Delaware Political Weekly: Feb. 22-28, 2014
1. Two Kent County Democrats File to Challenge Republican State Reps.
Jonathan Gallo has filed to face Bobby Outten in the 30th RD. Gallo changed his registration from R to D to run and, if you check out his site right now, you will not find the word Democrat, or the donkey, anywhere on the site. I mean, anywhere. He’s got the classic bio, and he’s a “man of dedication, integrity, and commitment, who 
early in his life felt a call to serve his community.” Which means, he’s a ‘man of dedication, integrity, and commitment’ who is hiding his party affiliation. He also rides a tractor standing up (picture).
J. Kevin Robbins of Harrington, is challenging Harold Peterman in the conservative 33rd RD. Robbins is a long-time farmer and has the type of profile that could give him a shot in this district. Here is his site. Not only does he have the donkey there, he actually calls the Party the Democratic Party.
Guess which one I prefer.
2. Shirley Price Tries Again
Former State Rep. Shirley Price (D) has filed to run for the 4th Sussex County Council District seat currently held by George Cole. Should Cole run, he will also face a primary challenge from William F. Carroll, Jr. According to this article from the Cape Gazette which, by the way, does a good job of covering Sussex politics, Carroll believes that too much money from Sussex goes to the state, and that the county doesn’t get enough back:
“I see the state starting to usurp a lot of the things county government should be doing,” he said. “We need to tell them we don’t like the way they are doing it. The council should start defining what the problems are and telling the state what we want them to do.”
“We need people in our government to make sure the state spends our money down here,” he said. “We need to take more control.”
Price essentially echoes the same message:
“There is a disconnect and I’d like to explore ways to do it better,” she said, adding her contacts in state government would assist her efforts. “We need a stronger voice because we are so top heavy upstate. We need to bring some of our own money back to us,” she said.
Uh, OK. Longtime incumbent George Cole has not decided if he will run. Should he retire, former Sussex County Clerk of the Peace George Parrish has said he will run. Lest you might have forgotten Parrish, let’s allow Delaware Dem to remind us.
3. Does Anybody Support Chip Flowers Besides Chip Flowers?
Not only is Flowers having a hard time raising money, even former supporters like Sam Lathem are, at best, noncommittal. Thursday’s News-Journal article raised a key question in my mind: What is Flowers’ base? Does he have one? I’m not being facetious. Many who previously supported Flowers are staying away from him like he’s radioactive. I know it’s early, and Sean Barney still has a long way to go as a candidate, but if Flowers is doomed to primarily spend his own money, I think he’s doomed to defeat.
4. Filings.
Since my last weekly update, which was much more than a week ago, the following have filed in addition to those we’ve mentioned today: State Rep. Debbie Hudson, 12th RD; State Rep. John Mitchell 13th RD; Matthew Lenzini, R, 15th RD (he believes that too many skateboarders are in prison); and Rep. Kim Williams, 19th RD.
Tags: Billy Carroll Delaware, Chip Flowers, El Somnambulo, Featured, George Cole Delaware, J. Kevin Robbins, Jonathan Gallo, Sean Barney, Shirley Price, Steve Tanzer Delaware
“…the Cape Gazette which, by the way, does a good job of covering Sussex politics.”
The Cape Gazzette is a good local paper, and with very decent TV coverage out of Salisbury – Sussex has much better news culture than New Castle.
I like the fact that they let the candidates speak for themselves–unfiltered.
Standing up on the tractor in order to see over the flags is some kind of political symbol apotheosis.
if you cannot straddle a tractor in Kent, you cannot win
Instead of getting elected to office, Chip Flowers should have camped out in a park to propose increased accountability for banks. Then maybe you guys would have brought him cash, food, and blankets. I guess we have our own little social experiment right here in Delaware.
C’mon man. Your guy picked the wrong fight and did so while being pretty exposed on some judgement calls. You can like him, but that doesn’t change the basic facts.
Gallo is the nicest guy you’ll meet, he is a great choice for the 30th! Kevin Robbins is also very nice and great for the 33rd!
Although Southern Democrats will not be as progressive as northern democrats would like, it is a radical improvement for all if they run and win. Currently all their constituents have their voices completely shut out because Outten is a Republican. Even if they want something legitimate, they won’t get it, because their district foolishly backed the wrong party…
Voting for a Republican, any republican, anywhere in Delaware, gives you less of a voice then driving to Fenwick Island, walking into the surf, and tossing your News Journal fake paper ballot into the ocean….
The benefit to all as Republicans slowly disappear or change parties, is that again as when we were all growing up, Progressives and Conservatives can respect and work together without some slick haired jerk in Greenville calling Republicans up on the phone and literally screaming at them for trying to help their constituents…. because people would interpret it as a win for the Democrats….
Glad that period of state history is dying.
Well, my only question about Gallo is how much of a Democrat is he really? According to Outten, he would have backed Gallo as a Republican once he retired, and Gallo makes literally NO reference to the Democratic Party on his campaign site.
I agree that it helps the Party to elect more D’s. I just don’t know if Gallo is one and if he’ll caucus with the D’s if elected.
He really should at least list himself as a D on his campaign material before D’s should rally to support him, IMHO.
What’s that? Wait a minute. He HAS added the D word to his material online since this morning. That’s a start.
“Instead of getting elected to office, Chip Flowers should have camped out in a park to propose increased accountability for banks. “
Get over yourself, puck. I too voted for Chip. Chip has revealed himself to be a self-absorbed idiot in politician’s clothing.
Chip has revealed himself to be a self-absorbed idiot in politician’s clothing.
Good for you. I won’t argue with your emo analysis. Haters gonna hate, especially once they have been given permission by the community.
s
‘ But back in the reality-based community, his execution of the Treasurer’s duties has been reliable and unremarkable, like Treasurers before him. I haven’t seen any refutation of that.
You aren’t going to find an individual who wants to hold banks accountable and is also well received by the Establishment. You have to decide what your priorities are. It sounds like the center-left’s commitment to bank accountability was only skin deep. The empty suit is the guy who says nothing and follows banker’s wishes without question.
I haven’t seen any refutation of that.
You sure have. And you’ve been in your little poutrage over the fact that you *keep* seeing it — without having any reality-based facts to counter it with.
What — exactly– are you holding bankers accountable for here? This job is the management of the state’s checking account and the only thing the bankers are doing is making highly conservative investments to try to get some return on the parts of that checking account they can. The only real accountability for these banks is in making sure they follow direction on the kind of investments allowed and getting the best return they can get in that limited playing field.
What — exactly– are you holding bankers accountable for here?
A very reasonable and honest accountability asked for (and rejected) was transparency owed to the taxpayer by requiring the appointed Board members to file a yearly disclosure of their financial holdings. No requirement to divest or recuse themselves from the process, merely an access portal through which the public might view (and if so moved) question, challenge or merely seek an explanation of agendas or motives in the boards recommendations and decisions. Treasurer Flowers asked for that and I sought that very simple and harmless amendment to the recently passed legislation. Since the authors and sponsors of SB 151 stated that the proposal was merely a clarification of the Boards responsibilities and authority it is obvious that there is no reasonable explanation offered or available to reject that amendment other than certain individuals (read Delaware Grapevine account) expressed belief that this was and is a bill to put Treasurer Flowers in his place. No one has the right to disparage any effort to open government transparency and impose minimal accountability standards on people who are dealing with taxpayer monies. If there is another motive, agenda or intention to policies and legislation then all elected officials should expose those personal feelings and considerations for the general public to see. Leaders that truly believe they are deserved of their authority should do a “gut check” and commit to some semblance of intellectual honesty. The people who elected them deserve nothing less.
Gallo is an established democratic candidate, I’ve seen him at many 30th RD democratic meetings and have had personal conversations with him… He’s a great democrat
John: You know damned well that the Cash Management Review Board is under sunset review this year, and that your proposal could well be implemented during that process.
By holding up the entire General Assembly to force this vote, which then would have required that the bill then be reconsidered by the Senate, you have only succeeded in making it more difficult to get your priorities through the Chamber.
Sometimes, I think you’re your own worst enemy. I think that your proposal likely would have become law through the Sunset review. I can only hope that you haven’t scuttled that with this unnecessary ploy. It’s hard to be a martyr when you create the conditions of your own martyrdom.
Yeah, that was a load of bullshit, John. The question, BTW, was regarding some bankers who needed to be accountable — not the people (not all bankers) who are on the Cash Management Board.
Flowers’ ask for disclosure of Board Member finances was a spectacularly bad bit of deflection from his rather long list of political problems. He didn’t care about this disclosure until he needed to find someone else to blame. There’s no real reason why this disclosure can’t happen, but there is a process to get there and one more time Flowers can’t figure out how to work the process to get what he wants. As El Som says, when this comes up before the Sunset Committee, it now looks like a second bite at an apple and probably puts at risk making this bit of transparency happen. And everyone takes to their fainting couches again — this time we’ll know it is because the opportunity got blown away by the folks who needed to be seen on their fainting couches.
Yes I do know that the Cash Management Board was scheduled for Sunset review and that’s exactly the point. SB 151 should have been deferred until the Sunset review as well. There was not and will not be any urgent or time sensitive accomplishment under this clarification of responsibilities bill. Treasurer Flowers did not ask for the disclosure, I did! And Cassandra I know full well that disclosure should and must happen and quite frankly the process was through passing that amendment which would have made it happen. To defend the vote against the amendment, because of some false sense of urgency or imminent danger to the taxpayer is a straw man argument that seems to be constructed to hide the vitriol and personal animosity you both seem to harbor toward the individual. Look under the “fainting couch” for your own agendas and motives before you choose to question mine.
@El Som, Cassandra: None of which bears on Flowers’s execution of his constitutional duties as Treasurer, which he has done just as well as those who came before him.
Even if the disclosure bill failed, it was a benefit to educate the public that these potential and real conflicts existed. Without the push for disclosure, the too-cozy relationships would have been swept under the rug, not to be mentioned again.
Hard to see so far below the high horse, but is Representative Kowalko’s point that everyone on the Board should be fully transparent on their income so people can see if there’s conflicts?
So, now we have it. Rep. Kowalko saying that there was no more urgency in passing the amendment than there was in clarifying that Chip was full of shit when claiming that he had powers he did not have.
So, of course, the thing to do was throw the amendment, which Kowalko has now admitted had no urgency, onto the bill, which almost everybody BUT Kowalko felt was necessary. Just as they felt it was necessary to make clear that the Sheriff of Nuttingham could not assume powers that were not his to rightfully assume.
And Kowalko wonders why so many people roll their eyes at his bullshit.
“..clarifying that Chip was full of shit when claiming that he had powers he did not have…”
You don’t pass laws just because some official makes a claim that never materializes and is essentially a thoughtcrime. Unless of course you are grandstanding in order to make an entirely different point.
Puck, there may be a more boring Johnny One-Note on the board than you, but I can’t think of one.
The Delaware General Assembly has merely done with Flowers what they did with the Sheriff of Nuttingham–remove any claim to the contrary that the plain English in the Code isn’t the plain English in the Code.
Delaware has not had many Jeff Christophers or Chip Flowers. Both are delusional, and have claimed that the law as written doesn’t mean what the law says it means. Which creates heretofore unique challenges for the General Assembly since there has previously been a general supposition that such delusional people will not act in a delusional manner when in public office.
Either the General Assembly addresses their delusions, or their delusions require intervention by the courts. Or both.
It’s not the LEGISLATORS’ faults that these two are just so–delusional.
I really don’t know what else can be said.
The courts can’t act unless there is an actual violation. There was no violation, therefore the legislature made its grandstanding gesture. I wish I didn’t have to repeat myself, but you keep posting this stuff, not me.
To defend the vote against the amendment, because of some false sense of urgency or imminent danger to the taxpayer is a straw man argument that seems to be constructed to hide the vitriol and personal animosity you both seem to harbor toward the individual.
Since I’m not defending the vote, then you must be working up your own strawman here. But people working the Dumb Politics vein never seem to get past that.
The courts can’t act unless there is an actual violation.
Huh. No one was talking about courts here, but the GA, which is one of 3 co-equal branches of government. Flowers kept insisting with this Board that he didn’t need them to do the investments they were clearly charged with directing. This never got to a court, but the faster process of getting the GA to make certain that the authorities were clear so that the state’s checking account wasn’t in jeopardy was reasonable. Particularly since the Treasurer himself kept claiming authority he never had.
Huh. No one was talking about courts here
Yes, someone was. Do check upthread, and try to keep up.
Flowers kept insisting…
Flowers can insist he is Napoleon Bonaparte, but as long as he doesn’t invade Russia he nasn’t done anything wrong.
By your comments I can guess that you might be a victim of or expert in “dumb” politics or some other such fantasy you harbor, but to even suggest that the state’s checking account was or could be in jeopardy is thinking outside the realm of any reality and suggests a touch of “out of touch” with reality. Get a grip.
“Get a grip.”
The vote on SB 151 was 20-0 in the Senate, and 36-0 in the House. Two reps went not voting. One was due to a conflict-of-interest. The other was John Kowalko.
Claiming that he alone may have the only correct take on something might have its own virtues, but telling those who disagree with him (practically everybody) to ‘get a grip’ is why he can’t get any meaningful legislation passed. Legislators have stopped listening to him.
puck and i have some common ground. Nobody is paying attention to the (perhaps) workmanlike job Chip did on the day to day basics. My point is that he’d be much better off right now if he pretended the day to day basics were important all along.
workmanlike job Chip did on the day to day basics
Oh really? The mismanagement of his and his staff’s credit cards and travel budgets counts as a workmanlike job? As well as the persistent blaming of everyone else but the person who is in charge of that travel budget for those issues?
but to even suggest that the state’s checking account was or could be in jeopardy is thinking outside the realm of any reality and suggests a touch of “out of touch” with reality. Get a grip.
Right. Because one person telling a legally charged Board that they were Not The Boss Of Him and He Could Do What He Wanted wasn’t a risk. Maybe your constituents need to know that you aren’t much concerned with how their funds get managed. But hey, don’t let me get in the way of more misguided righteousness. Because at the end of the day, it is more important to have a good head of steam built up than it is to have gotten some better transparency for this Board.
You don’t pass laws just because some official makes a claim that never materializes and is essentially a thoughtcrime.
This isn’t a thoughtcrime — it was a genuine threat to process. And if the process is meant to work with Board oversight, one guy showing up and insisting that he gets to run it all means that the process isn’t working. Given that the Board stopped meeting for a while, that is pretty good evidence that the process was damaged by Flowers. The change the GA made really was pretty minor, but enough to clarify the role of the Board so this one Treasurer can’t hold up the show.
Does anyone else find it odd that the guy who cried about conflicts of interest was actually the recipient of political contributions from both JP Morgan and their lobbyist??? Moreover, JP Morgan’s lobbyist was on the host committee for Flowers’ only fundraiser.
And for those not paying attention, JP Morgan manages in excess of $200 million for the State of Delaware, and until SB 151, Flowers alone had the ability to reward them for their political contribution by raising their allocation of State funds.
Does that sit well with you, Rep. Kowalko? Do you think a sitting State Treasurer should be allowed to take political contributions from a bank he directly oversees?
If that’s not a “conflict of interest”, I don’t know what is… Awfully, awfully hypocritical, wouldn’t you say?
Well, that’s a spicy stew.
Seriously John, have you ever even considered the possibility that you could be wrong? About anything, ever? And Puck, can you really argue that Chip has been managing that office well given the credit card and travel fiasco?
Seriously AQC,
No snarky remark conjured up by your misguided and inaccurate imagination referencing me sitting at my keyboard, pounding on the keys in a near drunken stupor?
Let me be serious here. Before I’ll ever respond to your inquiries, you must contact me personally divulging your identity to me (and only me) and I will sit down with you and buy you a coffee, beer, tea or lunch and we can have a civil discussion of my failings (real or imagined). At the conclusion of that meeting I will give you my permission to divulge the content of our discussion even if you choose to remain cloaked in your anonymity. In the interest of full disclosure let me assure you that I have nothing to hide.
John Kowalko
Hello AQC, are you still out there? Or have you chosen to enjoy the comfort of your anonymity a little longer. Hello! Hello! Hello! ground control to Major Tom.
The hypocritical People’s Treasurer won’t disclose his taxpayer-funded activities!
I find this anti-Bowie rhetoric troubling.
“Don’t lean on me man, ‘cus you can’t afford a ticket, back from Anchorage city…”
“Fame: what you need you have to borrow.” – Chip Flowers’ campaign finance report
Snort! Thin White Duke with the line of the night!
Sorry John, I was busy having a life while you were typing those responses. Because I have a life, I will not take you up on your offer, but, thanks for playing! BTW, I am still open to an actual answer to my question. Have you ever admitted you were wrong? Try AA, it’s the tenth step.
Let us know when you get past the step you’re at now = bitter, petty, uninformed and hatefully self-indulgent. After that take the next step to enlightenment and see if you can manage to get past your natural state of ignorance. As you hopefully move toward remission from your current state of vitriolic poisoning, rest assured I will always be there to pity your pathetic circumstances never to despise your own sense of hopelessness.
Wait, John. Is AQC in a state of ignorance, or is she in a state of vitriolic poison? Or is it actually a state of hopelessness? Or is it all three? And if it’s all three, can she tell us how those states pay for infrastructure?
If one’s anxieties and frustrations leads to irritable bowel syndrome, aka a “gaseous state”, then I suppose a gas tax would be used. “Hopelessness” can take an emotional toll on one’s mental stability so an increase in tolls would support that state. And don’t forget New Hampshire “live fee (sic) or die”
Hey John, your cranky diatribe is doing you no good.
No diatribe to see here, just musing how infrastructure might be payed for in response to Nuttinham’s query
John, please reread your posts. We may not always agree but we are mostly on the same side. Let’s not eat our own.