BQAC Public Hearing Tonight (Aug. 28)

First, what is "BQAC"? It's the Ballot Questions Advisory Committee, set up by the MCDCC (Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee). 

Its job is to research all the questions that will appear on MoCo ballot and prepare a clear and concise explanation of each ballot question, and then give the best possible reasons why the MoCo Democratic Party should (a) support, (b) oppose, or (c) take no position, on each ballot question. 

The BQAC report is presented to the MoCo Dem Precinct Organization (precinct chairs and vice chairs, etc.), who vote on what position to take on each ballot question, and the MCDCC then votes to either accept what the Precinct Organization did or neutralize it, meaning the Dem Party takes no position.

Along the way, the BQAC holds a Public Hearing to allow any MoCo citizen to present views and suggestions tot he BQAC. That Public Hearing was held tonight (Aug. 28) and even though there are few ballot questions this year, and the ones that exist are unusually uncontroversial.

About a dozen people showed up for the hearing, in addition to the approximately 11 members of the BQAC. The public comments and suggestions were very helpful and almost all of them will be included in the BQAC report.

When the BQAC report is finished, within the next two weeks, it will probably be posted on the MCDCC website and elsewhere (such as this blog) so everyone can become more educated about this year's ballot questions before you vote on them.

General Election Ballot Proofs Available

The Maryland Board of Elections has posted "proofs" of the ballots as they will appear in the general election coming up in November 2014. The ballots for MoCo (132 pages total, 4 pages for each different voting area) are available at http://www.elections.state.md.us/elections/2014/general_ballots/16.pdf

Medal of Honor for Gettysburg Hero

President Obama and Congress have approved the awarding of the Medal of Honor to Alonzo Cushing, one of the heroes of the Battle of Gettysburg.

His name may not be familiar to everyone but he is well known to those interested in the Civil War.

At the conclusion of the Battle of Gettysburg, Pickett's Charge, a key element to the victory of the United States Army was its artillery. Alonzo Cushing commanded the artillery in the key section of the line. 

He was severely wounded in the shoulder, then in the groin and abdomen. Despite being ordered to the rear, he remained, held his intestines, and continued the fight. He was put out of his misery by a bullet through his mouth and brain, but his actions certainly helped achieve victory.

The efforts of those such as Alonzo Cushing, Winfield Scott Hancock (also wounded in his groin about the same time and place) and many others helped save the United States from being torn into two countries, one slave and one free. It is most appropriate that he is receiving the Medal of Honor 151 years and almost 2 months after his death.

Something to Cheer Depressed Candidates

Sometimes during a campaign a candidate may feel she or he is not going to win. That can be depressing, but you should remember a little-known story about Abraham Lincoln.

On this day 150 years ago Lincoln, in the middle of the Civil War and facing a very difficult race for reelection --- even though today most people think he was a hero and loved by all --- wrote the following:

"This morning as for some days past it seems exceedingly probable that this Administration will not be re-elected. The it will be my duty to so co-operate with with the President elect, as to save the Union between the election and the inauguration, as he will have secured his election on such ground that he can not possibly save it afterwards."

Thanks to Sherman's victory in Atlanta in September, contrary to Lincoln's fears in the August 23 memorandum he was reelected by a large majority.

The Best Political Meetings for Young and Old Alike --- MoCo Young Dems

If you like to attend meetings where you learn all about politics in MoCo and Maryland, the best place is the Montgomery County Young Dems (MCYD).

They meet at the Silver Spring Civic Center and their website is http://www.mcyd.org/  They post information about their meetings on Facebook and you can ask to be on their email list.

Meetings, such as the one tonight, often include elected officials and others on panels that are absolutely wonderful. Tonight they had Delegate Anne Kaiser and Eric Luedtke, and Quincy Gamble from Brown-Ulman for Maryland. They gave the audience great insights into key elections throughout Maryland this November, the kind of information you don't usually hear about anywhere but at MCYD meetings.

If you're not officially "young" don't worry. My wife and I are retirement age yet we have never felt more welcome than when we attend MCYD meetings, which we do whenever we can. It's a fun group and very effective in Dem politics, and we learn a great deal at every meeting. I encourage everyone to consider supporting MCYD in every way you can.

Openness in Government - Maryland Should Do Better

A report was issued by the Center for Public Integrity that grades each state on its openness and transparency to citizens. Most states did poorly.
Unfortunately Maryland was included in the poor category because, among other things, we are the only state in the country that requires a personal visit to the state capital to see financial disclosure information by public officials. Our legislators should fix this as soon as possible.

The study is available at http://www.stateintegrity.org/maryland

Women's Right to Vote

   
Today, August 18, is the 94th anniversary of the ratification of the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which gave all women in the U.S. the right to vote. (Some states have already adopted that policy.)

Most people today do not realize the tremendous work done, and the horrible tortures endured by the Suffragists. Many were arrested, imprisoned, tortured and force-fed when they went on hunger strikes. Their story is one of great courage that should be remembered.

It is so sad that in 2014 the trend in our country is to restrict voting rights in our country rather than expand them, and that those who have the right and ability to vote easily often do not do that.

We should remember what the Suffragists went through to be allowed to vote and hope that spirit about voting will reemerge in our country.

The Importance of Elections for MoCo Board of Education

One of the most importance elections in MoCo in November 2014 is also one of the least publicized.

The MoCo Board of Education controls more than half the budget (almost $2.3 billion) -- and thus our taxes -- in Montgomery County, and there is little control over how they spend it. So everyone in the county should take a great interest in who gets elected to the Board of Education.

The process may appear a little confusing. Two candidates are running for "at large" seats, and 2 candidates are running for each of the "district" seats on the Bd of Ed. However, everyone in the County gets to vote for all these races, the "at large one" and the 3 district ones. (The districts exist just to prevent all the members from being in the same part of the county.) Elections for the Bd of Ed seats are staggered, and that is why this year we are voting for only one of the at large seats, and only the district 1, 3, and 5 seats.

Here are the candidates:

At Large: Shebra Evans vs. Jill Ortman-Fouse
District 1: Judy Docca vs. Kristin Trible
District 3: Laurie Halverson vs. Patricia O'Neill
District 5: Mike Durso vs. Larry Edmonds

Most of the candidates have websites which you find by "googling" their names, and it is likely that all of them will appear at candidate forums and other places before November. 

All of us should ask them questions such as, "If you are elected, how will you spend the $2.3 billion in taxpayers' money that will be under your control?" and "Will you support meetings and budgets that are completely open to the public and easily accesible?" and "Exactly what policies do you support and oppose for education in our county?"

Is President Obama Using Executive Orders More Than Past Presidents?

Republicans are complaining that President Obama is using Executive Orders and acting on his own more than any other president. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives has even voted to sue him over this issue. What are the facts?

The Bridge Project, an organization that says it exists to obtain facts to counter myths spread by conservatives, has released a detailed report about President Obama's executive orders compared with others', particularly as they relate to his authority to take action concerning immigration issues.

This blog exists largely to give facts that can be useful to people, so I'm happy to give the link to this useful report. It's at http://www.bridgeproject.com/wp/assets/Executive-Action-8.8.14.pdf

Two New Members of the MoCo Democratic Central Committee

At tonight's meeting of MCDCC (Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee), two new members were elected. They are Wanda Resto-Torres and Mimi Hassanein.

Their positions are sometimes called "State Central Committee Members" and sometimes "Gender Balance Members." The Maryland State Central Committee requires that all county Democratic Central Committees have an equal number of men and women. 

In the June 24 primary this year, two more men than women were elected to MCDCC, so to provide gender balance two women were elected to join MCDCC tonight. They have full voting rights on the State Central Committee but they are non-voting members of the County Central Committee.

This brings the total membership of MCDCC to 28 --- 8 At Large (elected in the primary election by all Dem voters in MoCo) and 16 from districts (2 elected in the primary from each of the 8 legislative districts in the County). These constitute the 24 voting members. There are also 2 student members, and 2 gender balance members, these 4 being members of MCDCC but without a vote there.

A Couple More Parliamentary Procedure Myths and Facts

Myth - There can only be 1 motion on the floor at a time.

Fact: There can be many motions on the floor at one time, so long as they deal with procedural or subsidiary issues and are germane (related to the same subject as the original motion). For example, there could be a main motion that we buy a new coffee machine for up to $50. Someone could then move to amend that to change $50 to $100, and someone else could move to amend the amendment to say the $100 ceiling is only applicable if the coffee machine is purchased on sale. Someone else could move to send the whole subject to a committee, and someone else could move to take a recess of 10 minutes to discuss this informally. Someone else could move to adjourn and someone else could move to set the time to which to adjourn, meaning that if the motion to adjourn is adopted, the meeting will continue starting at, for example, 2pm the following day. Each of these motions can be made so long as the newer one has a higher priority, and then each is voted on in order from the top down. This doesn’t mean this is good practice, and in reality it is not likely that there would be more than a main motion, an amendment, and a motion to refer to committee.

Myth - During debate anyone can say whatever he or she wants.

Debate-2: All discussion must relate to the motion before the group, and all debate must refer to the motion and not the people involved or their alleged motivations. If someone says, “Anyone who votes for this is a fool,” or “All of you are failing in your duty to do your jobs properly,” the Chair can and should hit the gavel and say that person is out of order and direct that he or she stop talking, and if need be order that he or she be removed from the room. The whole purpose of parliamentary procedure is to insure that the majority can rule while protecting the rights of the minority to try to convince the majority to change their minds, while always insuring that discussion is polite and respectful.
(Citation: RONR at pages 391-394)

Some Graphs Showing Democratic Registration in Montgomery County from 2000 through the Present

The source of the information that formed the basis for these graphs is the website of the Maryland Board of Elections, at http://www.elections.sate.md.us/voter_registration/stats.html

The second graph seems especially interesting.

In the following graph, the top line shows total registered voters in Moco, the next line shows registered Democrats, and the both two lines show registered Republicans and registered as "Unaffiliated" with any party, Republicans higher in earlier year and Unaffiliated higher in recent years.

Changes in Election Board Statistics that would be Helpful

The Maryland State and Montgomery County Boards of Election provide interested citizens with statistics about election results, but there is room for improvement.

For example, the County Board of Elections provides a precinct-by-precinct breakdown of how many people voted on election day and for whom they voted, but it doesn't do this for early voting, absentee ballots, and provisional ballots.

We know this could be done because the State Board of Elections provides a precinct-by-precinct breakdown of the turnout in elections, and also because the Board must have this information in order to determine which ballot to provide those who vote early, absentee, or provisional.

Also, for those of us who take the time to add all the figures, we find that the totals don't always jive with what the Board of Elections says the totals are.

Hopefully in the future the State and County Boards of Elections could provide more precinct-by-precinct voting and turnout information, and more details about all statistics that are of great interest to many people who follow election details.

The Good Old Days when Politics was Gentlemanly

     

People often think that politics today are too rough, unlike the good old days when it was more gentlemanly and intellectual, as in the days of Abraham Lincoln.

According to Lincoln Day by Day, on this day in 1838 Stephen Douglas and John T. Stuart (Lincoln's law partner at that time) were running against each other for Congress. (Douglas is pictured on the left, above, and Stuart on the right.) 

Douglas used language that was offensive to Stuart. Stuart therefore grabbed Douglas and contemptuously carried him. (Douglas was short.) In retaliation, Douglas bit Stuart's right thumb.

Things may be rough in politics today, but as far as we know no candidate has bit an opponent's thumb this year.

A Couple More Parliamentary Procedure Myths and Accurate Information

Myth - If someone wants to amend a motion, you should ask the person who made the motion and the person who seconded it if they agree to the amendment, especially if the amendment is called a "friendly one."

Fact - There is no such thing as a "friendly" amendment. All amendments are treated the same.

Once a motion has been made and seconded, and then “stated” by the Chair, it is the “property” of the group and not one or two people. Even if the maker of the motion doesn’t like the amendment, it can still be made and if made properly must be discussed and voted on. The person who seconded a motion should never be identified, so of course he or she cannot be asked if he/she supports an amendment.
(Citation: RONR at page 162)

Myth - It is necessary to summarize the discussion in the minutes, and to include something if someone says, “Include in the minutes what I am saying.”

Fact - Not only is this not necessary, it is improper to do it. Minutes should be a record of what was done at a meeting (meaning motions), not what was said.

(Citation: RONR at page 468: “[Minutes] should contain mainly a record of what was done at the meeting, not what was said .....”)

More Parliamentary Procedure Myths and Correct Actions

Here are a couple more myths about Robert's Rules of Order (things lots of people think they know, but that are wrong):

Table

This is one of the most misused motions. It should hardly ever be used. The only proper use of "Move to table" is when you're discussing a motion and an outside speaker suddenly shows up. You "table" the motion being discussed to listen to the speaker, and after he or she is finished, you "take from the table" the motion you were previously discussed.

If this is the case, how do you postpone action on something you're discussing? Simple. You "Move to postpone the current motion until the next meeting" or until a specific later time. Simple, and you don't have to confuse anyone with a motion to "table."

Is this just being picky about words? No. A motion to table is non-debatable while a motion to postpone is debatable. That makes a lot of difference when someone makes a motion to put off what you're currently discussing.

RONR, at pages 215-216

Approving agenda and minutes

Most people have seen Chairs of meetings ask for a motion to approve the agenda, then ask for all in favor and then all opposed. This is a waste of time and unnecessary.

The Chair can simply say, "Are there any suggestions for changes in the proposed agenda?" (this is assuming the agenda has been distributed)  Then, after waiting a second or two, the Chair can say, "Hearing no objections, the agenda is adopted as distributed."

Then move to the minutes. "Are there any corrections to the minutes?" Then, "Hearing none, the minutes are approved as distributed."

Parliamentary Procedure -- What you think you know is often wrong

From time to time I'll post some parliamentary procedure information, things that most people are "sure" they know but what they think they know is inaccurate.

Call the Question

For example, many people have been in meetings where someone yells, "Call the question," and the presiding officer says, "The question has been called so no further discussion is allowed." Most people think this is correct, but it is absolutely not correct. The citations are listed so anyone who questions the corrections to the myths can look them up.

According to Robert's Rules of Order New Revised, 11th edition, 2011 (the latest edition), if someone yells, "Call the question," they are out of order and should be told to be quiet. If someone wants to end debate and proceed to vote, here are the general rules for how you do it:

1. Someone raises a hand and waits to be recognized by the Chair.
2. He or she then says, “I move the previous question on the motion to xxxxxxx” or “I move to close debate and proceed to vote on the motion to xxxxxxx.”
3. Someone else yells out "second" (or the Chair can ask if there is a second).
4. This motion is undebatable and cannot be amended.
5. The Chair takes a vote and if ⅔ are in favor, debate on that motion is ended and a vote is taken immediately. If there aren't ⅔ in favor, debate continues.
6. Motions to close or limit debate are not in order in committees. Debate goes on until all have said what they wish.

If you think about this it's logical, as just about all of the rules in Robert's Rules. What right does one person have to force everyone else to stop discussing a motion? However, ⅔ do have that right.

Citation: RONR (that's the official citation for Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, latest edition) at page 202.

Abstentions

Another thing that most people think is right but it's not: 

Myth - Abstentions count and should be recorded.

Abstentions are failures to vote and should never be considered in any way. When a majority or ⅔ vote is required, that refers to votes cast and by definition that does not include abstentions, so if a vote is 5 in favor and 6 abstaining, it's a unanimous vote in favor. 

When the Chair calls for votes in favor or against, he or she should never ask for abstentions and abstentions should never be recorded in the minutes. 

This is also logical. If someone chooses to abstain from a vote, that mean he or she wants nothing to do with that vote. If you want your stand on a motion to count, you vote "yes" or "no." If you abstain it means you're not involved and therefore your abstention shouldn't be counted or even mentioned anywhere.

If a member of the group has a conflict of interest, the correct thing to do is not to merely say you're abstaining, but to tell the group of the conflict of interest and then leave the room during the entire discussion of that subject, and that fact should be recorded in the minutes.

Citation: RONR at page 45

Five-Year Anniversary of Meeting Barbara

Yesterday was the five-year anniversary of Barbara and I meeting. As we do each year, at 1pm we reenacted it at the spot where we met, and where my life began to change for the better. "To love another person is to see the face of God." -- Victor Hugo in Les Miserables