Annapolis – Today, the Maryland Republican Party announced the appointment of Del. Justin Ready as its interim executive director. Outgoing Executive Director Kim Jorns was hired for the same position in her home state of Michigan.

“I want to thank Kim for her outstanding service to the Maryland Republican Party and our state,” said MDGOP Chairman Alex Mooney. “Her leadership and determination to make Maryland a true, two-party state helped Republicans make a net gain of 40 seats in the 2010 election, from the local to congressional level. We know she will do a great job for the Michigan GOP and help that state join the Republican column in the 2012 presidential election.”

Chairman Mooney tapped Del. Ready to take the position on an interim basis while undergoing a search for a full-time Executive Director.

“Justin’s experience as a former MDGOP Executive Director makes him the right choice to serve as the interim executive director through the end of 2011,” Mooney said.

“I am excited about the opportunity to support and help the MDGOP during this time of transition,” said Del. Ready. “I look forward to promoting the Republican agenda to make Maryland a place where families can afford to live and job creators can succeed.” Ready served as Maryland Republican Party Executive Director from April of 2008 through July of 2009. His experience includes working in the General Assembly as staff and on several campaigns. Ready was elected to the House of Delegates in 2010, representing District 5A in Carroll County.

###

Map Puts Voters First

ANNAPOLIS, MD – Today, the Maryland Republican Party (MDGOP) released a new good-government Congressional District map based on what is best for Maryland residents, not career politicians.  MDGOP’s new map draws districts based on the 2010 census and the new lines respect municipal and county boundaries, therefore protecting communities of interests instead of furthering the interests of any political party.  According to MDGOP Chairman Alex X. Mooney, the new map finally provides Maryland residents with the prospect of fair Congressional Districts.

“MDGOP’s new map provides Marylanders with districts that protect voters, not incumbent politicians.  For ten years we have lived with some of the worst gerrymandered congressional districts in the country, purely because one political party chose to put their electoral interests over what’s best for Maryland voters.  This cannot continue, and the Maryland GOP has taken the first step forward to show Maryland voters that fair congressional districts are possible.

“I am proud of our map and I look forward to sharing our map with the voters as the redistricting process moves forward. It is our hope that this map will launch a healthy debate throughout Maryland about what good representation looks like and how our elected officials can best serve the citizens of Maryland. We have put the voters first and that makes for good government.”

MDGOP’s map can be viewed here

###

Annual Awards
From left to right: Faith Loudon, Republican Woman 2010; Bonnie Luna, Grassroots Activist 2010; St. Mary’s, County of the year 2010; Somerset County, Voter Registration award; Fiona Moodie, Republican Youth 2010

In this issue:
What happened at Spring Convention?
Voting method explained
MDGOP victories make a difference
Fresh look at voter registration
Allegany reaches out to the community

What happened at the Spring Convention?
By: First Vice Chairman Diana Waterman

For as long as anyone can remember, the members of the Maryland Republican party have been “fighting” over how we vote. At our last convention (May 2011), we finally approved an amendment to our bylaws that should put an end to that seemingly never-ending debate! (Emphasis on “should.”)

But there appears to be some confusion as to what exactly was approved at our Spring Convention – from those that heard about it second or third hand, and even from those who were there.

A little history: a committee of over 30 members from across the state (counties large, small, and in between) met and created a revised set of Bylaws – covering not only voting but also fixing some other problems and adding some new items.For the record, the committee met over a three month period and tried to create a comprehensive Update that would address many issues without (hopefully) causing too much controversy. To put it mildly, that was not the outcome. The proposed Voting Method was probably the most volatile of the recommendations (as the debate during convention showed), however, several other areas were also very contentious.

Back to convention. The Parliamentary Procedures were flying back and forth with gusto. We spent about 45 minutes on reports, while waiting for the Credentials Report. Once approved, we were ready for Rules. As was normal, we spent the next hour debating the Rules, which were eventually passed with a few votes to spare. Then onto the Report from the Bylaws Committee. (Time Check: about an hour left to debate the Bylaws Amendments) We made it though Item 1 – mostly housekeeping stuff but it also included the following:

• Change terms of office to two years for Chairman, Vice Chairmen, Secretary, and Treasurer (starting in 2014)
• Allows for electronic notification of meetings for Exec Committee and the first meeting of Chairman following Gubernatorial elections
• Changes the date requirements of the first organizational meeting of the newly elected County Committee following the Gubernatorial Primary
• Changes date the annual budget is required to be given to chairman
• Changes procedure for amending bylaws to submission to a Bylaws Committee (instead of to the Secretary), and fixing dates to convention, not arbitrary dates
• Requires State Party to inform a county of any change in the allowed number of Committee members

Next up, through suspension of the Rules, Voting (with very little time left). At this point, for the casual observer, things may have gotten a little confusing. When the dust settled, a new voting method had passed by more than the required 2/3 majority.

And that’s all that passed! There was no change in the Political Activity of any members, no change in the Voting status of any members of the Executive Committee, no creation of any new standing committees, including Judicial, Platform, Events, or any other. (there will have to be a Bylaws Committee created as an ad hoc committee since Bylaws amendments must be submitted to a Bylaws committee). We also did not get to the Rule 11 amendment (submitted by Michael Swartz and Heather Olson).

There are many things that still need to be addressed and others that various individuals or groups would like to see addressed. I hope that the Chairman will create a new committee tasked with continuing the process started by the first committee. Stay tuned for more information.

MDGOP Victories Made a Difference
By: Second Vice Chairman Larry Helminiak

There are those who say Republicans are wasting their time running for public office in Maryland.  “We will always be in the minority and can never gain enough seats to make a difference.”

On March 11, after passing the Senate ,  the Same Sex Marriage bill was sent back to committee, not having enough votes to pass the House of Delegates.

An Associated Press report of March 12^th , states, “While Democrats hold an overwhelming 98 seats in the 141 seat House of Delegates, the pickup of six seats by Republicans in the last election helped erode support,” said House Environmental Matters Chairwoman, Maggie McIntosh. She went on to say, “If in the general election we had retained all of the Democratic seats, I think we would be declaring victory today.”

It doesn’t matter where you stand on this issue.  What does matter is that, in 2010, Maryland Republicans took six seats in the House of Delegates that were held by Democrats, and the presence of those six additional seats made the difference in the outcome of this legislation.

Calls, emails and visits  from constituents surely made a difference, and should not be minimized.   Never stop exercising your rights to speak to your elected officials.  However, the election of Republicans to seats formerly held by Democrats put us over the top.   Congratulations to all those Republicans throughout the state who worked to get them elected.

Voting Explained
By: David Parker, Rules Committee Chairman

MDGOP finally has a voting method incorporated as a part of their Bylaws. This fall, for the first time in a long time, a lengthy amount of time should not need to be spent approving a Voting Method as a part of the Rules!

A little history is in order for those of you who are unfamiliar with this issue. Since the MDGOP Bylaws have not stated a voting method for Party business, this has been addressed by the Rules for the Convention. Dating back to the 90’s (and probably well before that), there has been some discord between the more populated counties and the smaller populated counties. It reached the point that we would spend most of our time debating how we should vote, as opposed to conducting other business. So, at our 2010 Fall Convention, the State Party unanimously resolved that we had had enough and wanted a committee created to revise the Bylaws.

In a nutshell, the previous voting methodology was based purely on population. A county’s vote was based on the percentage of Registered Republicans in their county divided by the Total Number of Registered Republicans in the State. The end result: the larger counties have a much larger percentage of the total vote than the smaller counties have. This led to the smaller counties feeling completely marginalized. The goal of the committee was to create a methodology that would recognize the higher number of individual voters in the larger counties, while acknowledging the successes of the smaller counties (which tend to have Republican majorities). This is the result:

We start with 500 total base votes. Fifty percent (50%) of these are distributed equally among the 24 jurisdictions (23 counties plus Baltimore City). Thirty percent (30%) are distributed proportionally based upon the number of votes received in their county for the most recent top of the ticket race. And the remaining twenty percent (20%) are distributed proportionally based up the number of Registered

Republicans in the county (based upon the most recent data available). This makes up a county’s base vote (50% of the base vote is determined by population in  the county – from registered Republicans and from all voters voting in a particular race. This insures that the more  populous counties still have the larger share of the vote.)

Using the base vote, a county can increase their total base vote by up to thirty percent (30%), based on performance. A county can add an additional ten percent (10%) each for accomplishing three additional benchmarks: having more Republicans registered in their county than Democrats, winning the most recent top of the ticket race, and electing majority control of their county (or city) government.

While these benchmarks are more easily attained in the smaller counties, this is something all counties (and even Baltimore City) should be working towards. Our primary goal as members of the MDGOP is to elect more Republicans. Increasing the number of registered Republicans, turning out the vote for the top of the ticket, and electing Republicans to all offices are what we’re supposed to do. And please remember, these performance votes are calculated on the county’s base vote which is calculated on population for the most part. Therefore, even if a smaller county can add 30% more to its vote, it will never outvote the more populous counties.

This voting scheme is not perfect. Some people feel it punishes the large, Democrat controlled counties. Others feel the smaller, more Republican counties are not recognized enough for their accomplishments. The Bylaws Committee felt that it was a good compromise. And clearly, more than a two-thirds majority of the State Party agreed. Well, at least they all agreed that we needed to codify something into our Bylaws and this was, at the very least, an acceptable plan. Will it need to be tweaked in the future? Probably. Will some people always be whatever is decided? Definitely.  But thankfully, there is finally a voting methodology incorporated into our State Bylaws. Now, let’s get to business registering those voters, recruiting and training those candidates, and win those elections!

A Fresh Look at Boring, Tired, Old Voter Registration (VR)
by: Jay Lounsbury

Hello!  I have the honor and privilege of serving as Voter Registration (VR) Chair for the Calvert County GOP.  Let me describe two principles that have served us well in the past year.  How well?  Since March 2010, Calvert Democrats have lost net 565 voters while the GOP has gained 255 (Independents gained 164).  In 14 months, we’ve closed the gap from 1339 to 519 and, at this rate, will take the lead in Feb. 2012.

You may already be applying these ideas, perhaps with even greater success than Calvert – good for you.  If not, take a look.

First, get everyone – volunteers, office holders, candidates, Central Committee – to buy into the importance of VR as a team effort.  For years, I have taken the raw VR numbers from the Election Board and put them into a table showing the numbers by party and precinct.  AND percentages.  I throw in a little analysis and commentary.  Sometimes peppy, sometimes scolding, sometimes homespun, sometimes blue sky speculative.  Although monthly changes are often tiny, there’s something about seeing trends over time; something about seeing individual or group efforts reflected in a chart.

I don’t own Calvert Republican VR – neither should you.  Be alert and sensitive to what makes the folks in your county GOP tick and think of ways to jujitsu that to your VR efforts.

Second, pardon the cliché, but think outside the box.  Your head was probably nodding in agreement with the title of this article – VR too often is a boring, tired, old drudgery.  The solution is to 1) be realistic in your expectations, and 2) try something new.

For example, I get home purchase data for Calvert from the Maryland Dept. of Assessment and Taxation.  I cross-check names of buyers against my VR database to see who is not registered to vote.  After eliminating realtors, speculators, and nonresident landlords, we periodically send these people a welcome letter, listing specific reasons they should register Republican and giving complete contact and event info.

Another example: with the Dems, we hold VR events at our high schools and college campus.  Also, Calvert GOP leaders have gotten the message that a few VR forms are always good to have handy.  And we’re trying to find good locations for drive up registration.

Many hard-working Calvert Republicans are part of the VR Team.  By the same token, I’d welcome you to share your ideas, comments, and questions to take this statewide.  You can email me at jaylounsbury@comcast.net/

Allegany County GOP Provides Lunches, cribs for children
By Lisa Griffith

The Allegany County Republican Women recently donated a baby crib to the local Family Crisis Resource Center. The center helps victims of domestic violence and their children. Sara Beth James, Executive Director was very thankful as all cribs at the center needed to be replaced. The Center is located in Cumberland.

The Allegany County Republican Women recently donated $500 to the Summer Lunchbox Program. This program delivers lunches to children in the summer at local playgrounds. The program was started as a way of helping children to receive nutritious meals when school is not in session. Some of the Republican Women in the club have even asked to volunteer to help prepare and deliver the lunches this year.

The Allegany County Lincoln Day Dinner will be on Friday June 24 at the Frostburg Moose. Cocktails will be at 6PM. Tickets are $25 and available by calling 301-707-0480 or 240-727-6654.

###

For a printable version of this newsletter, click here.

“[P]resident Obama Friday Will Tour Chrysler’s Toledo Assembly Complex To Tout The Success That The 2009 Bailouts Have Spawned.” (Tom Troy, “President To Visit Jeep In North Toledo,” The Toledo Blade, 6/2/11)

THE GLOSSY RHETORIC FROM OBAMA AND HIS ALLIES 
DOESN’T FIT WITH THE FACTS

PROMISE: In 2010, President Obama Said “American Taxpayers Are Now Positioned To Recover More Than My Administration Invested In GM.” “General Motors relaunched itself as a public company, cutting the government’s stake in the company by nearly half.  What’s more, American taxpayers are now positioned to recover more than my administration invested in GM.” (President Barack Obama, Remarks On The United States Auto Industry, WhiteHouse.gov, 11/18/10)

RESULT: The Value Of GM’s Stock Would Have To “Greatly Exceed Levels It Had Traded At Before The Company’s Bankruptcy … For Taxpayers To Make A Profit.” “‘Even if GM goes public again, the value of its stock would have to greatly exceed levels it had traded at before the company’s bankruptcy in order for the stock to be worth enough for taxpayers to make a profit.” (Chris Isidore, “GM CEO Promises Profit For Taxpayers,” CNN Money, 1/11/10)

• “Separately, The U.S. Government Has Recovered $23.1 Billion Of Its Bailout Of GM. If It Sold Its Remaining 500 Million Shares, It Would Lose About $10.7 Billion At Current Trading Prices.” (David Shepardson, “Feds: Auto Bailout Losses Will Be Less Than $16B,” The Detroit News, 6/1/11)

PROMISE: President Obama Said, “We Are Going To Get Back All The Money That We Invested In Those Car Companies.” (ABC’s, “The View,” 7/28/10)

RESULT: White House Manufacturing Policy Advisor Ron Bloom Admits The CBO Expects A $14 Billion Loss On The Bailouts. “The latest number from the CBO I think was a $14 billion loss, and that reflects market prices at the time they did it.  The final number will be the final number.” (Press Briefing By Press Secretary Jay Carney And Assistant To The President For Manufacturing Policy Ron Bloom,WhiteHouse.gov, 6/1/11)

• “In The End, Uncle Sam Will Probably Lose Several Billion Dollars On Its Stake In GM And Will Have Bits Of Chrysler And Ally Financial, GM’s Former Financing Arm, Left To Unload.” (Ben White, “Obama Sees Auto Rescue As ’12 Plank,” Politico, 5/23/11)

PROMISE: Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner “The Choice To Stop The American Automobile Industry From Unraveling Was The Right One.” “What happens next for Chrysler and GM is up to their executives, managers and workers — just as with any other company. We cannot guarantee their success, and at some point they may stumble. But we’ve given them a better shot. The choice to stop the American automobile industry from unraveling was the right one.” (Timothy Geithner, Op-Ed, “A Rescue Worth Fueling,” The Washington Post, 5/31/11)

RESULT: The Congressional Oversight Panel Wrote That Treasury’s “Differing And Conflicting Goals” Call Into Question Whether The “Interventions In The Auto Industry Should Be Called Successful.” “These differing and potentially conflicting goals make it difficult to determine whether the TARP’s interventions in the auto industry should be judged to be successful. Instead, the articulation of multiple goals, without specification of their priority, allows Treasury to claim success if the program achieves any one of these goals.” (“The Final Report Of The Congressional Oversight Panel,” Congressional Oversight Panel, 3/16/11)

Read more: http://www.gop.com/index.php/briefing/comments/false_advertising

DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ ADMITS OBAMA’S FAILURE TO GET THE ECONOMY MOVING COST DEMOCRATS WOMEN’S VOTES

In 2010, Women “Defected From The Democratic Party” For The First Time In Over 30 Years. “Female voters defected from the Democratic Party in historic numbers. Postelection surveys found female voters preferred Republican congressional candidates over Democrats, 49 percent to 48 percent – the first time in at least 30 years that Republican candidates received a majority of women’s votes.” (Dave Boyer, “Obama Courts Jilted Female Followers,” The Washington Times, 6/1/11)

DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz: “The Explanation For That Is Really Economic.” “‘The explanation for that is really economic,’ said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, new chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee. ‘Women make so many of the economic decisions in households. And so the struggle economically is really borne by women, especially women who are heads of their own households.’” (Dave Boyer, “Obama Courts Jilted Female Followers,” The Washington Times, 6/1/11)

THAT WAS A REFRESHING MOMENT OF HONESTY FROM DWS AFTER A WEEK OF OUTRAGEOUS DISTORTIONS

DNC Chair Rep. Wasserman Schultz: “It’s Easy To Throw Bombs And To Be Incendiary, Not So Easy To Sit Down And Actually Govern.” (CBS’ “Face The Nation,” 5/29/11)

DWS Has Been Called Out By The Associated Press For “Attacking Provisions That Do Not Exist”

The Associated Press: Wasserman Schultz Has “Led The Charge” Attacking Republicans With False Accusations. “Democrats are distorting the fundamentals of a Republican plan to reshape Medicare, falsely accusing the GOP of pushing a proposal that tells the elderly ‘you’re on your own’ with health care and that lets insurers deny coverage to the sick. … The new chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., led the charge this week in an appearance on CBS’ ‘Face the Nation.’” (Calvin Woodward, “FACT CHECK: Democrats Distort GOP Medicare Plan,” The Associated Press, 6/2/11)

The Associated Press: Wasserman Schultz Has Been “Attacking Provisions That Do Not Exist.” “But Wasserman Schultz and some other Democrats who accuse the GOP of wanting to ‘end Medicare’ have skipped past the complicated crux of that debate, instead attacking provisions that do not exist.” (Calvin Woodward, “FACT CHECK: Democrats Distort GOP Medicare Plan,” The Associated Press, 6/2/11)

The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker Gave Her “Three Pinocchios”

The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker Gave Debbie Wasserman Schultz Three Pinocchios For Her Claim That The GOP’s Medicare Reforms Will “Throw You To The Wolves.” (Glenn Kessler, “Wasserman Schultz’s Bogus Claim That The GOP Medicare Plan Will ‘Throw You To The Wolves’,” The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker, 6/1/11)

• The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker:“Wasserman Schultz’s Bogus Claim That The GOP Medicare Plan Will ‘Throw You To The Wolves’.” (Glenn Kessler, “Wasserman Schultz’s Bogus Claim That The GOP Medicare Plan Will ‘Throw You To The Wolves’,” The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker, 6/1/11)
• The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker: “But Wasserman Schultz is jumping to conclusions — not to mention scaremongering metaphors — to describe provisions in the GOP Medicare plan that just do not exist.” (Glenn Kessler, “Wasserman Schultz’s Bogus Claim That The GOP Medicare Plan Will ‘Throw You To The Wolves’,” The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker, 6/1/11)

Expert Whom DNC Cited Called DWS Comments “High-Octane Idiocy.” “We checked with Michael Cannon, director of health policy at the libertarian Cato Institute, one of the experts cited by [DNC spokesman Hari] Sevugan as backing up Wasserman Schultz’s claim. Cannon described her comment as ‘high-octane idiocy.’” (Glenn Kessler, “Wasserman Schultz’s Bogus Claim That The GOP Medicare Plan Will ‘Throw You To The Wolves’,” The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker, 6/1/11)

FactCheck.org Said DWS “Throws Truth To ‘Wolves’”

FactCheck.org: “DNC Chair Throws Truth To ‘Wolves’.” (Eugene Kiely, “DNC Chair Throws Truth to ‘Wolves’,” FactCheck.org, 5/31/11)

• FactCheck.org: “Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz falsely claimed that seniors with preexisting medical conditions would be denied Medicare coverage under the GOP’s plan. The House GOP plan specifically says insurance companies “must agree to offer insurance to all Medicare beneficiaries.’” (Eugene Kiely, “DNC Chair Throws Truth to ‘Wolves’,” FactCheck.org, 5/31/11)
• FactCheck.org: “She also repeated a false Democratic talking point that future beneficiaries — those who are now younger than 55 — would be left on their own to buy insurance in the private market.” (Eugene Kiely, “DNC Chair Throws Truth to ‘Wolves’,” FactCheck.org, 5/31/11)
• FactCheck.org: “She is simply wrong to say that the GOP plan would allow insurance companies to ‘throw you to the wolves and allow insurance companies to deny you coverage and drop you for preexisting conditions.’” (Eugene Kiely, “DNC Chair Throws Truth to ‘Wolves’,” FactCheck.org, 5/31/11)

And Politifact Rated Her Claims “False”

PolitiFact Rated DWS Claim That Paul Ryan’s Medicare Reform Plan Would Allow Insurers To Use Pre-Existing Conditions As Barrier To Coverage As “FALSE.” (Louis Jacobson, “Debbie Wasserman Schultz Says Ryan Medicare Plan Would Allow Insurers To Use Pre-Existing Conditions As Barrier To Coverage,”Politifact, 6/1/11)

• PolitiFact: “We Rate Her Statement False.” “Wasserman Schultz is free to criticize the Ryan plan on any number of grounds, but in her comment, she went too far. Both the budget plan that passed the House and its predecessor, Ryan-Rivlin, specifically noted that coverage could not be prevented by a pre-existing condition. It may be easier to say you’ll bar ‘cherry picking’ patients than it is to put it into practice, but Ryan has made his intentions consistently clear. We rate her statement False.” (Louis Jacobson, “Debbie Wasserman Schultz Says Ryan Medicare Plan Would Allow Insurers To Use Pre-Existing Conditions As Barrier To Coverage,”Politifact, 6/1/11)

Read more: http://www.gop.com/index.php/briefing/comments/the_one_true_thing_shes_said_all_week#ixzz1O8Wc3epR

“Wasserman Schultz is free to criticize the Ryan plan on any number of grounds, but in her comment, she went too far. Both the budget plan that passed the House and its predecessor, Ryan-Rivlin, specifically noted that coverage could not be prevented by a pre-existing condition. It may be easier to say you’ll bar ‘cherry picking’ patients than it is to put it into practice, but Ryan has made his intentions consistently clear. We rate her statement False.”

Click here to read the full fact check: http://bit.ly/lw23La

Washington Post: “Something about the debate over Medicare prompts eye-popping rhetoric. A few weeks ago, it was Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius saying the Republican plan for Medicare would let cancer patients ‘die sooner.’ This weekend, on CBS’s ‘Face The Nation,’ Wasserman Schultz said Republicans would ‘throw you to the wolves’ …

“Where does Wasserman Schultz come up with her claims? DNC spokesman Hari Sevugan provided a link to a study and quotes from various experts that mostly focused on whether the premium support envisioned under the plan would be adequate for most people …

“We checked with Michael Cannon, director of health policy at the libertarian Cato Institute, one of the experts cited by Sevugan as backing up Wasserman Schultz’s claim. Cannon described her comment as ‘high-octane idiocy’ …

“There are certainly details in the GOP plan, which has not been drafted as actual legislation, that need to be addressed. But Wasserman Schultz is jumping to conclusions — not to mention scaremongering metaphors — to describe provisions in the GOP Medicare plan that just do not exist.”

Click here to read the full fact check: http://wapo.st/mN8RPE

Factcheck.org: “Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz falsely claimed that seniors with preexisting medical conditions would be denied Medicare coverage under the GOP’s plan. The House GOP plan specifically says insurance companies “must agree to offer insurance to all Medicare beneficiaries.”

“She also repeated a false Democratic talking point that future beneficiaries — those who are now younger than 55 — would be left on their own to buy insurance in the private market.

“She is simply wrong to say that the GOP plan would allow insurance companies to ‘throw you to the wolves and allow insurance companies to deny you coverage and drop you for preexisting conditions’ …

“[I]t’s wrong to say that the GOP plan would ‘throw you to the wolves and allow insurance companies to deny you coverage.’”

Click here to read the full fact check: http://bit.ly/iCGJz7

Read more: http://gop.com/index.php/news/comments/dnc_chair_wasserman_schultz_scores_a_hat_trick#ixzz1O8NrDdwl

Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley (D) took another swipe this week at his bête noire Chris Christie the Republican Governor of New Jersey.  O’Malley slammed Christie for withdrawing New Jersey from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a multistate cap and trade compact with the ostensible goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Under RGGI power producers buy emission allowances at auction to power, states then use the proceeds to subsidize renewable energy and efficiency programs. Utilities pass on costs to ratepayers

“This program is not effective in reducing greenhouse gases and is unlikely to be in the future,” Christie said. “The whole system is not working as it was intended to work. It’s a failure.”

In a statement O’Malley said “I reject his assertion that the initiative is ineffective in reducing greenhouse gases…Governor Christie is simply wrong when he claims that these efforts are a failure.  Here in Maryland, RGGI has avoided dangerous carbon dioxide emissions equivalent to taking nearly 3,500 cars off the road.”

However, RGGI’s record supports Christie’s claim, because in reality it is a political Potemkin village masquerading as a policy initiative.

Read the full story at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/local-opinion-zone/2011/05/omalley-aims-christie-hits-his-own-record#ixzz1NZUmCRsv

Governor O’Malley is still trying to convince us that Maryland’s private sector job creation is out performing the rest of the nation:

“Last month’s jobs report shows that Maryland employers continue to outperform the rest of the nation. (Governor O’Malley, “Statement from Governor Martin O’Malley on the Gain of 11,600 Jobs in April,” Press Release, 5/20/11)

But the facts tell a different story:
Maryland ranks dead last in private sector job creation since April 2010:

Maryland businesses have only created 500 private sector jobs between April 2010 and April 2011.  As of April 2010 Maryland’s private sector employed 2,010,300 individuals, a year later that number has only increased to 2,010,500.  (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,www.bls.gov, Accessed 5/24/11)

Maryland’s lackluster private sector growth of 500 jobs ranks 49^th among all states, last among our neighbors, excluding Washington DC.  Private sector job growth in neighboring states over the past year: Pennsylvania (94,700); Virginia (25,600); West Virginia (9,800); Delaware (2,900). (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,www.bls.gov, Accessed 5/24/11)

Even Delaware created nearly six times more private sector jobs than Maryland.  Since April 2010, Delaware has created 2,900 private sector jobs compared to Maryland, despite having nearly five million less people.  (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,www.bls.gov, Accessed 5/24/11)

Maryland’s overall employment numbers do not fair much better, ranking near the bottom of all states:

Maryland ranked 44^th in the nation for percent change in job growth from March 2010 through March 2011; last among neighboring states. Pennsylvania (1.37%), Delaware (1.37%), Virginia, (1.02%), Washington D.C. (0.76%), West Virginia (0.71%), Maryland (0.22%). (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,www.bls.gov, Accessed 4/25/11)
Maryland ranked 38^th in the nation for annual employment gains through the end of the first quarter.  (G. Scott Thomas, “Maryland adds 5,400 jobs in the past year,” Baltimore Business Journal, 4/25/11)

Maryland ranked 38^th in the nation for jobs created from March 2010 through March 2011, second to last among neighboring states. Jobs created: Pennsylvania (76,500), Virginia (37,000), Delaware (5,600), Washington D.C. (5,400), Maryland (5,400), West Virginia (5,300). (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,www.bls.gov, Accessed 4/25/11)

###

“While today’s job numbers are encouraging, celebration would be premature. A large number of Marylanders still remain unemployed and with Northrop Grumman and Super Fresh recently announcing massive Maryland layoffs, we clearly have a rough road ahead. Maryland’s job creation has dismally settled to the bottom of all states over the past year and while one month of growth is encouraging, O’Malley’s predisposition to job-killing taxes and fees do not bode well for future job creation.”

Despite what Governor O’Malley claims, Maryland is not better off than most states:

Maryland ranked 44th in the nation for percent change in job growth from March 2010 through March 2011; last among neighboring states. Pennsylvania (1.37%), Delaware (1.37%), Virginia, (1.02%), Washington D.C. (0.76%), West Virginia (0.71%), Maryland (0.22%). (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,www.bls.gov, Accessed 4/25/11)

Maryland ranked 38th in the nation for annual employment gains through the end of the first quarter. (G. Scott Thomas, “Maryland adds 5,400 jobs in the past year,” Baltimore Business Journal, 4/25/11)

Maryland ranked 38^th in the nation for jobs created from March 2010 through March 2011, second to last among neighboring states. Jobs created: Pennsylvania (76,500), Virginia (37,000), Delaware (5,600), Washington D.C. (5,400), Maryland (5,400), West Virginia (5,300). (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,www.bls.gov, Accessed 4/25/11)

With more job losses coming soon:

The parent company of Superfresh grocery stores warned the state on Monday it could cut nearly 1,500 jobs in Maryland if it closes 22 stores instead of selling them. (Ryan Sharrow, “Superfresh could cut nearly 1,500 Maryland Jobs, Baltimore Business Journal, 5/16/11)

Defense contractor Northrop Grumman Corp. expects to lay off about 200 employees at the end of the month, most of them in the Baltimore area. (Jamie Smith Hopkins, “Northrop Grumman to lay off 200, mostly in Baltimore area,” Baltimore Sun, 5/13/11)