Rep. Mike Smith Plans To Brazen It Out. Says he won’t seek reelection–in 2028:
State Rep. Mike Smith (R-Pike Creek), who was announced Wednesday morning as the next president of the Delaware State Chamber of Commerce, told Spotlight Delaware he would not run for reelection in 2028.
While the 41-year-old Smith has long been seen as a rising future leader in the Delaware Republican Party, the lawmaker said he also will not seek any office come 2028.
He called the decision to transition to the private sector after a decade as a state representative, should he win his reelection bid next month, “a commitment” he made to both himself and his family.
The General Assembly also has changed a lot since he was first elected, Smith said. Changes that have not necessarily been for the better.
“I’m not someone who believes in the party apparatus or the party fiefdoms, and I guess what comes with that,” Smith said. “I also don’t think the General Assembly has that makeup anymore. I think the General Assembly has generally been made up of advocacy organizations and really been kind of pillaged by the rise in outside [political action committee] spending.”
But the appointment also raises questions about a potential conflict of interest, should Smith win his reelection bid this November, as he would sit at the helm of an organization that often lobbies lawmakers in favor of business-friendly legislation.
And while Smith said those questions are fair, he rebuffed the idea of a possible conflict.
The role of the chamber president is much bigger than government lobbying, Smith said. He pointed to other facets of the role including membership, education and fundraising as areas where his attention will be focused.
He also noted candidates in other legislative races who have ties to advocacy organizations have already been supported by voters, as well as current lawmakers who are presidents or CEOs of organizations that also do direct lobbying to the legislature.
You mean like Dan Cruce? Smith now joins Cruce as exemplars of the Delaware Way. Casual corruption, indeed.
Tennessee Failed To Kill The Woman Who The Supreme Court Ordered Killed:
Christa Pike was set to be the first woman executed in Tennessee in more than 200 years. Instead, she is the state’s second death row inmate in a matter of months subjected to an unsuccessful attempt at a lethal injection.
On Wednesday night at the Riverbend Maximum Security Institute, following a day of legal wrangling, the state tried and failed to execute Pike for the 1995 murder of Colleen Slemmer. Pike’s lawyers say that she is still alive.
Gov. Bill Lee said he will postpone the state’s lone remaining execution in 2026. Gary Wayne Sutton was scheduled to be executed on Dec. 3. Lee also said he will commission a “comprehensive, third-party review” into Pike’s execution.
When Rethug Operatives Say That These Races Are Lost, I Believe Them:
With 34 days until the midterms, Republican strategists see at least five U.S. House seats are a lost cause for their party as President Donald Trump’s abysmal approval rating threatens to drag the GOP into the political abyss.
Punchbowl News reported that Republicans are broadly resigned to losses in California’s 48th District, Iowa’s 1st District, Nebraska’s 2nd District, New Jersey’s 7th District, and Pennsylvania’s 7th District—all GOP-held seats that in a neutral environment would be highly competitive.
“Nearly every senior Republican and Democrat involved in 2026 believes these five R seats are all but lost,” Punchbowl News co-founder Jake Sherman wrote in a post on X.
What’s more, Punchbowl reported that a handful of other districts are also close to being cooked. They include:
- Pennsylvania’s 10th District, held by Republican Rep. Scott Perry, a key player in Trump’s corrupt and illegal efforts to steal the 2020 election.
- Arizona’s 6th District, a seat Trump carried by less than 1 point in 2024 and which is held by GOP Rep. Juan Ciscomani.
- Iowa’s 3rd District, a seat Trump won by more than 4 points in 2024 but where Trump’s negative impact on farming communities is putting Republican Rep. Zach Nunn in serious peril.
- Ohio’s 7th District, where GOP Rep. Max Miller‘s disturbing domestic-violence allegations threaten to cost Republicans what should be an easily winnable seat.
Punchbowl said these seats “are growing more difficult for Republicans but still within reach.” It’s why even the typically gun-shy race-rating groups have declared that it’s “almost impossible” for Republicans to keep control of the House.
Independent journalist Tara Palmeri said one unnamed Trump ally told her the following at Trump’s midterm convention in Texas three weeks ago: “It’s going to be a tsunami. Total wipe out. Anyone saying we’re going to hold the Senate, that’s not going to happen. They’re delusional. Get ready for impeachment. Everyone needs a lawyer now.”
Another anonymous Republican operative told her this at an event during the two-day convention event: “What are we doing here? We’re all going to lose. … We’ve known this is all over for two months. It’s over. I guess we’re just supposed to party until then?”
I know y’all needed a pick-me-up. There it is.
Pete Hegseth And Elon Musk–Manly Men Unite:
Pete Hegseth announced on Wednesday that Elon Musk will co-lead a government project to study the future of warfare, marking the SpaceX CEO’s first return to government since he ran the chaotic, so-called “department of government efficiency”, or Doge. Musk will be joined by Palmer Luckey, CEO of the defense tech company Anduril, and Newt Gingrich, the former Republican speaker of the House.
A defense department press release on the effort, called Project Meridian, described its goal as “identifying the capabilities required to achieve absolute technological dominance on the next-generation battlefield”. The project will run for 120 days and culminate in an unclassified public report of its recommendations.
The defense department’s project brings Musk back into government work a little more than a year after his explosive tenure as leader of Doge, which gutted federal agencies while failing to achieve its stated cost-cutting goals. It is also a sign of how Musk has re-entered the good graces of the Trump administration after a dramatic falling out with the president last year.
Musk and Luckey are far from independent arbiters of the future of warfare. Both have extensive defense department contracts through their companies, with Anduril’s business centered on the government purchasing products that it advertises as the latest advance in warfare.
Gingrich was appointed as a member of the defense policy board in December 2020 during the first Trump administration but was dismissed less than three months later after Joe Biden became president. Going back to the 1990s, he has been warning about the threat of an electromagnetic pulse attack that could knock out US power grids.
Newt is still alive? Sad.
Speaking Of Toxic Masculinity Personified:
The US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, has confirmed plans to cut 20% of generals and admirals and declared “no beardos, no weirdos, no wimps” would be tolerated inside the country’s military.
Delivering his latest extraordinary attack on diversity, and dismissing reports of low morale within the US armed forces as “false claims”, Hegseth also suggested they were retaining service personnel at “record” rates.
“The only focus, as you know, in your formations should be training, readiness, accountability, discipline and lethality,” Hegseth said. “And when you pursue those things, you don’t have to walk on eggshells … the complainers, the ideologues and the poor performers are no longer in the driver’s seat.”
He added: “But it’s worth saying again, so the fake news understands it. We are no longer the woke department or the weak department. Simple translation of that: no fatties, no trannies, no beardos, no weirdos, no wimps, no radicals. Just warriors.”
Generals “who clung to the woke department, or seemed to think civilian control of the military is simply a suggestion, well, they no longer work here”, Hegseth said.
Hegseth is one sick fuck.
What do you want to talk about?
Perhaps Mr. Smith was also referring to Mrs. Khan-Flowers, current Democratic candidate in RD 9. She has yet, as far as anyone is aware, to step down or announce plans to step down from the DEBCC.
I am not in any way saying he is right. In fact I think BOTH, and all, should do the ethical thing. Its a HUGE conflict of interest to accept monies from such organizations and be the one voting on bills or in committees with insider information.
Agreed. In fact, he knows it’s a conflict, hence the pledge not to run in 2028. Let’s see if the voters in RD 22 reject his reelection campaign based on this obvious conflict.
Also, whoever gets elected as Speaker can make sure he doesn’t get anywhere near committees where he has a conflict. If they give him any committee assignments at all, which I wouldn’t. Hmmm, wonder when Hockessin last had a member on the Agriculture Committee…
I don’t know El Som. Ag is big bidness. The head of the State Chamber might have a whole of conflicts serving on that committee too.
You’ve got a point there. Perhaps ‘no committees’ is the way to go…
By this standard, which sitting legislatures would you say DON’T have a conflict of interest?
What about Senators who get a salary from law firms, and are heavily involved in crafting legislation that the law firms think appropriate. Do they have an ethical conflict of interest? Should they recuse themselves from committees?
What about legislators that have “day jobs” that are essentially tax payer funded non-profits? In other words, all of the funding for their “day job” comes from Tax payer funded grants. Too many people to list. Do all of those legislators have a conflict of interest?
What about certain union members who chair the Labor committees and are actively getting Union related salaries, in addition to the legislative salary. Should they be barred from committees?
They all do, and in a properly working system they would recuse themselves on issues that affect them. In practice, the GA considers this not a conflict but expertise. Opinions on that differ.
Having a job does not in itself constitute a conflict of interest. In some cases it might, and legislators should use their best judgment about when they need to opt out of a vote or a debate. For example: if you run an organization that operates primarily with State grants or contracts. This is rarer than people are making it out to be.
Running the Delaware State Chamber of Commerce is not just a job. In that position you are the highly paid representative of a very specific interest group. The Chamber actively lobbies the legislature. They actively take positions on dozens, maybe even hundreds of pieces of legislation a session. As President of the Chamber you basically represent a constituency.
Rep. Smith has been an incredibly reliable vote for the Chamber in his past 4 terms. Now it appears that he is being rewarded for that reliability to the tune of apparently $300,000 a year. I’m sorry but this is the definition of open corruption. It is not “soft” corruption of the type you might see normally in Delaware. I think it is arguable this is unlawful.
If I were one of Rep. Smith’s constituents I would rightfully have questions about who he is actually representing in leg hall. If 100% of RD 22 residents were on one side of an issue and the chamber were on another is it really even a question which vote he would cast?
To the elected dems who read this blog: you cannot allow this asshole to dab on us like this. He is making a mockery of the institution of the legislature and he needs to face swift consequences. For god’s sake the guy is a Republican get it in you to put an end to this nonsense.
Every year, the Chamber puts out a list of their legislative priorities. Smith will inevitably be involved in putting together those priorities.
The House Of Representatives, specifically the Speaker, cannot allow Smith to determine for himself which votes he recuses himself on. I mean, the Chamber’s concerns permeate pretty much every bill of significance that comes before the General Assembly.
This is an incredibly blatant conflict of interest. If Smith is reelected, there should be a complaint to the Ethics Committee waiting for him on Day One.
I think the thing people might be missing here is that the Chamber of Commerce is not a neutral entity. They may claim to represent the “business”
community but that is untrue. They are a private organization that represents their membership, which is a subset of business owners (not workers) who largely share right-wing political goals. You could reasonably compare the Chamber to the NRA, or the Heritage Foundation.
And to reply that once again to OP of this thread, there is a material difference between being an ostensible member of an interest group and being the paid President of an organization funded by that interest group that largely exists to lobby the government on behalf of that interest group. They are just facially two different things. That’s where the conflict is created.
The 2 labor committee heads are not receiving salaries from the Unions. They are retired members.