippings during the alleged repeal timeframe from Baltimore paper the The Sun. No mention. So I respectfully ask Peter James to back up the story or stop spreading it as if it were fact.

April 20, 2008

Peter James' website is very worthwhile for voters to visit, including story about how "Santeria" became, and stayed on for several years, the official state religion of Maryland (1987-1992!)

Peter James is the Republican in this race. His website is full of interesting stuff. I agree with him on many things, including his conclusion that the Republican party has failed our nation. Here's how he put it, in the section titled What happened to The Republican CONTRACT With AMERICA? as I saw when reading on April 20, 2008:

"We Republicans have breached our contract.

For four years the new Republican Congress kept their promise and reduced federal spending. Coming very close to a balanced budget. Then all the honorable men and women, that signed term limit pledges, kept that promise and did not seek another term. We were left with mostly Republicans in name only. Since then spending has risen to fantastic levels. If we are ever to win back the confidence of America, we must confess our guilt and redeem ourselves by upholding that contract.

Help me to return to the true Republican ideals of limited central government and return the power to the people and the states.

Most voters spend more time shopping for a car then for a representative. I am not going to make it easy for you. I expect you to spend many hours reviewing my and other candidates materials. We as a people can never expect to fix government without understanding the mechanics of the system.

'If once the people become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, Judges and Governors, shall all become wolves. It seems to be the law of our general nature, in spite of individual exceptions.' - Thomas Jefferson

Do not let this chance pass us by. Get involved. Tell your friends. Vote."

[END OF EXCERPT FROM MY OPPONENT's WEB PAGE]

I very much agree with Mr. James' comments about his party. I was a Republican, and shared his dismay. If a better candidate had emerged this year as presumptive Republican nominee for President, I might not have changed my party affiliation last month.

Here's the paragraph from his site about our state's recent declaration of (dare I say establishment of) an official religion:

"It is not well known but the Maryland Official State Religion was Santeria between 1987 and 1992. This occurred because one Maryland Senator, Charles Highweather, a priest of this religion, placed a rider on a long transportation bill that he correctly suspected none of the legislators would read. The oversight was finally discovered by a 9 year old boy, who wrote about it in his class paper. Santerians place hexes on people not in their favor and perform ritual animal sacrifices.

If such an obvious unconstitutional provision can become law, imagine how many other unconstitutional provision of a subtler nature are enacted every year. If elected I will spend most of my time and energy rooting out and repeal these laws."

[END OF EXCERPT FROM MY OPPONENT's WEB PAGE]

This sounds like a story that the old Montgomery Journal would have covered, and I recall they had their stories from those years available in their archives the last time I checked. Alas, I see that The Journal stopped publishing in 2005, and their assets were apparently purchased by The Examiner. A search of the Maryland papers in the Lexis-Nexis archive didn't show any hits using a variety of the best search term combinations I could think of. Googling the web showed one source on the matter; it looks like one of those wiki-style sites. Here's the link and the paragraph:

"In 1992 Maryland residents were surprised to discover that not only did they have an official state religion, but that religion was the Afro-Cuban import known colloquially as 'Santeria'. This fact was discovered by a nine-year-old boy while doing research for a Civics class paper; his startled teacher pursued the matter on his own and discovered that the boy's outlandish assertion was indeed a matter of public record.

When the story broke in the local newspapers, Marylanders learned that this addition to the state's roster of official persons, places, and things took place in 1987, where it was introduced as a rider appended to legislation regarding a planned highway project. The author of the rider, Democratic state senator Charles Highweather, admitted when contacted about the matter that he had for years led a double life as a Santerian priest or babalocha who went by the name of 'Papa Guegue' and performed services for paying clients that included hexing their enemies and foretelling the future by examining patterns in spilled chicken blood.

Shortly thereafter an amendment was rushed through by the mortified legislature eliminating the category of 'official state religion' altogether."

[END OF EXCERPT FROM everything2.com]

I found this story interesting in many ways, and though I agree that cleaning out the unconstitutional provisions in old laws is important, I personally will spend more time as your Congressperson on ensuring that the new laws being passed are better than the old. If Mr. James really means what he says about how he will spend most of his time, well, that's a big difference between us that I hope you'll consider. If he edits that line to reflect better prioritization, I congratulate him. If anyone out there can tell me more about this story, please send it along. My preference these days is email, but any method that's convenient for you is welcome.

A nice Ms. Lincoln at Montgomery County Public Library's "Ask A Librarian" phone service today couldn't find anything else on this in her first attempts, either. But she said she'd keep checking as time allowed during the day. The 1992 Montgomery Journal issues are still available on fiche, she said.

One final thing about Mr. James' site. I admire his obvious intellectual curiousity and courage. He prominently displays a "Mouse Land" video from Canada that contains much that is relevant to our current state of political affairs in the USA. The part about the difference between the two major parties gets my enthusiastic applause.

April 18, 2008

The democrats aren't so pro-choice when it comes to the choices on the ballot

Bob Benenson of CQpolitics.com recalls that the last special Congressional election in Maryland was in April 1996, to fill the seat vacated by Rep. Kweisi Mfume (resigned to become president of NAACP). The circumstances were very different then, but it is noteworthy to point out that fully 27 candidates arose for Democratic primary in that case.

There will be no primary this time. And that is because our Democrat Governor requested our Democrat-majority legislature to pass a bill to set a single special election date with nominees chosen by party officials rather than by primary voters. The move was justified as cutting the length of time that the seat will be vacant and saving taxpayers the roughly $1 million it would have cost to hold a primary.

April 17, 2008

Gov. O'Malley plans to call for June 17 special election for House seat to be vacated by Rep. Wynn

Channel 4 WRC news reported this afternoon that Gov. Martin O'Malley said he will set a June 17 special election to replace Rep. Albert Wynn, who is stepping down in June after losing the Democratic primary. O'Malley said finding a replacement is important, because nearly a quarter of Wynn's two-year term remains. Local Democratic and Republican party officials from the two counties will choose a candidate for the special general election. If local party officials can't decide, then state party officials will make the decision. O'Malley will officially issue a proclamation calling for the June 17 election on Friday.

Michael Teitelbaum of CQpolitics.com reports that Peter James, the winner of the February Republican primary for the November election, has said he might sue to block the new law, charging that district residents' right to choose party nominees in a primary is being abridged and that the legislation creates a short time frame that would restrict the ability of third-party candidates to gather enough signatures to qualify for the special election ballot. O'Malley is required by newly signed law to set deadlines for the candidates nominated by their parties to qualify for the ballot.

April 16, 2008

Update on President Bush's climate policy remarks today

He stopped short of the kind of mandatory cap program proposed by McCain, Clinton/Obama and rest of the nincompoops on that side of the issue, but he surely gave aid and comfort to the alarmists today. There's no excuse for President Bush to get this wrong. Yet, here we are. Many will take some cheer that he praised nuclear power several times. Well, I'm pro-nuclear even without giving a whit of credit to the CO2 alarmist view.

April 16, 2008

PLEASE CONTACT WHITE HOUSE BEFORE 2 PM TODAY

The folks at RightMarch.com emailed a plea a few minutes ago which prompted me to write the following letter, using their automated system:

SUBJECT: Please don't lend credence to the CO2 alarmists

Dear President Bush:

I have spent literally thousands of hours since early in your administration reviewing the scientific basis for the type of alarm about CO2 expressed by your first Treasury Secretary. Claims by alarmists that the science is settled enough for purposes of major policy change are bunkum. The field of climate science encompasses so many specialties that few, if any, scientists have time to really understand the limitations of research commonly touted as authoritative. A great example is the so-called hockey stick graph which was quickly embraced by IPCC as sort of a poster child for their 2001 report. The hockey stick graphic was even portrayed as policy-relevant by its inclusion in the Policymakers Summary document which was leaked in the autumn of your 2000 campaign. The full report wasn't released until 9 months later. By then, the hockey stick had become what I've come to think of as an "icon of calamitology". I urge you not to give the alarmists the slightest benefit of any doubt you may have. I've long told folks that abundant and cheap electricity gives your average Joe today a life better, in many ways, than Kings used to enjoy. Unnecessary CO2 controls are bad for liberty, bad for the economy, and the notion that the results will have any predictable effect on global or regional climate is an exaggeration.

Mr. President, my industry is nuclear power. If these CO2 controls are adopted, my industry will surely benefit, at least in the short run. But every appeasement of the CO2 alarmists further empowers them and their shoddy science. And I have no doubt that these same fraud-mongerers will not long tarry before turning their attention to other targets, including my industry.

Please don't empower the alarmists!

Very truly,

NUCLEAR.COM

Steve Schulin,
Founding Editor

- - - - END OF STEVE's EMAIL - - - -

Here's the text of the alert which prompted me to jot off the above missive:

URGENT -- CONTACT THE WHITE HOUSE BEFORE 2:00 PM TODAY (WEDNESDAY):

http://capwiz.com/sicminc/mail/?id=20004&type=PR

ALERT: This is an URGENT EMERGENCY ALERT! President Bush is scheduled to give a major speech on global warming policy TODAY at 2:45 PM. A former WH official has warned us that "It will be very bad." Our intel is that he will not support the environmentalists' "cap-and-trade" or a carbon tax explicitly, but he WILL call for setting national mandatory targets and lay out principles for the kind of legislation he would sign.

This is exactly what we were afraid of. We've been able to STOP the implementation of "Kyoto Accord" environmentalist extreme measures in Congress -- but now, the President might side-step our efforts and do it himself!

We MUST try to convince him NOT to!

TAKE ACTION: Enacting further mandatory limits on emissions would be especially unwise at this time, as the U.S. economy totters on recession and consumer confidence sags from rising food and energy prices. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the Kyoto process, with its built-in momentum for ever more unrealistic emission reduction targets, is economically ruinous and, hence, politically unsustainable.

We need to try to stop this nonsense QUICKLY -- before the President's speech. Please CALL the White House at 202-456-1111 NOW -- or email comments@whitehouse.gov -- and urge President Bush NOT to give in to the radical environmentalists and abandon the prudent and successful course he's followed during the past seven years. Or, click below NOW to "compose your own letter" to him now:

http://capwiz.com/sicminc/mail/?id=20004&type=PR

P.S.: This is URGENT-- the President's speech is TODAY, Wednesday, April 16th. Call or send him a message RIGHT AWAY. Thank you!

- - - - END OF RightMarch.com's email - - - -

April 13, 2008

Hello and Welcome

I hope Gov. O'Malley calls for special election to fill the otherwise vacant U.S. House seat in our District when Rep. Wynn leaves office as he has announced he intends to do. I also hope that the Constitution Party has a candidate on the ballot, and that he or she takes this opportunity to talk to as many folks here as possible about the important choices we face.