Breaking: Dumais openly flipping *against* "full ban" on 'AWs'!!!

[gmhowell]

And two words....Martin O'Malley.

I am exploring a run against Delaney in 2014 but money will be an issue.

Not in the district, but I'm in for $10.

 

[Brooklyn]

Money is always an issue. That is what bugs me about campaign financing. The rich like Bloomberg and the NRA can buy seats. You either have to be entirely on one side of the aisle or the other to get funding. Complete BS.

We need an amendment just for campaign financing so people that are not uber rich can actually run for office and the rest of these morons no longer get all the wooing that they do from big money people and corporations. $15,000 a plate dinner. PLEASE.

Not quite. Only if we let them. And its campaign finance reform that mostly helps incumbents and rich sponsors. The last thing we need is more ' reform'...

 

[Ken Stanka]

Not quite. Only if we let them. And its campaign finance reform that mostly helps incumbents and rich sponsors. The last thing we need is more ' reform'...

Reform sucks, but so does only having the corrupt eligible for office.


Greed begets corruption.

 

[Truthlesshero81]

No, compromise breeds corruption.

 

[Patrick]

If history is any indication, O'Malley could do what Glendenning did in '94, and pull fence sitters aside in ones and twos and threaten to cut off funding for their districts if they do not get on board and tow the party line....

...essentially, use blackmail

That has already happened in a few cases. Leadership posts - present and future - are at stake. Funding for District activities has been put on the table.

The problem for O'Malley is that he won't be running for reelection in 2014. They will. And I guess he has a habit of twisting arms using these techniques, and I am told there is only so many times you can go back to that well before you become numb to it.

Not sure how big a "problem" this would be for the Governor. He is not one to make friends, so that works against him. I had one Delegate (someone who you would be surprised to find out was talking so candidly to our side) tell me, "I don't like the Governor all all. Hardly anyone does. The problem is that they are not nice people and they have ways of making things uncomfortable around here if you don't do what they say."

The "they" included leadership, though I am getting the sense even they are strained on this one. People up there talk and frankly there are not a lot of secrets. We are straining their unified view of the gun bills, and the only way we win is to keep informing them of the ugliness of these proposed laws and to keep reminding them we will be there in 2014, good, bad or indifferent.

We are scoring in ways never envisioned. I keep hearing the words, "this was not supposed to happen."

They need to know we are not going back to sleep.

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

Hhhhmmmmm......You might have a point there.

Too long. Legislative session closes April 8, Naval Academy commissioning May 24. 46 days. Still betting there will be a pat on the back, either by a special visit or belated signing party.

 

[Patrick]

I see a couple of things going on here, the main one being that the federal AWB died miserably in the senate yesterday with less than 40 votes. (interesting that it said "less than 40 votes" - it makes me wonder just how many fewer than 40 there were.) I would have figured it to be a slam-dunk for the US Senate, and that we'd have to push and hope that it got killed in the House, but it didn't even get close to making it out of the Senate, which means that it was pretty unpopular nationwide.

...

It just seems to me that from a political point of view it makes sense for Owe'Malley to take the teeth out of this bill from within. It's going to be people like Dumais doing it, even though Owe'Malley will be pulling the strings.

Is my tinfoil too thick or is it too tight?

Smart thinking, but the Governor is doubling down hard. It could be sheer competitiveness or an idea that he can succeed where others have failed. I do know that his team is nakedly ambitious about electoral politics. They openly admit this is about future votes.

 

[Patrick]

I sent Dumais this:

Kathleen:

I was encouraged to read that you are rethinking your position on the "assault weapon" ban. I was also pleasantly surprised to hear that you have actually started researching this issue. To many times politicians legislate without any first hand knowledge about the topic and usually results in very short-sighted laws. The reaction related to the tragedy in Newtown is understandable given the sheer number of innocent children among the victims. However, you have to ask yourself if an assault weapon ban would have prevented that psychotic and deranged individual from carrying out those horrific acts of violence? That person was bent on causing as much havoc and destruction on the most defenseless of individuals and would have used any means (legal or illegal) to carry out such atrocities. People feel the need for security and constantly look to legislators for some sort of panacea to make them sleep better at night. I am sure that in your research has shown how few acts of violence in Maryland have been committed by weapons that would be characterized as "assault weapons". You also have to ask yourself if you should pursue legislation that is merely symbolic, with no substantive affect on curbing violence AND that legislation happens to infringe on many citizens' Constitutional rights under the 2nd Amendment?

Also, I would also like to understand why the proposed fingerprinting is necessary for citizens who have never committed a crime? How is that an effective deterrent gun violence? This reminds me of the current Maryland law for the new handgun shell casings to be sent to the Maryland State Police. These casings have never been used to identify the shooter in a criminal case. It sounds great in theory but it has just been an administrative cost for the State and has NO substantive impact on cracking down on gun violence. Please research this issue (if you haven't already) and I am sure you will come to agree that symbolic legislation just does not work.

I urge you as a Montgomery County resident to remove yourself from co-sponsoring the legislation and oppose any further legislation on "assault weapons" and the treating of gun owners as "criminals".

Smart letter. Others have updated grammar ("affect" --> "effect", etc.).

I think even better here is delivering this in person. Anytime this week. Call her office and request five minutes, then drive over. An alternative is to deliver a letter in person. They are real busy up there these days (crossover is coming and they are in session a lot).

Let me know you are coming so we can meet up, and I can buy you a soda or something (email me).

 

[HoCoShooter]

This reminds me of when Obama was basically giving rides on Air Force one to secure votes for Obamacare. wonder what O'Malley has to offer.

 

[Patrick]

We need to realize that we are the underdog here. We need to allow them to change their views. That is the point of lobbying .

...

If a Delegate or Senator was opposed us in the past then the path to redemption is clear, support us now, clearly,publicly, and prove to us that you mean it. Red herrings and smokescreens will not do it.

That is the key to successful representaive Democracy.

Some will enable these laws through committee or cloture votes, then vote against it in the end and claim they were with us. Or better yet - work to undo positive action and then "spin" the end result to their advantage by claiming they supported us, when in reality they gave up gains we lost in return for a Governor's support.

We have people in that building all day, every day. We will see right through it and deliver the true story.

But a good number up there are reconsidering their views in light of data, reason and - most importantly - voter reaction. If they work to fix things or to make laws that actually make sense, I have no problem accepting them as honorably intentioned.

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

Patrick, where do folks congregate down there? I plan to come down today and would like to touch base with you when I get down there to discuss talking points and who is best to visit.

 

[Robert]

I wonder how Del. Dumais is defining "complete ban"...

gave me pause as to whether a complete ban is appropriate

 

[Patrick]

Patrick, where do folks congregate down there? I plan to come down today and would like to touch base with you when I get down there to discuss talking points and who is best to visit.

Anyehwre, everywhere. It's a game of movement. It's best to let me know when/where you will be and then we meet up. A good place is the lobby. Everybody starts there, anyway.

From there I can walk you around.

I will be there today most of the day. If anyone wants to show up, I will personally walk you around and introduce you or attend a meet with you or just thank you and let you do your thing. You are in charge.

Your NRA liaison is also there pretty much non-stop. Will be happy to introduce you to her, as well. NRA is owed a thank you for all they are doing in Maryland right now. But that's a post-session story.

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

Anyehwre, everywhere. It's a game of movement. It's best to let me know when/where you will be and then we meet up. A good place is the lobby. Everybody starts there, anyway.

From there I can walk you around.

I will be there today most of the day. If anyone wants to show up, I will personally walk you around and introduce you or attend a meet with you or just thank you and let you do your thing. You are in charge.

Your NRA liaison is also there pretty much non-stop. Will be happy to introduce you to her, as well. NRA is owed a thank you for all they are doing in Maryland right now. But that's a post-session story.

That would be great!!! Will be in the lobby at 10 prompt. Thanks and I look forward to meeting you.

 

[pecormd]

Put this on Omalley's facebook page


I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. If I am not mistaken you did as well. Taking rights away from honest hard working Americans and removing the ability to defend themselves and their families is just plain ridiculous. when you know the criminals will not follow your ineffective laws. I will be happy to vote for whoever runs against you in the next election.

 

[Patrick]

That would be great!!! Will be in the lobby at 10 prompt. Thanks and I look forward to meeting you.

I might be a little delayed. More like 1030.

Taking back my words already...

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

I might be a little delayed. More like 1030.

Taking back my words already...

No problem. 10:30 it is.

 

[Klunatic]

Smart thinking, but the Governor is doubling down hard. It could be sheer competitiveness or an idea that he can succeed where others have failed. I do know that his team is nakedly ambitious about electoral politics. They openly admit this is about future votes.

If it is about future votes, then why would he want to ram this through? More people are against this then for it according to the pols.

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

If it is about future votes, then why would he want to ram this through? More people are against this then for it according to the pols.

The typical modis operandi for Democrats is to get as far left as possible going into a primary. Then shift to the center for the general. Since we are all convinced MOM is running for POTUS, this move is consistent with that.

 

[K3LAG]

Patrick,

Is it worth coming down after work? Having already spent 4 days down there for the hearings and I can't afford to be out of the office, but could come down afterward.

I have already met with my delegates (DeBoy and Malone) and they seem to be on our side. I figure Sen. Kasemeyer is a lost cause.

Tell me what I can do outside of my office hours (besides phone calls and emails, I'm already doing that) and I can do it.

Larry