One day last week it was so hot that I thought it might be August. We’ve already had too many of those hot, humid days that make excursions outside unpleasant.  And mosquitos and ticks seem to be having a banner year as well.

All that kept me inside a few days. Quiet days at home offer an opportunity to reflect on what you might call “the human condition.”  In my case, I lean towards the negative.  I’m a worrier.  A glass half-empty type guy. This being the case, it is often better to look forward rather than backwards. Often, I do so by asking myself questions.

This week, a few questions popped into my head. Some were quite serious. Others were not. And still others were “neutral,” not reflecting my political or social preferences but rather reflecting my personal interests.

Here are nine questions that I asked myself last week:

Is the pandemic really winding down?  I read about the “Delta Variant” of the coronavirus that started in India and is now the dominant strain in the U.K.  Is it coming here?  If it does, will we take three steps back before taking another step forward?

Is Joe Biden doing a good job as president?  Half the people I talk to say yes, often with enthusiasm. The other half don’t agree. They continue to tell me that Biden has dementia. (If the President’s occasional verbal lapses are solid evidence of dementia, I have it, too.) They suggest he is a puppet of either Kamala Harris or Jill Biden. This split in perspectives suggests that we don’t yet have a clear answer. Let’s wait and see if the economy continues to recover, whether inflation raises its ugly head, or whether Biden does something obviously wrong.

Are we in for a period of inflation?  The big question seems to be whether inflation is coming and, if it does, how bad will it be. My personal guess is that we are in for higher inflation than the Fed or White House is willing to admit. I also fear that it will be difficult to slow down inflation if it takes root. Please note, I am not a professional economist.  If you are and know the answer, please share it with the rest of us.  

Why are there so many crazies serving in Congress right now?  In answer to this one, let’s set aside Mr. Harris. (I hope the First District does this permanently in the next election.) Instead, let’s focus on other “colorful personalities” in Congress. Here’s a partial, bipartisan list: Matt Gaetz (accused sex trafficker),  Paul Gosar (far-right dentist), Ilhan Omar (anti-Semite squad member), Lauren Boebert (gun nut), Louie Gohmert (forest service should change earth’s orbit), Jim Jordan (considered to be the most obnoxious member of Congress), Elizabeth Warren (many will disagree, but read all her “plans”), Steve Cohen (check out a few videos of his wildest House speeches on YouTube), and, of course fist-pumping Senator Josh Hawley and Cancun-visiting Ted Cruz.  Let me stop there. Why can’t Americans send more sane people to Congress?

Are people really turning off Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN?  The ratings of these and other news outlets I call “Opinion News” are down.  President Trump was right—he was making them money by giving them someone to either cheer on or condemn each evening. Biden, by contrast is boring. Are people really switching to channels offering old episodes of Cheers, Mr. Ed, and Friends?

Is ex-president Trump really going insane?  Some comment that he was already there a long time ago, but what about those reports of him crashing weddings at Mar-a-Lago, wearing his pants backwards (he wasn’t, but it sure looked like it), and suggesting that he will be “reinstated” as President later this summer?  Is the Trump era over?  If it is, why are most Hill Republicans still loyal to him? 

Why are people quitting their jobs or thinking about it?  This has been in the news the last few days. It appears that some people who have been working from home for the last year don’t want to go back to an office. Instead, they want a new job. I’d say “good luck” to that but am at a loss as to the thought process of quitting a job when unemployment remains high, and the economy overall remains unsteady. 

Is the federal government about to disclose that, yes, earth has been visited by aliens?  This question arises out of the recent flurry of UFO sightings. I saw one the other day in Talbot County, but it was “unidentified” only to me. It was a military jet on what appeared to be a joy ride over the Chesapeake Bay. How will we react if reports of UFOs prove to be true?  Do you remember that Twilight Zone episode where friendly aliens come to earth and offer earthlings free trips to their home planet? The episode ends with scientists translating a book one of the aliens was carrying around which turns out to be a cookbook!

I hope the weather improves this week so that I can get outside, ride my bike, kayak, or do something other than engage in idle speculation. Wish me luck.

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant writing on politics, government, birds, and occasionally goldendoodles. 

 

Last week I learned that America is not falling apart. I did it by metaphorically burying my head in the sand, ostrich-like. I stopped watching TV news for a few days. I missed it, the way I would miss a cup of coffee in the morning. A habit interrupted.

The first TV news-free day was difficult. I cheated a bit, by looking at Google News, which links to some video news posted on YouTube and other electronic media and by more thoroughly reading my newspaper. Determined, I made it through but decided to take my plan day-by-day. Basically, I substituted reading for watching the news. My goal was not to stop receiving news, but to get it from more accurate sources. Finally, rather than committing myself to a week or more of not watching news, I set the goal of abstaining from TV news for as long as I could.

It turns out that was only three days. Not long, but enough to convince me my idea had merit. That lifted my spirits. The news I got in print form, including news from the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, and The Economist, was different than that I was getting from TV. The same major events were covered, but less sensationalized. I didn’t get to see interviews with weeping parents of shooting victims, but I did learn more about the epidemic of shootings. I learned much more about the Israel-Gaza fighting instead of just seeing videos of bombed-out buildings and wounded children.

I also found that domestic politics is usually not covered unless there is news worth covering. Rather than learning about how Trump crashed a wedding at Mar-A-Lago, I read an analysis of why Republican congressional leaders believe Trump remains relevant to their efforts to win in 2022.

Reflecting on the change in the type of news I was receiving, I was grateful for no longer being bombarded with the worst, often exaggerated or false, bad news of the day. In its place, by reading the newspaper (including The Spy), I was reminded that this community, and the country, is mostly populated by decent people, working honestly to cope with the pandemic, economic downturn, and other challenges.  I learned there is good news out there to balance out the bad.   

Those who regularly read my columns may shake their heads and think, “He stopped watching MSNBC 10 hours a day.” I was not watching TV news for that long but confess to watching it for maybe two hours a day. If you watch MSNBC, you learn a lot about the threat to democracy posed by right-wing loonies and the problem of systemic racism. You also learn that the Republican party is rotten to the core. But sometimes that’s all you learn. 

MSNBC’s focused news is not necessarily wrong. I agree with a lot of the opinions that are the mainstay of the channel.  But it is no more “fair and balanced” than Fox News, NewsMax, and OAN. All these channels—those on the left as well as on the right–are a disservice to anyone interested in “the middle.”  The middle is boring, so none of them spend much time covering it. 

Watching one-sided news undermines our ability to talk to one another. If watching MSNBC or CNN convinces me that most Republicans are virulent racists, how likely is it that I will be able to exchange ideas with them? Convinced that they are beyond reason, I won’t get near them.  Similarly, many conservatives, some of whom I would call right-wing, will not want to talk to me if they assume I am left leaning for the same reason. 

What is to be done about the situation?  Certainly not government regulation that would effectively control what is broadcast. That not only would be unconstitutional, but it would also be a disaster. It is next to impossible for any government agency to differentiate objective from biased news. Ultimately, the party in power would determine what we hear and see. Just like China, North Korea, and a few other places. No thank you.

To weigh in against government regulation of news content is not to say there is no role for government. In addition to the government itself ensuring that the information they share with the public is accurate, think PBS.  While many of us occasionally disagree with a PBS news story or program, few of us would suggest PBS is as biased as Fox, OAN, MSNBC, and CNN. If PBS maintains its quality and independence, it will be worth watching.  

Another “solution” I reject is the idea that I should be watching news channels promoting ideological perspectives different than my own. For me this would mean watching Fox and similar channels. No, thank you. I’m not a masochist. Listening to the likes of Sean Hannity isn’t going to make me smarter any more than watching Morning Joe will “cure” a Proud Boy. 

One valid solution, at least for me, is to seek out trusted, unbiased news sources. In addition to reading magazines such as The Economist and reading newspapers I trust, I occasionally tune into C-SPAN and watch congressional debates directly. Doing so offers me an opportunity to listen to legislators debate. While the quality of the debate—on both sides of the aisle—is often lacking, you do hear both sides.

Finally, there is the option of talking to others with differing views from yours whenever possible. Such conversations can be especially educational. To make these conversations happen, all you need to do is to open yourself to them, find opportunities to engage in them, and be civil. If you are civil in conversations with others, you will listen to pretty much any differing point of view and remain calm. With a little luck, you learn something.

So, what happened when I stopped watching TV news?  I became better informed, more positive, more engaged with others, and a bit happier. Since I returned to watching TV news, I now watch much less and consider it a strictly secondary source of news. For me, that’s progress. 

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant writing on politics, government, birds, and occasionally goldendoodles. 

 

I wish I could stop writing about Andy “Handgun” Harris, but he won’t let me. First, he voted against the bipartisan bill to establish a commission to investigate the events of January 6. Then he voted against legislation responding to the increase in hate crimes against Asian Americans. With that second vote, I feel obligated to speak out. This man is not representing me. He votes incorrectly with a remarkable consistency.

Harris’ vote against the bipartisan commission was predictable. Andy is in Donald Trump’s pocket. A commission report that definitively established Trump’s role in inciting the January 6 insurrection would be devastating to him. More of his already dwindling group of supporters would throw in the towel. Worse yet, for Trump, the report could prompt civil or criminal actions tied to what he did on January 6 and the days preceding it. 

Trump calls the shots for Andy on anything to do with stolen elections or the need to stamp out democracy. Do voters in the First District care about these issues?  Are you aware of any listening session or other effort by Harris to determine how his constituents feel about investigating January 6? 

More disturbing to me is Andy’s no vote on the hate crimes bill. In fairness, he was joined by 61 other Republicans, including QAnon follower Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), alleged sex-trafficker Matt Gaetz (R-FL), gun advocate Lauren Boebert (R-CO), right-wing dentist Paul Gosar (R-AZ), and a host of other Tea Partiers, Trumpers, and lunatics. 

The bill, officially called the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act, passed the Senate in April by a vote of 94-1. Missouri Senator Josh Hawley (R) was the only dissenting vote. You may remember him as the guy who fist-pumped January 6 rioters as they approached the Capitol. Mr. Hawley plans to run for President in 2024 and, if Trump himself is not running (perhaps because he is incarcerated), he is an attractive choice for Trump’s endorsement. 

According to The Washington Post, “The legislation would assign an official in the Justice Department to review and expedite all reports of hate crimes related to the coronavirus, expand support for local and state law enforcement agencies responding to these hate crimes, and issue guidance on mitigating the use of racially discriminatory language to describe the pandemic.”

Are there provisions in S. 937 that most of us on the Eastern Shore are against?  I don’t think so. So why did Andy Harris vote no?  The answer is that he is a rigid idealogue who could care less about the Asian Americans who are getting killed, beaten-up and otherwise harassed across the country.  

House Republicans had little difficulty explaining their no votes. Representative Chip Roy (R-TX) offered, “You can’t legislate away hate.”  Maybe he’s right, but shouldn’t we try?

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), one of ex-president Trump’s strongest supporters, offered, “This violence, by and large, is happening in Democrat-controlled cities, many of which, interestingly enough, have defunded their police department.”  He appears to have voted against the bill because of his view that the violence is occurring in “Democrat-controlled” cities. Is his vote intended to punish Democrats?  Or is he trying to support his belief that police should not be defunded?

A search for a statement or explanation by Handgun Harris produced nothing. No tweets, no press releases, nothing. 

If you are Asian American and living in the First District, you are, like the rest of us, left to guess why Harris voted no. That is wrong. Importantly, it would be unfair to Harris to suggest that he is indifferent to the violence against Asian Americans. It is not unfair to ask him who he thinks he is representing in Congress.

Had Donald Trump publicly urged his followers to vote for the bill, how do you think Andy would have voted?

The Eastern Shore not only deserves better representation in Congress, but we also desperately need it. As far as many of us are concerned, we would be better off with Andy’s seat left vacant. 

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant writing on politics, government, birds, and occasionally goldendoodles.

 

Isn’t it great that the CDC has announced a new mask policy? It means the pandemic is about over, doesn’t it?

Well, no, not really. It means that although there are encouraging statistics, risk continues to surround us.  It means that the CDC, perhaps prompted by growing reports of anti-maskers and anti-vaxers, recognized that the public is fed up with the pandemic and efforts to control it. The public, at least parts of it, was losing confidence in the CDC. In some ways, they had to take action.

I’m nervous about the new policies. In my opinion, they were premature. I would have preferred to wait another month or so to let more people get vaccinated and to see more signs that the pandemic is on the decline. But the CDC didn’t ask my opinion before announcing the new policies. 

About 30 percent of us say we don’t want the vaccine. Also, we face the risk that a new, vaccine-resistant strain of the virus will appear. I’d like to know more about how much of a risk that is before giving up one of the most effective safeguards against infection. And, as you know, the virus is still rampant in India, South America, and other places. 

And, most importantly, what about that false sense of euphoria that followed the CDC announcement? We are experiencing the high that comes in anticipation of freedom from masks, social distancing, closed restaurants, and a struggling economy. 

I fear our false sense of euphoria will lead some of us, perhaps most of us, to do stupid things. Things like crowding into bars or onto beaches. Things like presuming that everyone we run into in public spaces, here on the Eastern Shore and everywhere else, is vaccinated. Things like assuming that a vaccinated person cannot spread the virus, etc., etc. 

The announcement by the CDC took many people by surprise, including medical experts. That’s another red flag. News reports are replete with comments that the new standards may be premature by a week or two. Other reports emphasize that less than half the country is vaccinated.   (Talbot County’s numbers, as readers of The Spy know, are fairly good. See this page).

Did the CDC act too hastily? Did it feel political pressure to accelerate a return to normalcy? Most importantly, did they do the right thing?  Only time will tell. In the interim, those of us who are skeptical about the CDC’s actions, which prompted Governor Hogan to change his executive order, need to take matters into our own hands. We need to exceed the CDC guidelines and encourage others to do so.

First, before we get ahead of ourselves, why not look at the new CDC guidelines. Almost everyone I have talked to about the new standards since they were released, hasn’t read them. Their reaction, like my initial reaction, was based on news reports, some of which I subsequently learned were based on inadequate review of the facts. Surprise, surprise.

Also, local governments, unions, companies, and many commentators criticized the newly released guidelines, claiming they are too complicated. A visit to the CDC website explaining the new guidelines will convince you the critics are right. 

Here is a distillation of the new guidelines from the CDC website:

• If you are fully vaccinated, you can resume activities that you did before the pandemic.

• Fully vaccinated people can resume activities without wearing a mask or physically distancing, except where required by federal, state, local, tribal, or territorial law, rules, and regulations, including local businesses and workplace guidance.
  
• If you haven’t been vaccinated yet, find a vaccine. 

This seems simple enough, but individual businesses and state and local governmental authorities have the discretion to implement their own guidance. Thus, if you are out shopping, you may be required to wear a mask in one store and are free not to in the next store.  

Governor Hogan updated requirements for Maryland on May 14. Importantly, masks are still required on planes, buses, trains, and other forms of public transportation traveling into, within or out of the U.S. and in U.S. transportation hubs such as airports and stations. Also, schools, where interaction with others is likely, still require masks. Of course, other exemptions apply to people with special needs or in situations where mask-wearing is not feasible or optimal.  

While the Governor’s announcement was well-received, it represented a change in his plans. Just two days earlier, Hogan had announced that the mask mandate would remain in place until 70 percent of Marylanders were vaccinated. The CDC announcement prompted him to change his mind.

Given that multiple experts have expressed concern about the new guidelines, I’m worried. Typical of the experts is Ann O’Leary, healthcare advisor to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. Ms. O’Leary tweeted: “My blood is boiling that @CDCgov acted so irresponsibly to adopt an “honor code” for public mask-wearing. It’s not good public health advice to say to parents whose kids can’t get vaccinated, just trust the public to do the right thing.”

Ms. O’Leary has hit on one of the big problems with the new guidelines—they rely on honesty, voluntary compliance, and common sense from the public. Given that polls show a substantial number of people have decided not to get the vaccine, how do you know that the pleasant looking fellow you run into in Walmart has been vaccinated?

The answer is you don’t and can’t. There is no enforcement mechanism. And much to my personal disgust, some “entrepreneurs” are offering fake vaccination record cards for sale on the web.  

All the above suggests that, yes, the CDC and Governor Hogan may have acted too hastily. That is, of course, water under the bridge. So, what should we do now?   

Here are my suggestions:

Encourage everyone you know who is eligible for the vaccine and hasn’t gotten it, to do so, immediately. Share your personal experiences with them to help remove concerns they may have about its safety. More than 150 million people have now had more than one vaccine shot. It is clear the vaccines are safe for 99.9 percent of us. 

Exceed the CDC guidelines by continuing to wear your mask.  

If you choose not to wear a mask, that is your decision, but please, please do not give grief to any of us who choose to continue to wear them. Reports of people being harassed in stores and on the street are deeply troubling. If someone wants to make a small contribution to everyone else’s safety, let them do so in peace.

Use common sense in choosing your activities. The CDC did not say that mass gatherings are suddenly OK again.  Already, we are seeing a lot of people returning to the beach, enjoying parks, and looking forward to attending sporting events. That’s great, but the pandemic isn’t over. If these mass gatherings get out of control, if social distancing is not practiced, we will have a resurgence in infections.

Finally, do your part to depoliticize the pandemic. Debating on whether President Trump gets credit for “Operation Warp Speed” and expediting the development of the vaccine, or whether he did a poor job in leading the country’s initial response, does not move the ball forward.  Why not leave it to historians to figure that out later?

Right now, we still have a pandemic to fight. We need to use common sense. So, if you are like me, consider erring on the side of caution. If you’re not, please do not fault others when they do. Safer practices are better practices. 

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant writing on politics, government, birds, and occasionally goldendoodles.

 

Some of my best friends on the Eastern Shore, especially those in Talbot County, are tired of the debate over whether the statue of the Talbot Boys should be removed from its honored home in front of the county’s courthouse.  We need to preserve history and avoid the ‘cancel culture,’ I am told.  I am also told that the statue is ‘beautiful’ and is “balanced out” by the nearby statue of Frederick Douglass.

I call these friends and neighbors “Modern Talbot Boys and Girls.”  That is not meant to be offensive, but rather to suggest that, like the “Talbot Boys” honored by the monument, those opposed to removing it are, in my opinion, misguided. They are on the wrong side of justice and, if you will, history.

I am not calling anyone against moving the statue a “racist.”  While some racism still exists in Talbot County, most people I have discussed the issue with do not seem to appreciate how offensive and hurtful it is to people of color. That lack of understanding is not necessarily racism. It is, however, something that should be addressed. The recently filed lawsuit, especially the fact-filled complaint, helps address this problem.  It not only makes a persuasive case for removing the statue but is educational as well. 

In suggesting that everyone better inform themselves about the history of the statue and why its continued presence in front of the courthouse is a problem, I am not asking anyone to do anything other than to give the facts surrounding this divisive issue a closer look. 

I have read that history and am convinced the statue needs to be moved.  I may be naïve, but I think most of us will agree that the statue should be removed after learning more about it. Those of us who oppose moving the statue should read the lawsuit just filed in support of removing it. It may not convince you to change your mind, but it will help you understand why so many consider the statue problematic. 

 I have chosen only a few excerpts from the complaint.  You will find reading the entire 54-page document educational. It describes how the monument came to be where it is today, the history of racism in Talbot County, and explains why the statue injures people today.

Here are the excerpts:

“The so-called ‘Talbot Boys’ statue—an homage to traitors to the United States and to the State of Maryland, who fought to sustain the enslavement and subjugation of Black people and to tear apart the Union—cannot remain on government property consistent with the core promise of the Fourteenth Amendment to all Americans:  equality under the law.”

“Erected 50 years after the Civil War had ended and during the Jim Crow era, the statue was funded primarily by a prominent white lawyer who had repeatedly made disparaging public remarks about Black Americans and embraced ideals of slavery. . . Against this backdrop, it is clear that the Talbot Boys statue, like numerous other Confederate  monuments once standing across the country, was created to pay homage to a slaveowning society that lost the Civil War, and was principally intended to serve as an overt expression of white dominance over Black people. “

“Before the Civil War, Talbot County had the tenth largest slave population in the state—nearly 4,000 people were enslaved in the county.  Easton’s port had become a hub for the domestic slave trade, and the town’s slave market was located on the very grounds where the courthouse and the Talbot Boys statue now stand.”

“The statue’s origin traces directly back to the violence of Jim Crow, which followed post -Civil War Reconstruction.  It was erected at a time when Confederate statues were used as a means of racial intimidation.“

“Black people and others have to pass the statue to get a marriage license, serve on a jury, attend and petition their county officials at Council meetings, and go to court. “ 

“The statue’s depiction of Confederate imagery, including a Rebel soldier with a ‘C.S.A’ belt buckle, a Confederate battle flag, and the inscription “CSA,” intentionally and overtly invokes the spirit of that racially discriminatory set of values, no less offensive and racially discriminatory than if Talbot County paid live humans to shout racial epithets or installed a public address system through which racial epithets were aired 24 hours a day.”

“Not only is the Talbot Boys statue a symbol of past and present discrimination against Black people, but it is an active instrument of it. Every judge, juror, and attorney who enters the Talbot County courthouse must pass by this symbol of government support for white supremacy.  Additionally, every Black person who wishes to enter the courthouse to exercise other fundamental rights, such as the right to marriage by obtaining a marriage license, must pass by it, knowing its demeaning history and knowing that it attracts those who hold racist and white supremacist views.”

If the lawsuit is successful, Talbot County would be required to remove the statue from its current location. The County would also be prohibited from moving it to other grounds or property owned by or managed by the County.

I hope nobody is outraged or offended by my quoting the complaint. All of us in Talbot County will be better off when the troubled history embodied by the Talbot Boys statue is addressed. We should remember the past so we do not repeat it, but we also must evolve to a more enlightened perspective and redouble our efforts to eradicate racism.

And where do I think the statue should go?  Let me suggest a museum of reconciliation—a learning center where Marylanders can learn about our painful past and what later generations did to right past wrongs. 

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant writing on politics, government, birds, and occasionally goldendoodles.

 

It’s been more than a week since I read that Andy “Handgun” Harris opposed the University of Maryland’s decision to require most students to get the COVID-19 vaccine before returning to college this fall. I was gobsmacked by the news. Harris is a doctor. I thought he should know that students getting vaccinated is in everyone’s best interest. It is the best means of preventing an outbreak of infections that could result in the university returning to virtual teaching. 

I subsequently learned that Harris does understand that everyone should get vaccinated. He is just against UMD requiring it. He is fully supportive of voluntary vaccinations and even helped administer shots here on the Eastern Shore. He also appeared in a public service announcement intended to persuade those afraid of the vaccine of its safety.

So why would Harris speak out against our premier state university requiring the vaccine? The answer is ideology. Harris doesn’t like the government telling people what to do, even if it’s in their best interest. In the case of the vaccine, Harris’ ideology trumped his knowledge as a doctor. He thinks that if someone doesn’t want to get the vaccine and still attend the University this fall, it’s OK.  He’s OK if that student infects other students with the virus.  Harris’ “principles” are more important than the health of the unfortunate student.

To be fair to Congressman Harris, here is his statement of the UMD vaccine requirement:

“As a physician, I have administered many COVID-19 vaccines – and I continue to encourage everyone, especially our most vulnerable, to get vaccinated. However, government mandates to require an individual to have an Emergency Use Authorized (EUA) vaccine flaunt the very federal FDA requirement that EUA products be optional, and that informed consent recognizing the unapproved nature of such products be obtained.”

Technically, I suppose, Harris is right, with “optional” being the key word. He is still wrong, however in opposing the vaccine requirement. If his view were to prevail (it won’t), some students could die or spend months in hospitals as a result. That’s what putting ideology over science will get you.

I thought Harris’ rationale for his position sounded disingenuous. That’s a bit unfair, but I doubt Harris is as much of a stickler for technicalities on things like gun laws.  

Although Harris statement on the UMD is unlikely to prompt any change in policy, it tells us a lot about how he develops positions on legislation. Ideology first, constituents second. I do not want my representative in Congress to be driven by ideology where it means that common sense and science are ignored. Unfortunately, he is an “ideologue.” 

Merriam-Webster defines Ideologue as an “often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology.” The dictionary offers the following synonyms:  crusader, fanatic, militant, partisan, and true believer. 

How does that fit with the Congressman?  Harris’ ideology is best exemplified by his membership in the Freedom Caucus; his ardent support for President Trump, including skipping the second impeachment vote; and declaring that “Trump’s brand of populism is the future of the Republican party.”

Although the “principle” that led him to attempt to carry a handgun onto the Floor of the House of Representatives is hard to understand, that too, apparently, was a gesture of Harris’ ideology—unless, of course, you assume that he worried about Nancy Pelosi or some other Democrat shooting him there.  

If all this strikes you as unnecessarily harsh on Andy Harris, you are forgiven. I admire his helping to administer COVID-19 vaccines and speaking out on the safety of the vaccine. That’s not enough to excuse everything else he does. He has a long history of poorly representing the first district.   

We deserve better representation. We all need to continue to monitor what “Handgun Harris” is up to in Washington and hold him accountable. He should be representing us, not Donald Trump. He must go. 

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant writing on politics, government, birds, and occasionally goldendoodles.

 

April 30 will mark the 100th day of Joe Biden’s presidency. How is he doing? We all have our opinions. We will also be reading a lot of other opinions in coming days. This week’s column offers my views.

For each of eight areas, I rate the president’s performance on a scale between one and ten. One is the worst possible score; ten is the best. In the second paragraph, after each of the eight areas, I comment on my own score and offer additional insights into my thinking.

Handling the Pandemic.  Score: 8.   There have been no fumbles on distributing the vaccine or promoting safe distancing practices since Biden took office. Doctors and scientists have been empowered to advise the administration on what action to take, such as when to reopen schools and businesses. The result has been substantial progress. A return to normalcy is on the horizon.

Why not a 10? The administration has not yet figured out how to convince skeptical Americans to get the vaccine. This will slow the process. Importantly, the President has announced new steps to speed our recovery. Among the unanswered questions is whether enough is being done to understand new variants of the virus and how to respond to them. 

The Economy.  Score: 8.  Recovery from the devastating effects of the pandemic is continuing. Businesses are reopening and employers are hiring. Not everyone is happy with the pace of reopening, but the president, in my view, has found a viable balance between reopening and not promoting additional spikes in the infection and death rates. 

Social and Racial Justice.  Score: 9.  This high mark doesn’t mean that our problems have been solved. They haven’t. It means that the president has recognized the eradication of systemic racism as a national priority and is taking action towards that end. It is not difficult to suggest he could do more. I hope he does. 

Why not a 10? It may be unfair to President Biden, but the For the People Act (the Biden voting rights bill) and the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act have not yet been passed. (I discuss the voting rights bill in more detail below.) Also, the administration could be doing more to help those of us skeptical about addressing past wrongs understand why it is important to move forward? Yes. But do not ask me for details.  

Leadership style.  Score: 10. I do not fault Joe Biden for his leadership style. If we remember that he is 78 years old and do not expect the charisma or JFK or the likability (for some of us) of Ronald Reagan, he is doing great. He succeeded in securing passage of a major stimulus bill and has assembled a strong team of cabinet members and senior officials. In my book, President Biden has exceeded my expectations for his style and competence in office. 

Why not less than a 10? I could deduct from Biden’s leadership score because I do not like all his appointees or because he is not the greatest orator in American history. I still get nervous when he schedules press conferences, makes speeches or does interviews. So far, he has done well. Thus, I do not feel obligated to make a deduction. Biden deserves extra credit for not using obscenities in political speeches and not lying. Enough said—this column is about Biden, not Trump. 

Bipartisanship.  Score: 6.  Biden’s promise of bipartisanship has not materialized. This is not entirely his fault. Republicans, with few exceptions, do not want to work with him. This is unlikely to change. Biden, however, is at least partially to blame. I know some Spy readers will vocally disagree, but Biden’s major legislative proposals have been aggressive, things like massive new spending for progressive priorities and tax increases. Given the aggressiveness of his agenda, is expecting bipartisan support realistic?

Why not a higher or lower score? Biden’s legislative proposals do not differ materially from what he endorsed during his campaign. It is thus somewhat unfair to criticize him for not being “more moderate.” Also, despite the unlikelihood of finding bipartisan support, he has invited Republicans to the White House to explore the possibility of compromise. That demonstration of stoicism deserves extra credit.

Voting Rights.  Score: 7.  Who isn’t for all citizens (or almost all) having the right and the opportunity to vote? Biden has supported Democratic efforts to expand voting rights and will sign H.R. 1, the For the People Act, legislation to remove obstacles to voter participation. The question is whether parts of H.R. 1 were written to benefit Democrats at the expense of Republicans. The answer to that, in my view, is yes because, at least for now, broader participation in elections has benefited that party. I deducted a point, reluctantly, from Biden’s score because the bill is too aggressive. It is the pursuit of the perfect at the risk of losing the good.  

Passage may also encourage a Republican backlash that could encourage more states to try to restrict voting. The bill, as currently written, also is likely to result in lengthy litigation ending at the Supreme Court.  

A fair grade? Not really if you believe the right to vote is sacred and should be pursued, even if it temporarily extends societal discord in the short term. But I would also note that Democrats’ proposal to make the District of Columbia a state would give the party two more Senate seats. If ending taxation without representation (a good idea) is the goal, why not return the parts of D.C. that were once part of Maryland to our state?

Federal Budget.  Score: 6. I am a fiscal moderate. I am nervous about a string of bills, each costing more than $1 trillion. Yes, we have pressing societal needs, including infrastructure, climate change, education, and social justice. Do we have to spend as much as fast as the president proposes? I do not think so. I remain nervous about inflation. If all the spending were to trigger a recession, what do we do? Spend our way out of it?  

A fair grade? You either support “going big,” as Senators Warren and Sanders proposed in the 2020 campaign, or not. At the risk of being called timid, I will describe Biden’s spending as exceptionally big and suggest his proposals could have been better focused, funded at a lower cost, and be equally effective. 

Foreign Policy.  Score: 7.  Biden gets high marks for rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement and for working to restore stability to our relationship with allies. I deducted from his score because Russia is threatening Ukraine, and China appears poised to invade Taiwan. As I wrote in my column last week, I am worried. Neither crisis is Biden’s fault, but they are happening on his watch. I have no idea of what he will do if a war, or two, breaks out. That is why he gets a 7.

Too early to grade Biden on foreign policy? Yes. We will know more in another 100 days. Hopefully, we can repeat this assessment in August. There will be more of a track record to review.

What do you think my assessments on these eight areas of presidential performance? A good friend of mine has already informed me that I am “too pro-Biden.” That surprised me. I thought my assessments were balanced.  

Please note that I purposely left out an assessment on “Border security and enforcement.” This is a problem area for Biden. I do not have enough information to make an intelligent assessment. My fear is that those who have condemned Biden on this issue are judging him too soon and those that what to ignore what appears to be a crisis on the border are guilty of the same thing. Had I included “Border security and enforcement,” I would have marked it “Do not know.”

I welcome comments, including disagreement, on my assessment.  

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant writing on politics, government, birds, and occasionally goldendoodles.

 

Summer is almost here, and my hopes for a return to normalcy run high. There are signs—only signs at this point—that the pandemic is in retreat. With a little luck and continued effort on everyone’s part, the economic hardships and social stresses caused by the virus may soon be a distant memory.

What is normalcy?  I mean the good type of normalcy, because many of us still have a way to go before things get back to a good state. And, of course, for some who have lost a loved one, a job or a business, normalcy is never coming back. 

I count myself among the fortunate. I never got the virus. And I am grateful to have received both shots of the Moderna vaccine. Such good fortune is the context with which I look forward to this summer.

Here’s a list of some things I look forward to:

Fully open restaurants. Obviously, this is already happening. I hope that there won’t be another “spike” this summer that forces Maryland to implement another lockdown. 

More outdoor dining. The few times in 2020 that I ventured out to eat were in open-air seating venues. I liked it. I’d like to see more of it.  And, let me add that I also hope for fewer loud vehicles barreling down the road while I am dining.   

The Waterfowl Festival in Easton. I am grateful that the strong leadership of the Festival enabled it to survive 2020. I look forward to a full restoration of the festival which I have enjoyed for more than 20 years. This year it’s scheduled for November 12-14. Be sure to visit the website for more information. 

Plein Air and all other Eastern Shore art shows and fairs. We are partial to the Oxford Fine Arts Festival in May. There is no such thing as too much art. We also look forward to Easton’s First Friday Gallery Walks.  

Open parks and museums.  

Live entertainment.   We missed the Tred Avon Players at the Oxford Community Center last year, as well as live entertainment at the Avalon Theater. We look forward to their return.  

Entertaining friends. We love having friends over for cocktails and appetizers on our screened porch. We plan to renew that tradition this season.

Sailboats on the water.  Few things are more elevating–especially the Oxford and Heritage Regattas. Some of my favorite photographs are from these events.

Hummingbirds.  We plant salvia to attract them. These beautiful and fascinating birds build their tiny nests in nearby trees.  

Our vegetable garden. This year we will plant peppers, tomatoes, green beans, lettuce, and eggplants and harvest blackberries and strawberries. 

Sunflowers.  We grow them in our yard and enjoy them wherever else we see them—particularly the lovely fields of Bill Eason’s farm. 

Blue crabs and crab cakes.  I proclaim Maryland’s the best in the U.S.   

The Farmers Market in Easton. The selection of fresh fruits and vegetables, honey, seafood, fresh flowers and more is a treat indeed. 

The Oxford Library book sale. Thanks to this sale, we’ve added some wonderful additions for our library.  It is typically held on Oxford Day. Unfortunately, Oxford Day 2021 has been cancelled. The next Oxford Day is April 22, 2022.  We will look for information to see if the Library will hold a sale this year.

The Oxford fireworks.  We hope to view them from the water this year, preferably with nice cool weather. 

Continued growth in the quality and circulation of the Spy newspapers.  I’m a bit biased, but I check my email at 3 p.m. every day for my Daily Intelligencer to find out what’s going on. You should do the same.  Also, consider supporting the Spy with a donation. Tell them John sent you. 

Balancing out, sort of, here are some things I hope not to see:

Trump flags flying from boats on our waterways. The election is over. It’s time to give Trumpism a rest.

Plastic bottles and other debris in our waters. Last year, I saw trash of some sort or another every time I was boating.  Can’t we all make special efforts to prevent items from blowing overboard?  And all who are caught throwing trash into the river should lose their rights to boat.

Drunk drivers (and drunk boaters).  I’m weary of seeing a variety of beer cans and empty booze bottles tossed on roadsides. Even worse are the frequent accidents caused by drunk drivers. This needs to stop.

Andy “Handgun” Harris. Why did Andy attempt to carry a handgun onto the Floor of the U.S. House of Representatives?  That stunt put me over the line. I already wanted to see him voted out based on his alignment with Trump.  It’s OK if the Eastern Shore elects a representative more conservative than other members of the state delegation. Just let it not be a far-right extremist.  Why is Harris on this list given that he is not up for election this year?  I’d like to see him resign.

Mosquitos. The bane of our existence!

Anti-bicycle motorists. Bikers don’t want to be run over. Also, when you toss that trash out the window while driving down the road, you create hazards for bicyclists.  Don’t do it. 

Pollen.  If I wanted a yellow car, I would have bought one.  

Cicadas.  I’m dreading them.  

What are you most looking forward to and dreading this summer?  If so inclined, please leave a comment.

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant writing on politics, government, domestic policy, and occasionally goldendoodles.