From Harford Campaign for Liberty:
Fellow Harford County Resident,
In early April, Harford Campaign for Liberty sent every candidate for Harford County Council a Liberty Survey, to allow each candidate to express his or her views on important economic and social issues.
Sadly, although email records show most candidates opened their survey, only five candidates actually took the time to respond.
Only one incumbent candidate – Chad Shrodes in District D – actually returned our voter survey.
Thank you to the following candidates who answered the survey:
Michael Perrone, Jr in District A
Eric Daxon in District C
Chad Shrodes in District D
Johnathon Grimmel in District D
Dan Lambros in District E
Where are the incumbent candidates who should have found it easy to answer these questions based upon their voting records??
Are they just giving us a song and dance?
Are they like the Boy Band of the month, afraid if they answer a question truthfully their fans will stop loving them?
Is our County Council all flash, and no substance? If they don’t respond now, in the election season, how do we really know They’ve Got It – The Right Stuff?
Dion Guthrie, District A – perhaps he didn’t answer because he doesn’t want you to know he happily votes for thousands of dollars in state and county freebie conditional loans for corporations every time OED Director Jim Richardson asks for them.
Joe Woods, District B – maybe Joe couldn’t be bothered to answer, since he’s running unopposed – but shouldn’t you know his intentions for the next four years? Will he vote to raise the budget? Raise taxes? Raise the roof?
“Capt’n” Jim MacMahan, District C – After rubber stamping his approval on over 300 new zoning changes including several commercial B3 changes during the last Comprehensive Zoning Review, Mr. MacMahan claims to be concerned about the property rights of residents. But why does he now want to vote away his voice in zoning appeals? How does he feel about the livability code, which would infringe upon homeowners’ rights, both rentals and primary properties?
Richard “Coach” Slutzky, District D – Coach Slutzky is running for Council President, and says he represents strong Republican values. Why then did he vote for both the Beechtree Estates TIF, which is now the only under-performing loan on the county books, and the James Run TIF, which gave major developers $23 million in tax easements for prime undeveloped property? What else will Richard Slutzky vote for in the future? Is he for or against Liberal spending? We can’t know, he won’t fill out his survey.
Mary Ann Lisanti, District F – Ms. Lisanti is running for House of Delegates this year. But before she goes, she’s left us a liberal legacy of bicycle paths, obesity task forces, and the new Healthy Community Planning Board, which will recommend new ways to mind your business for you. Little wonder she didn’t want to answer any questions, she’d rather move on to Bigger Brother programs. How will she vote in Annapolis?
ASK THESE HARFORD INCUMBENTS TO BE ACCOUNTABLE – CALL OR EMAIL, AND TELL THEM TO SEND IN THEIR SURVEY!
Dion Guthrie: 410-638-334 dion.guthrie@ibew1501.com
Joe Woods: 410-638-3520 joe@teamjoewoods.com
Jim MacMahan: 410-638-3523 thecaptaincares@gmail.com
Richard Slutzky: 410-638-3522 lrss362@gmail.com
Mary Ann Lisanti: 410-638-3526 maryann@maryannlisanti.com
If you’d like to review the surveys of those who DID take the time to answer, please click here!
This 2014 election is crucial – The American economy is shaky, Maryland has been losing residents to more conservative states, and the liberal agenda continues to snowball down in Annapolis.
We need to know our local elected officials will be good stewards of our money!
We need a finely-tuned, harmonious set of officials for County Council. Not a Boy Band.
Please contact your County Council member today. It’s not too late to find out what they really think, before the primary election on June 24th.
For Liberty,
Scott DeLong
Joe Fleckenstein
Greg Johnson
Christina Trotta
Lowell Sheets
Vicki Seitzinger
Steering Committee, Harford Campaign for Liberty
Before you ask me to call random council members can you let me know what the questions are on the survey. If your questions are radical maybe that’s why responses are not being given.
http://harfordliberty.org/2014-county-council-surveys/
You can see the survey questions as well as the answers of those that responded.
Is this an easy survey to complete! Wherever the word Oppose (or against,, etc.), the correct answer is YES; wherever Support (favor, for, etc.) shows up, No is the expected reply.
I was originally worried that a genuine fellow like Chad Shrodes bothered to reply this clearly rigged series of simplistic questions, but he did come off as reasonable, albeit a little too knee jerk.in places.
I’m surprised “Coach” failed to respond: I supposed he was concerned about protecting his well established “integrity.”
Congratulations to Dion Guthrie, Joe Woods (for once), Jim MacMahan, and, Mary Ann Lisanti:(she must be a communist or something–imagine being concerned about the health and well being of county residents).
A bunch of stupid set up questions that no one in their right mind should answer and for those who did expect the answers to be used against you in the future. Dumb move.
The only thing boy bandish here is campaign for liberty, it’s always the same old screechy song with the words just mixed up to sound new. Please get a new tune you are running out of ditzy 13year old girls to impress
Run along now Bill, the Grumpy Old Farts club is being called to order at McDonald’s and they need their treasurer.
Who in their right mind would even answer any of your questions. Your group is so far to the right your not on the map anymore.
A bunch of stupid questions! Really? Asking potential County Council members to declare their positions on taxes, speed cameras, Maintainance of Effort, TIFs, potential wasteful government spending, etc. etc. These are EXACTLY the questions we should be asking. As far as using answers against the respondents. I call that holding them accountable for what they have said. For far too long we have treated these elections like popularity contests instead of serious government. If you don’t ask these questions, Bill, you are one of the massive number of uninformed.
I was especially interested in the answers given by Mr. Perrone and Mr. Shrodes. Mike Perrone came off as well informed, involved and CONSERVATIVE. His candidate, Ms. Baldwin did not do herself favor by avoiding the survey as well as the Dagger questions. Mr. Shrodes gave equally well informed answers and was able to proudly defend his record. He had to know that his answer regarding the Office of Sustainability would not sit well with many at C4L and yet he had no problem defending his answer. Contrast that with Mr. Grimmel who could easily show up in a dress and a brunette wig and pass as Mary Ann Lisanti.
Asking these questions is vitally important.
Actually they are not important, what is important is where the leaders of the county are taking it and what they will do to repair the wrongs they believe that need fixing.
You and your posse of loonies are really into the finger pointing of politics which gets nothing done. You’re like a bunch of 4 year old screaming that some one else got a bigger slice of cake or they pulled your hair. If you would have been on iceberg duty on the Titanic you would have been on the fantail looking at things as they passed.
You have grown old just like a” boy band” and the world has tuned you out, so either actually do something or stay on the porch yapping as the world passes by.
The C4L Steering Committee includes Christina Trotta, Patrick McGrady and Joe Fleckenstein all running for Central Committee. I’m not going to vote the C4L wing nut ticket.
You can vote for Impallaria’s children then. Much better choice. I think they just turned 21 too, so you can take them out for a beer after.
“Do you think it’s your duty to interpose between Harford County citizens and the federal or state government if unconstitutional acts are passed?”
This question makes little sense. In order for this to make sense a law has to continue to be implemented and enforced by an executive branch despite having been determined by a court to be unconstitutional.
Could you please give an example of an act that has been determined to be unconstitutional, rather than simply unpopular, that continued to be enforced despite being illegal to do so?
The remainder of the questions seem reasonable enough.
In Carroll County, the board of commissioners created an alliance with the sheriff, and DA to create an SB 281 free zone in their county. If someone runs afoul of SB 281 in CC, they will not be arrested or prosecuted unless they are guilty of an additional crime. This is true leadership. If the state can refuse to cooperate with current immigration laws then the same tactics should be available to those of us that still have respect for the Constitution. I hope this helps, Mr. Gable.
@Vicki
Thanks. I think I understand now. This isn’t about constitutionality, as defined by courts, but about local attempts to nullify an unpopular law through other means. In this case, an attempt by local authorities to not enforce a law whose constitutionality has yet to be determined.
(I could be wrong, but I believe the federal court allowed the law to stand, which unless a federal court of appeals or the US Supreme Court decides differently, than Carroll County is taking a stand against a constitutional law, which upends the whole concept of the rule of law.)
She wants to follow the Constitution till she doesn’t agree with it, then not so much.
Hope that helps.
So, BillH, I just want to see if I am following your logic correctly here. Because the implication inherent in your characterization of Mrs. Seitzinger’s stand on the constitutionality of a law tends to imply that you think a law rescinding the right of every law-abiding citizen in Maryland from possessing certain firearms is constitutional. That would put you on the side of O’Malley, Inc. and the gun-grabbers. No?
And Keith, from some of your previous posts, I feel like your ideology would lend itself to the principle of nullification. Or do you not believe that people of respectable intelligence are capable of discerning from its very clear language the intent of the Second Amendment as well as, if not better than, an activist judge who may well be motivated by his own agenda?
Do I believe that citizens have the right to attempt to use extra-judicial means to abrogate a statue of their choosing? Yes, of course, provided that they are willing to accept the consequences of their actions, as, inevitably, the matter will be returned to the judicial branch at some point.
Do I make a distinction between “activist” and “strict constructionist” judges? Of course not, as they are the same creature. The former shifts left and the latter shifts right.
Do I have faith in the judicial branch, including jury trials? Yes, undoubtedly, especially in matters of constitutionality, as it is the only branch of government endowed with the final say in this. (Marbury v. Madison)
Do I agree with everything the US Supreme Court and the Maryland Court of Appeals decides? Of course not, but I have to accept it, at least until the next court case involving the same issue arrives on the docket.
Before everyone gets angry, please remember, my line of questioning remains the same. Name a statute that has been determined by the courts to be unconstitutional, that is still being enforced or implemented, which would require the lower level of government to pass a law requiring that the unconstitutional law not be obeyed. (Again, as far as I can tell, no court has YET to overturn Maryland’s gun control law, so that one doesn’t count.) It is upon this line of thought that I find the question on the questionnaire to be absurd/nonsensical. It creates a completely hypothetical situation that doesn’t/rarely exists in reality.
Keith Gabel, not in a position to personally respond now, but to answer your question from the other day, do an online search for the League of Women Voters Guide. You can narrow the search to Maryland and then Harford County. They will tell you who is running for Harford Republican Central Committee, and you can see who answered their survey, and how they answered. You can draw your own conclusions based upon that. Thanks!
Thanks!
“a liberal legacy of bicycle paths”
Congratulations for possibly one of the stupidest phrases I’ve ever seen. Ever. Anywhere.
“Noble’ and “Qualified”, you have a right to your opinions. But why don’t you identify yourselves by name? Cowards!
Probably typing-away in your parent’s basements. 🙂
Joe not everyone is batshit crazy like you. Does DOD know what you are doing?
Hello NSA! It’s time for an in depth check out mr Fleckenstein again.
Paging Big Brother… it’s 1984 and Nobler wants you to ensure that Joe is being a doubleplus good boy…
“a liberal legacy of bicycle paths”
I’m quoting that again to emphasize the fact that you’re not seeing the absurdity of that collection of words. That really speaks for itself.
I’m a conservative and lifelong Republican by the way, and accordingly, I appreciate my privacy and I don’t do unwise things like use personally identifying information on the open Web.
It seems to me the more important question would be why do you feel need to have your name out there, or should we say, recognizable?
“Actually they are not important, what is important is where the leaders of the county are taking it and what they will do to repair the wrongs they believe that need fixing.” BillH
This is the rational that Mr. Bill H. uses to explain why he thinks the voters of Harford County should not ask those seeking elected office their positions on taxes, speed camera, the 2nd Amendment. It sounds as if Mr. H. doesn’t think voters should not worry their little heads at all about such silly things when they go to the polls. Apparently, the only thing that is important is “where the leaders of the county are taking it (I presume he means the county) and what they will of to right the wrongs that THEY BELIEVE need fixing.” I ask, are we allowed to know where they want to take us or what needs fixing? According to this statement; NOT NECESSARY.
He is so perturbed by the fact that truly conservative candidates (i.e. right wing-nuts) may find favor with the voters that he will make such a silly claim. Unless of course he really means it. How did you feel Mr. H. when David Brat defeated amnesty loving Eric Cantor. Or how about when Marco Rubio defeated Charlie Christ (just before he became a Democrat). Would you rather have Mike Lee or Mr. Bennet protecting your rights? How about Rand Paul, managing to pull out a victory inspite of all the powerful establishment types lining up against him? I could go on but you get the picture.
Are people so married to their favorite political buddies that they will support them regardless of how they represent you in office? Will you support a Central Committee slate that is backed and likely financed by people that think HB1513 was a good idea? Just to remind you, HB 1513 was a failed bill put forward by certain HC delegates to create a political fiefdom in HC at the expense of actual voters. When confronted by this, the lead sponsor said “the voters don’t matter” For those of you that think this was a good idea, you may want to know that the MD GOP unanimously passed a resolution condemning HB 1513 and by proxy, all those that supported it.
So vote for the bought and paid for establishment Central Committee and County Council Candidates or vote for people that understand the nature of a lawful society and the rightful role of government within it.
Vicki the really sad fact here is you are so clueless you don’t even know what the word reply means or how the feature is used in a public forum.
And WTF is up with the name Vicki? did your parents not have full grasp of the English language?
Mr. H., Rather than name call and insult, why not try to address the issues. It t might take more effort but the exercise will do you good. I promise
Wow. Great comeback, Bill!
Keith, I think the thread got too long for me to reply directly, since it did not give me the option to reply. I understand your line of reasoning, and agree with it to an extent. But that is not the point Mrs. Seitzinger was making. She wasn’t merely advocating for CITIZENS to use “extra-judicial means to abrogate a statue of their choosing.” She was advocating for elected officials–namely the Sheriff and County Council, as has happened in jurisdictions around the country recently– to interpose ON BEHALF of those citizens. That said, yes, we who care about Liberty are certainly comfortable and willing to accept the consequences of these actions.
@RINO Hunter:
Thanks for your reply.
I understood Vicki’s point, but I don’t think she understood my comment. In summary, I found one question to be of little value. She gave me an example of a County Council attempting to abrogate a constitutional law on behalf of the citizenry. Unfortunately, the questionnaire asks whether or not an elected official would attempt to nullify unconstitutional laws. I believe our disagreement comes down the point of who has the ultimate say in whether or not a law is constitutional. I believe it is with the judiciary, whereas it appears she may have a different idea.
That said, when it comes to nullifying unpopular laws or those that citizens feel don’t fit well with their community, then, yes, the political class and citizens have all options on the table. Examples of this can be found in Arizona with immigration and in Colorado with marijuana, with both states bucking the national system. (Internet trolls: these are examples, not an invitation to discuss them.)
Otherwise, thanks for your responses and good luck with your endeavors.
If you don’t like the “wingnuts” trying to keep elected officials accountable, I just got a great new slate in the mail today – Kingmakers Harris and Craig’s Super Slate, paid for by thug Ricky Impallaria. What a crew! And for central committee? A bunch of students, legislative aides and shills who have never even been to a meeting.
Seriously! Look at 1.) their last names, 2.) the description of their credentials for office, and 3.) businesses they own. A full 2/3 of this slate is either immediately related to a current politician, works for one (a benefactor of our tax dollars), or owns a business which hosts meetings of organizations with which a politician promoted on the other side of this piece is directly-involved. There’s a fresh start.
Pat Haggerty should hook up with Lisanti to “Get Fit” they are all fools who need to leave their warped views out
Mr. Gabel, I understood your question but found the assumption on which it was based to be false. You seem to think that only acts that have undergone judicial review can be considered. If that we were the case, we would all be twiddling our thumbs waiting for SCOTUS to get on board so we could act. And depending on the outcome it would be moot. As your own post states, the situation would rarely if ever exist.
Perhaps the question could have been worded differently but I think you and all the respondents understood what it was getting at. I provided the example of Carroll County because it is a perfect example of elected officials willing to put themselves on the line for Constitutional principles. Our elected officials, including law enforcement are sworn to protect the Constitution. That implies that they are granted a certain amount of judgment and I would like to be assured that their judgement is good. I would go so far to say that unelected citizens are granted the opportunity to exercise and act on their own judgement. As always, people must accept the consequences of their actions, whether they are in the right or not.
Marbury v. Madison aside, I have lost faith in the purity of our courts and suspect that such a thing could never be achieved completely. But the the recent Obamacare ruling was a case of judicial gymnastics and the revisiting of Roe v Wade was an embarrassing admission.
@vseitinger
I accept that we have different ideas regarding the definition of “constitutional” and how statutes achieve that status. I take the legalistic route and you another. That is fine. We are never going to agree.
As mentioned in my discussion with RINO HUNTER, we do agree on certain points. For example, I oppose SCOTUS’ decision regarding Citizens United. I can call it unconstitutional until the cows come home, but it will still be the law of the land. Where we agree procedurally is that, yes, the County Council could take steps to preserve local election law on the grounds that this federal decision is unpopular and dangerous to elected government. What I won’t do or advocate is to couch my opposition on constitutional grounds, for obvious reasons.
My belief is that the questionnaire chose the term “constitutional” because it is a powerful buzzword used to inflame, rather than inform. Everyone is opposed to unconstitutional laws, just as everyone is pro-family, loves puppies and kids, etc.
Thank you for your reply and good luck with your endeavors.