Contributor Opinion By Laura Berthiaume: What I Know

This Contributor Opinion is by Laura Berthiaume.

I know the womens’ movement has reached maturity (or maybe immaturity) in Montgomery County. That is because, with all the lip service we often give to the notion of women helping women, Montgomery County’s fiercest rivalries often seem to be between female Democratic politicians. Unfortunately, in the D17 race, we are now way, way down into the mud. After three consecutive negative mailers from Cheryl Kagan, Jennie Forehand finally fired back. I do not blame her – if there is one thing we have learned on the national level it is that when someone levels a Swift Boat style charge, then you fail to respond at your political peril. Jennie did not fire the first shot or even sling the second mud ball. She did finally respond forcefully, and that seems to have triggered even worse behavior. I really was horrified at the mailer I received from Cheryl Kagan basically accusing Jennie of helping corporate interests poison children.

This between two candidates who admit they have no serious policy disagreements.

I will disclose my bias up front before getting into the pros or cons of who to vote for. I first remember meeting Jennie when I was a child: Jennie and my mother are life-long friends. By the time I was in college, Jennie had me at the polls wearing a straw hat and handing out campaign literature for a candidate she was mentoring. It was my first introduction to retail politics, and I discovered I liked it. When I decided to run for Delegate back in 2006, Jennie welcomed my desire to engage in civic life with true warmth and delight. In contract to the quick dismissal I received from so many other women (albeit some of them rivals with Jennie who just did not want her to have any allies holding office), Jennie truly seemed to embrace the notion that women should be encouraged to run and mentored when they do. Perhaps she is a little naive that way, since she tells me she once did exactly that for Cheryl Kagan, and look what she is facing now.

When I ran for Delegate, I was admittedly naive myself. Now, with some small political experience under my belt, I think I know just a few things, though perhaps only a few:

I know that Jennie knows this District inside and out. She is in touch with her constituency. She also has a mind and values of her own and when she disagrees, she does so for a reason. I personally opposed the current location of the District courthouse. In fact, I facilitated a meeting between TCAT and the leadership of the Montgomery County Bar Association to see if we could not come to an agreement to move the courthouse to the other end of Maryland Avenue. I had numerous conversations on the matter, including with Jennie. She listened to me, and then she told me her reasons for supporting the current location. She knew very well what all of the arguments were. We simply had to agree to disagree on that one. The interesting thing is, to the best of my recollection, I saw Cheryl Kagan once that entire time, at a meeting around the same time Mayor Hoffman came in and told us it was basically a lost cause. Perhaps Cheryl was very active elsewhere on getting the location moved, but if so, I never saw it or heard about it.

I know that Annapolis does not work the way we think it probably should. Good ideas fail all the time. Bad ideas sometimes pass. That is because nothing there happens in a vacuum – everything happens in relationship, both to other issues and to other representatives. I have learned it is one thing to get elected, quite another to figure out how to work with a diverse group of people in a way in which it is possible to have some positive impact on the direction things are going. You enter thinking you are going to do X, Y, and Z, and pretty soon you realize that if you can just get X on the agenda, you have worked miracles. From my conversations with various people, I get the distinct impression that Cheryl Kagan mostly never even got X on the agenda during her time in Annapolis,and when she did she somehow managed to tick people off. Jennie gets X on the agenda all the time – maybe not on the flashy issues, but on those issues she can advance given the current political leadership. And let’s not kid ourselves that Mike Miller is going anywhere, by the way, whoever wins this particular State Senate race. Now, it is OK not to get X on the agenda if you have a good reason for doing something else – say, building a rationale for systemic change. If Cheryl were running on the idea that eight years in Annapolis taught her it needs to be reformed from inside out, that is an argument I could buy. She is not running on that – she is running on the notion that she can bring people together to bring home the bacon for Montgomery County. If that is the test, then I’ll take Jennie Forehand every time because if there is one thing she has dedicated herself to, it is bringing home the bacon for Rockville, Gaithersburg, and Garrett Park. While it is true that our state delegation has failed time and time again to get our share of school construction money, but I think we have to lay that at the feet of the entire delegation as a whole and at the feet of Mike Miller, who is politically savvy enough to know how to play Montgomery County and Prince George’s County off against each other. I do not see how having Cheryl Kagan in office instead of Jennie Forehand is going to change that equation. I could probably name two or three other key County races where who wins really could make a difference, but not this one.

I know that Jennie must be terribly hurt that anyone would accuse her, a mother and grandmother herself, of betraying the health of poor children in return for campaign contributions. I hope she has the opportunity to respond to this very late, very nasty charge, made less than a week out from election day, just as early voting has really gotten under way.

I know that later today, I am going to go vote early so I that can work the polls on election day, just as I did twenty plus years ago, but this time on behalf of Jennie herself, as well as for couple of other candidates I support.

One last thing I know: I know that I am going to vote for Jennie Forehand for State Senator.

Laura Berthiaume

Laura Berthiaume is a member of the Montgomery County Board of Education.

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to hello@rockvillecentral.com. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!

Please also note that Rockville Central does not endorse candidates in election campaigns. Supporters of all candidates are encouraged to submit opinion pieces for consideration.

Contributor Opinion By Eileen McGuckian: Why I Support Cheryl Kagan

This Contributor Opinion is by Eileen McGuckian.

Although I do not live there now, my heart has lived in Rockville and District 17 for almost half a century. Through that time, I have worked closely with both Jennie Forehand and Cheryl Kagan and consider them both to be friends. Both have served and would serve their constituents well.

While I don’t get to touch the District 17 voting screen, I gave considerable thought to how I would vote for State Senate if I could. My husband and I have decided to support Cheryl Kagan.

After 32 years, Jennie should be recognized for a number of accomplishments, even though she has never taken a true leadership role in either the House or the Senate.

The time comes, however, when any individual should make way for new ideas, different approaches, new relationships, and different issues. With her bank of knowledge, experience in Annapolis, boundless energy, and ability to work with people and groups, Cheryl is poised to enter office in January without District 17 missing a beat. The endorsements she has received reflect the breadth of her interests and how effectively she will serve our communities and our State.

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to hello@rockvillecentral.com. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!

Please also note that Rockville Central does not endorse candidates in election campaigns. Supporters of all candidates are encouraged to submit opinion pieces for consideration.

Contributor Opinion By Richard Arkin: Forehand The More Successful Legislator

This Contributor Opinion is by Richard Arkin.

Both incumbent District 17 State Senator Jennie Forehand and challenger Cheryl Kagan are known quantities. They both have records that can be examined. To see who has the better record, all we have to do is look at the record. It’s all on the web and is easily accessible to anybody who is interested.

Research demonstrates that Jennie Forehand has been the more successful legislator than Cheryl Kagan by a very significant margin.

The clearest indicator of legislative success is the number of bills each legislator sponsors that are passed by both houses of the General Assembly and signed into law by the Governor (i.e., legislative enactments).

The total of career legislative enactments for Sen. Forehand is, of course, considerably higher than the career total for Del. Kagan. But it’s not just the totals — in each year in which both were in office, Jennie outscored Cheryl.

Check it out and find out for yourself.

To examine and compare legislative records, point your mouse to the Maryland Legislative Information Service website at LINK. That URL brings up the MLIS bill index page, where the reader can click on Bill Indexes and Sponsors to see the bills for which the legislator was the primary sponsor or a co-sponsor, a description of each bill, and the bill’s disposition (pass or fail). If the bill failed, the entry points the exact stage of the enactment process at which the bill failed. If the bill passed, the entry shows the chapter number at which the bill was entered into the Laws of Maryland.

A simple click of the mouse shows a complete history for each bill and all votes (including the ayes, nays, and abstentions). Further mouse-clicks will bring up the exact text of a bill when it was filed, the text of each amendment, interim texts, the final text of each adopted bill, and more.

A symbol at the right side of the entry shows if a bill passed or failed, and if passed, if it became law. Be careful here — a bill veto does NOT necessarily mean that the vetoed bill did not become law. If the heading states that a bill was vetoed because a “cross-filed bill was signed,” it means that the other house of the General Assembly passed a bill whose final text was identical to the bill you’re looking at, but the Governor signed the other house’s bill and therefore had to veto the bill before you to avoid having two identical or duplicate enacted bills on the books. Thus, a count of successful bills is both the number of bills signed into law by the Governor and the number of bills shown as vetoed by the Governor because he signed an identical cross-filed bill which originated in the other house.

If you look at Sen. Forehand’s record for 2010 at LINK, you will find that she sponsored or co-sponsored 171 bills, of which 85 passed both houses of the General Assembly and were signed into law. That’s a pretty impressive score in just about anybody’s book.

But to compare the relative effectiveness of Sen. Forehand and former Del. Kagan (or any two legislators, for that matter), go to the index page and click on Prior Session Information, then pick out a year in which both legislators were in office, and then do the counts.

The last year that both Jennie and Cheryl were in the General Assembly was 2002. In the 2002 session, Sen. Forehand sponsored or co-sponsored 92 bills, of which 39 were successful (either signed or the cross-filed bill was signed. In the same session, Del. Kagan sponsored or co-sponsored only 62 bills, of which only 25 were successful.

The results are similar for the eight years in which both were in office.

Whatever else can be said about the candidates, researching the legislative records shows a real difference. Jennie Forehand’s record of success as a legislator is better than the legislative record of Cheryl Kagan by a significant margin, both in the total of bills sponsored and enacted and in the year-by-year comparisons.

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to hello@rockvillecentral.com. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!

Please also note that Rockville Central does not endorse candidates in election campaigns. Supporters of all candidates are encouraged to submit opinion pieces for consideration.

Contributor Opinion by John Moser: I Support Sen. Jennie Forehand

This Contributor Opinion is by John Moser.

I have known Jennie Forehand since before she went into politics. She never “grandstands”; she is not a publicity seeker; she does not have a “hidden agenda”; she is there when needed;. Basically, what you see is what you get—she truly serves her constituency and, in the process, improves the quality of life for all.

Her constituency service is absolutlely outstanding—second to none—and, since she arrived in Annapolis, has been a strong advocate for schools, health and safety. Jennie does not seek the media spotlight and she always, always delivers on her promises. One of her outstanding qualities is that she is NOT afraid of change, if it is for the betterment of all. And she is always pleasant and smiling while doing the business of government; like President Ronald Reagan, she never raises the issue of age against a political opponent.

Jennie’ seniority is a huge PLUS. Having worked a a Senatorial Aide in Annapolis for much more than a decade, I can personally attest to the value of this type of access—bureaucrats respond much more readily to elected officials who understand the legislative process, who are a known quantity.and who use their seniority wisely. To ‘badmouth” the power of incumbency is truly counter-productive. Jennie knows: who to call , how to get issues resolved , and how to get an immediate response.

A change based solely on the issue of “younger leadership” is not in the interest of the electorate. Senator Jennie Forehand represents her District well, she is readily accessible and she certainly knows her way around Maryland government and politics. .

I support her fully and most certainly hope that she shall continue to serve us for many more years.

John Moser

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to hello@rockvillecentral.com. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!

Please also note that Rockville Central does not endorse candidates in election campaigns. Supporters of all candidates are encouraged to submit opinion pieces for consideration.

Contributor Opinion By Anne Robbins: My Support For Cheryl Kagan

This Contributor Opinion is by Anne Robbins.

My support for Cheryl Kagan, the District 17 candidate for the State Senate, has become increasingly stronger as her campaign against 32 year General Assembly incumbent, Jennie Forehand has progressed. First of all, I think that 32 years is certainly long enough to represent our district and we need new perspectives on many issues especially campaign finance reform. After a lifetime in politics, (yes, I started as a little kid), very little shocks me, and yet, the findings of the research done last November by Maryland Politics Watch did, and I am talking big-time shock. I quote from their findings:

“Senator Forehand was the biggest user of “lump sums”, a finance reporting technique used to AVOID DISCLOSING DONORS. Forehand is the biggest user of this in the County and the third biggest in the state”.

No wonder that the Washington Post stated in an editorial endorsment, “The County would be better served by Cheryl Kagan”. (8-23-10).

I cannot believe in this day of openness and accountability, that Senator Forehand is engaging in a practice to hide the names of contributors. Perhaps, we are learning this because this is the first time in sixteen years in the senate that Senator Forehand has had an opponent, something extremely important for a healthy democracy to thrive. Former eight-year state delegate, Cheryl Kagan, has been pro-active in asking for more campaign finance disclosure, seeking to close the LLC loophole, and only accepting contributions of half the legal limit.

I believe that this should be enough to put Cheryl in the senate, but in addition, I have found Cheryl Kagan, to be smart, highly motivated, and open and accessible to all residents of Montgomery County. I strongly believe that a change is in order, and encourage other voters to support and vote for Cheryl Kagan.

Anne Mahoney Robbins (former Rockville City Councilmember)

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to hello@rockvillecentral.com. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!

Please also note that Rockville Central does not endorse candidates in election campaigns. Supporters of all candidates are encouraged to submit opinion pieces for consideration.

Contributor Opinion By Arthur Katz: Forehand’s Mailer, Cover Their Eyes

This Contributor Opinion is by Arthur Katz.

A mailer I received about a week ago from the Forehand campaign tries to raise ethics issues using the technique of guilt by innuendo. But the mailer’s visual images raise something equally or even more disconcerting, though perhaps more subtly.

They resurrected the idea that as soon as men pay attention to women using the image of a gift box tied with a ribbon – women in general and Delegate Kagan in particular – would swoon and follow mindlessly the men’s directions. It is a demeaning image and quite revealing when it appears in a 2010 campaign.

Like many fathers of working daughters I would have expected we would have put this stereotype to rest.

But the most recent campaign mailer I just received today reinforces the Forehand campaign’s disturbing attitude toward women. It shows two men with cigars alongside Delegate Kagan. One of them seems to be zipping up his fly while grinning and holding a cigar in his mouth.

It takes no imagination to figure out what that is about. I would have to cover my daughters’ eyes, even at their age.

This last mailer is particularly offensive coming at the beginning of the Jewish High Holidays

Arthur Katz

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to hello@rockvillecentral.com. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!

Please also note that Rockville Central does not endorse candidates in election campaigns. Supporters of all candidates are encouraged to submit opinion pieces for consideration.

Contributor Opinion By David Spitzer: A Response to Richard Arkin

This Contributor Opinion is by David Spitzer.

As Cheryl Kagan’s husband and campaign treasurer, I obviously have an interest in Richard Arkin’s recent attack on my wife, which he presents as an objective report on the District 17 State Senate race. He criticizes another reader for not providing details on his inaccuracies, claiming “The piece was very carefully researched and I stand by what I wrote.” Unfortunately, his research either was not done carefully, or he is deliberately shading his results. Let me point out a few of his misleading statements (in detail).

He refers approvingly to Jennie’s mailings in which she claims credit for bringing projects to the district. If he had done research, he would have discovered the fallacies buried in those claims. One mailing stated that “Senator Forehand and the Team were able to fund over $100 million worth of projects in Montgomery County.” This makes it appear that the projects were the direct result of their efforts and assumes that the community approved of the results. But over half the amount ($55 million) is for the enormous and controversial District Courthouse looming over the South Washington St. historic district, much to the dismay of its neighbors.

How about funding of the Rockville Civic Center Park? That was a team effort, but guess who was on the team when the $300,000 was approved in 1997? Cheryl Kagan, when she represented our community as Delegate (LINK).

There are projects included in the same mailing that were not in fact sponsored by the District 17 team. For example, the bond bill for Katherine Thomas High School was sponsored by Senators Hogan and Garagiola and the lead sponsor in the House was then-Delegate Nancy King. (LINK).

As for the amount of financial support garnered by the two campaigns, Mr. Arkin states that, “Jennie has worked more quietly and has raised almost as much money as Cheryl, primarily from Maryland contributors.” But if you compare the Campaign Finance Reports for each candidate (available here), you will find a different story. (By the way, the information is available in simple spreadsheets; there are not, as Mr. Arkin complains, hundreds of pages of data to wade through.)

In the current election cycle (2007-2010), 38.87% of the $87,441.26 Jennie raised came from individuals, whereas for Cheryl, individuals accounted for 79.27% of the $142,429.82 raised, indicating much broader, grass-roots support (88%, if you remove in-kind donations). Jennie has made up for part of her lack of individual support with PAC and corporate money, raising $40,750 that way, compared to Cheryl’s $12,661. Also on fund raising, Jennie has reported over $35,000 in anonymous “lump sum” amounts over the years, hiding the sources (and agendas) of those contributing (LINK).

One more fund raising point needs to be considered. In the 8/31/10 debate at the Rockville Library, Jennie stated “… A lot of people have given me $5 or $10…” (LINK) If you examine Forehand’s finance reports for the 2007-2010 election cycle, there are only 5 donations by individuals of less than $20 listed compared to 53 donations in that same range for Cheryl. Which candidate has shown, again using Jennie’s words from the debate, “real grass roots support”?

So Jennie has not been forthright in her advertising and campaign reports, and Mr. Arkin has accepted her inaccuracies as fact. That doesn’t seem very careful to me. I prefer to back up my statements with data that can be verified.

David Spitzer

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to hello@rockvillecentral.com. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!

Please also note that Rockville Central does not endorse candidates in election campaigns. Supporters of all candidates are encouraged to submit opinion pieces for consideration.

Reader Note by Kevin Brooks: Forehand Kagan…Pretty Simple

This Reader Note was submitted by Kevin Brooks about the District 17 race for State Senate between Jennie Forehand and Cheryl Kagan.

Just a quick tid bit to think about.

Why would we, as a disitrict, want to go from a strong, senior State Senator, with plenty of clout, ….to a freshman senator with little or NO clout to represent us in Annapolis?

I say give Jennie your vote and let her leave on her own terms…….

Kevin Brooks

This is a Reader’s Note. If you would like to contribute a Reader Note or other piece of writing, please send submissons to Rockville Central using our contact form. The more community voices, the better Rockville Central will be. Please remember that the views of contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of the editors.

Note: Rockville Central does not endorse candidates. We are encouraging towards all people who choose to run for office the city and try our best to make ourselves open to all. We actively encourage candidates to submit opinion pieces and other news. We don’t include every last bit, but we try to be fair to all and give useful information about what is happening.

Contributor Opinion by Frederick Beckner: Cheryl Kagan Helping to Keep Big Money Out of Politics

This Contributor Opinion is by Frederick S. Beckner.

The Supreme Court’s reversal of 100 years of campaign finance law in the Citizens United case not only set back the cause of reform, it has energized those of us who want to see big money out of politics. Bills are progressing in Congress to overturn the decision, and campaign finance is back on our political agenda in a big way.

On the local level, one candidate is not waiting for the law to change before changing the way she funds her campaign. Cheryl Kagan, candidate for the State Senate from District 17 (Rockville, Gaithersburg and Garrett Park), has voluntarily cut in half the maximum campaign donation she’ll accept. She unilaterally closed a loophole in campaign finance law that allows wealthy individuals with multiple bank accounts to avoid contribution caps altogether. This bold step is in keeping with her previous career representing District 17 in the House of Delegates, where she was a leader in campaign and ethics reform.

Democracy only works if people believe that a fat checkbook doesn’t amplify the importance of your speech. Cheryl Kagan understands this, and that’s why she deserves our support.

Frederick S. Beckner, Gaithersburg

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to hello@rockvillecentral.com. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!

Please also note that Rockville Central does not endorse candidates in election campaigns. Supporters of all candidates are encouraged to submit opinion pieces for consideration.

Contributor Opinion By Paul Carlson: Cheryl Kagan, The Hardest Working Public Servant I have Ever Known

This contributor opinion is by Paul Carlson, a former Maryland state delegate:

Photo from the State of Maryland

I’ve known Cheryl Kagan close-up as a colleague, mentor, and friend – and with whom I had the honor and pleasure of serving in Annapolis during part of her tenure in the state legislature. She was one of the hardest working public servants I’ve ever known, and was a tireless advocate for the constituents in District 17. She was incredibly focused and involved, leading the charge and pushing through numerous pieces of important legislation – issues from meaningful campaign finance reform, to safeguarding our civil liberties, to improving public safety.

After eight productive years, Cheryl chose not to seek re-election despite the fact she was virtually unopposed. She did not quit. She believed – and still believes – as I do that there are numerous ways to serve the public without becoming a ‘career politician.’ Since her tenure ended in 2003, Cheryl has remained extremely active and visible – first, by working to elect Chris Van Hollen to Congress and them as Executive Director of a local charitable foundation that distributed over $1,000,000 each year to deserving nonprofit organizations. She also contributed her expertise to several nonprofit organizations as a board member and activist. She continued to give her time and talents to support progressive Democratic candidates and causes.

Now that my family and I are residents of District 17, we feel fortunate that someone like Cheryl has decided to return to public office. She possesses the independent-minded, hands-on type of leadership desperately needed by the people of Rockville, Gaithersburg, and Garrett Park in these tough economic times.

Paul Carlson

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to hello@rockvillecentral.com. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!

Please also note that Rockville Central does not endorse candidates in election campaigns. Supporters of all candidates are encouraged to submit opinion pieces for consideration.

Got Something To Say About District 17? Make Sure We Hear From You By Thursday!

Photo Credit: Flickr user 'Search Engine People Blog'

Dear Rockville Central readers,

As many of you are aware, the race for the Democratic nomination for State Senate in District 17 has shaped up to be one of the harder-fought battles in recent memory. Many readers have submitted contributor opinions in favor of their candidate, be it Sen. Jennie Forehand or former Del. Cheryl Kagan.

We are delighted at this outpouring.

However, to make sure that Rockville Central can remain a place for exchange over issues and not a mechanism for campaigning, we are going to stop publishing opinion pieces related to the campaign after Friday. After Election Day, we will gladly accept submissions again.

So: If you have a contributor opinion on the District 17 campaign that you would like to submit, please do so (just send it to hello@rockvillecentral.com) by Thursday, September 9, at 5:00 pm eastern. We will not publish opinion pieces on the District 17 election that we receive after that.

Forehand, Kagan Answer Audience Questions (Part Three)

Last Tuesday night, the District 17 Democratic Club held the final debate of the primary campaign between incumbent Sen. Jennie Forehand and challenger, former Del. Cheryl Kagan, at Rockville Memorial Library.

The primary election is September 14.

Rockville Central was there at the debate capturing video, and we have been releasing it in sections over the past few days.

The final audience questions:

• Rockville Pike is in need of safety improvements. Can you do something about it?
• What can either of you tell us about your Republican opponent?
• How do we bridge the geographic gap between where affordable housing is, and where the jobs are?
• What do you have to say about age?
• Should there be a constitutional convention?

Here’s the video:

(Note that there was a video glitch in one question, so I skipped it. That one was a two-part question directed at Kagan and then Forehand. To Kagan it was: Why did you quit being a state delegate and why are you coming back? To Forehand it was: Why do you want to remain a state senator? Also, note that I made a bit of a bobble on the final question, the one about age. So it jumps a bit. Sorry about that!)

Contributor Opinion by Richard Arkin: Kagan Goes Negative

Click for larger image

This Contributor Opinion is by Richard Arkin.

I believe that many District 17 voters are having a difficult time choosing between incumbent State Sen. Jennie Forehand and her challenger, former Del. Cheryl Kagan. Both are center-left liberals with almost identical positions on the issues.

THE CANDIDATES

Sen. Forehand is a gentle, intelligent, competent, and well-respected 30-year veteran of the legislature who knows state and local issues well, has friendly relations with legislators on both sides of the aisle, has a reputation for getting things done, and has consistently delivered the goods for her district. Jennie’s supportiveness to her constituents, her friendly, civil, and cooperative bearing, and her genuine interest in ordinary people and their problems, have generated feelings of affection and loyalty among many district voters.

Kagan is a hard-charging,aggressive, attractive, and poised candidate who revels in public policy concerns and loves nitty-gritty politics. Cheryl, who has a background in advocacy, community organizing, and non-profit organization administration, served two terms in the House of Delegates more than a decade ago, and then surprised legislators and other observers by opting not to run for a third term. Cheryl is very bright, a fast-learner, and quick on her feet, and her incredible energy and attention to detail has won her many supporters.

THE CAMPAIGNS

Cheryl began her insurgent’s campaign over a year ago by raising a large amount of campaign cash from contributors in Maryland and around the country. Jennie has worked more quietly and has raised almost as much money as Cheryl, primarily from Maryland contributors. Cheryl has run an impressive, well-planned, professional, text book campaign. In contrast, Jennie’s campaign has been more low-key and traditional, eschewing the latest flashy campaign techiques.

Voters in this district who were hoping for an issues-oriented campaign have been disappointed, however. Jennie’s campaign literature has focused on her admirable record, the projects she’s brought to District 17, and her legislative victories in both the Senate and House of Delegates. Her literature also gives the reader an insight into her generally liberal approach to state and local issues, but does not paint a sharp picture of what she would like to accomplish in her next term, if she is re-elected.

Cheryl, in contrast, focuses on her education and background, while claiming credit for just about everything good that’s happened in the district and state, but really does not focus much on her voting record or what she accomplished in her terms in the House of Delegates. She talks about national and statewide issues, but says very little about the local issues that concern District 17 voters. She also does not paint a sharp picture of what she would like to accomplish in the Senate, should she be elected.

CHERYL GOES FOR THE JUGULAR

Until recently, the campaign, like most District 17 campaigns, has been relatively civil, marked by a flurry of positive advertisements from both Jennie and Cheryl. But this changed less than two weeks ago when Cheryl launched a series of negative attack ads against Jennie. Compare-and-contrast ads can be very useful to voters in comparing candidates records and views, but Cheryl decided instead, in the best “Swiftboat” tradition, to go for the jugular.

Cheryl started off her attack campaign with a clever-but-misleading mailer that totally mischaracterized one of Jennie’s less important concerns as being her “top issue,” asserting that Jennie was “missing in action” on unspecified Democratic issues, and falsely claiming that Jennie deserted Gov. Martin O’Malley in one of O’Malley’s “top priorities” by failing to vote when a death penalty bill “came up for a vote.” The mailer had impressive-looking footnotes, but these footnotes, when examined, did not support Cheryl’s allegations (a pattern she has since repeated).

The reality is that Jennie had supported and voted several times during the legislative process for O’Malley’s bill, which eventually passed with Jennie’s vote and which sharply limited imposition of the death penalty. Now Cheryl’s website claims that she really meant that Jennie missed “the key vote [that] was on an amendment sponsored by Sen. [James] Brochin.”

The key amendment votes actually were on an amendment offered by Sen. Robert Zirkin and a later amendment (the one that finally ended up as the final legislative language) by Sen. Brochin, which Jennie voted for.

Cheryl followed up with a broadside (repleat with footnotes that didn’t support any allegations) in which she claimed that Jennie cast “the deciding vote” on a “devastating tax on computer services” that “drove local firms…out of business.” At Gov. O’Malley’s request, Jennie voted for the Governor’s comprehensive tax bill at the November 2011 Special Session. The bill, which included a sales tax on computer services, was enacted and its passage prevented a total shutdown of Maryland government, which would have really been devastating for our economy. By voting “aye,” Jennie preserved, under somewhat arcane parliamentary rules, her right vote later to repeal the the computer services levy. Jennie was, infact, the leader of the successful effort two months later that repealed the computer services tax. The tax on computer services computer tax never went into effect, so it could not rationally have had any effect on any local firm.

Next, Cheryl accused Jennie of taking $16,000 in campaign contributions by “special interests” for opposing “common sense lead paint restrictions.” Bills about lead paint and other potentially toxic substances are often grist for the propagandist’s mill because they sound so good, but this bill did no more than alter “some existing requirements on property owners to satisfy certain lead risk reduction standards relating to certain changes in occupancy in certain properties.”

It is not clear that the minor changes this bill made were an improvement or actually weakened consumer protections. In any event, Cheryl’s footnote supposedly supporting her claims of special interest money did nothing more than cite the Election Board summary of Jennie’s last three dozen campaign disclosure reports from 1994 to date, each running as much as 150 pages or more. Cheryl just tossed a boatload of documents at the voters without any explanation of who the supposed “special interdsts” might have been or how much, if any, they contributed.

JENNIE RESPONDS

Cheryl Kagan’s rat-a-tat-tat volley of attack ads on Jennie Forehand loosed the dogs of [political] war.

In response to Cheryl’s flood of attack ads, Jennie sent out a negative mailer this week questioning Chery’s acceptance of some $2,000 in lobbyist gifts at a time when a number of lobbyist and influence peddling scandals had sullied Maryland’s reputation. Jennie pointed out that Cheryl had taken “more gifts from lobbyists than any other delegate in Maryland” and that Cheryl “was one of only four legislayors in the entire House of Delegates to vote against” a strong ethics reform bill. She added that the reform was supported by the Washington Post because it included necessary “strong new rules” to clean up ethics and prevent lobbyist corruption in the Maryland General Assembly. Jennie wrapped up by saying that the Associated Press had reported that Cheryl “was ‘at the top of the list of legislators named by lobbyists as recipients of food, drinks, and gifts.’”

Cheryl’s website reply did not dispute the facts in Forehand’s mailer, but instead gave the excuse that she had been “dating a lobbyist” and had fully disclosed the many gifts of financial value that her lobbyist boyfriend had given her. Cheryl explained that she had “dated a guy who happened to be a lobbyist” and that his gifts to her had “made her the #1 gift recipient in the House for one year, ” adding that of three “legislator/lobbyist couples,” she and “her then-boyfriend” were the only ones to disclose everything.

As Cheryl certainly knows, it is not a violation of law in Maryland for a legislator to date a lobbyist, as long as all gifts from the lobbyist to the legislator that are of financial value are disclosed. But disclosure is not a cure-all, by any means. The problem is that the mere existence of a legislator-lobbyist boyfriend or legislator-lobbyist girlfriend relationship creates an appearance of conflict-of-interest that is essentially impossible for the legislator to escape. This is especially true in state politics.

So, for example, when it was learned this year that Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Mike Sheridan (D) had been dating lobbyist Shanna Wycoff, the appearance of impropriety led to a huge scandal. Similarly, last year’s revelation of a romantic relationship between California Assembly Rep. Michael D. Duvall (R) and lobbyist girlfriend Heidi DeJong Barsuglia led to a scandal.

And the story goes on. Take, for example, the romantic relationship between Tennessee Rep. Philip Pinion (D) and his girlfriend, lobbyist Velma Jones, which became a scandal when its existence became public in 2007. And it’s difficult to ignore the huge scandal that erupted in 2005 when a romantic relationship between Georgia Rep. David Graves (R) and girlfriend/lobbyist Julie Windom became public.

IN SUM…

The match-up between Sen. Jennie Forehand and challenger Cheryl Kagan, two well-matched candidates, should have been good for politics in District 17 and Maryland. If it could not have been an issue-oriented campaign or, conversely, a contest between generations, it could at least have been a test-case pitting the familiar against the new, or perhaps the tried-and-true against the shiney-and-clever. But that’s not what’s happening.

Cheryl’s sudden lurch to the negative, truly a departure for this district, obviously threw Jennie off-guard. Jennie clearly did not anticipate a negative campaign by Cheryl and Jennie’s responses, while effective, come late in the campaign. And while either could prevail, negative campaigning, if nothing else, really tends to obscure real issues rather than defining them.

Jennie could still pull this out, but Cheryl’s attack tactics may well win the day for her. But such a win for Cheryl would come at a terrible cost to the community.

Richard Arkin, Gaithersburg

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to hello@rockvillecentral.com. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!

Please also note that Rockville Central does not endorse candidates in election campaigns. Supporters of all candidates are encouraged to submit opinion pieces for consideration.

Forehand, Kagan Respond To Audience Questions (Part Two)

Last Tuesday night, the District 17 Democratic Club held the final debate of the primary campaign between incumbent Sen. Jennie Forehand and challenger, former Del. Cheryl Kagan, at Rockville Memorial Library.

The primary election is September 14.

Rockville Central was there at the debate capturing video, and we are releasing it in sections over the next few days.

The second four audience questions:

• What’s left to do to improve the Chesapeake Bay? Should we have fewer chicken farms?
• What changes are needed in education?
• What legislation did not pass in 2010 that should be brought up and passed in 2011?
• Can you tell us the sources of your campaign funds?

Here’s the video:

Contributor Opinion By Sen. Brian Frosh: Setting The Record Straight On Jennie Forehand

This contributor opinion is by state Senator Brian E. Frosh:

Photo from candidate's web site

I worked closely with Governor O’Malley to repeal the death penalty. Senator Jennie Forehand was a critical ally in our fight to end capital punishment in Maryland. Jennie voted with repeal advocates in each critical vote during the process.

Jennie voted for the repeal in the Judicial Proceedings Committee;

When the repeal fell short in committee, Jennie voted to bring the bill to the Senate floor over the objections of the Senate President;

When her vote was needed to start debate, Jennie was there – casting the deciding vote to move the debate forward;

When Senate Republicans tried to kill the bill by sending it back to Committee, Jennie voted to keep the issue on the Senate floor; and

Jennie voted for the final version of the bill, which dramatically restricted capital punishment in Maryland, limiting it to the rarest of situations.

We took a dozen tough votes on the issue, and Jennie voted with repeal advocates at each critical step. You can see the final Senate vote that passed the bill here and the full public record here.

I was there, and I know the important role that Jennie played. She was there when repeal advocates needed her, taking tough votes and standing up to the Senate President when she thought he was wrong.

Jennie Forehand takes her duties seriously. She’s never backed away from a tough fight, and she works hard for the residents of District 17. Whether you vote early or on Election Day this year, I hope you vote to send Jennie back to the Maryland Senate.

Brian E. Frosh

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to hello@rockvillecentral.com. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!

Please also note that Rockville Central does not endorse candidates in election campaigns. Supporters of all candidates are encouraged to submit opinion pieces for consideration.