Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

"The Real Democrat"

State Sen. Ida G. Ruben, who's facing a tough challenge in the Democratic primary from Jamie Raskin in Montgomery County's District 20, changed the tone of the race late last week, when she sent out campaign mailer declaring that her opponent is not a "real Democrat."

Ruben picked apart Raskin's positions in several legal cases to suggest that he helped elect President George W. Bush "through his support of third party candidates" and is aligned with "radical pro-life groups that intimidate women and doctors."

Raskin's campaign immediately condemned the mailer as "lies, fabrications and distortions" and demanded an apology for the "vicious Karl Rove-like attacks."

His campaign Web site urges voters to mark the flier: "Return to Sender/No Negative Politics Accepted."

A constitutional lawyer, Raskin supported Bill Clinton's re-election in 1996 and the right of third-party candidate Ross Perot to participate in presidential debates.

In 2003, he wrote a brief in a case to try to protect protestors protesters from being prosecuted under criminal racketeering laws. His position, which was supported by eight Supreme Court justices, was at odds with the National Organization for Women.

"I was standing up for a basic First Amendment principle," said Raskin, who had been working for Greenpeace and a labor union at the time. "It has nothing to do with the issue of abortion. It's all about the right of protestors protesters, and it's beneath the dignity of our politics to put this type of trashy material in people's mailboxes."

Ruben's campaign manager Philip Olivetti said the senator stands by the substance of the flier, which that was sent to 15,000 likely Democratic voters in the district that includes Takoma Park and Silver Spring and Takoma Park.

"It's important that the voters know her record of accomplishments, and it's important that they have all the facts about her opponent," Olivetti said.

The controversy gave Raskin a boost from Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D). He denounced Ruben's mailer, saying, "This kind of Karl Rove politics has no place in the Democratic Party. The voters should demand a clean and honest campaign."

Ann E. Marimow

By Phyllis Jordan  |  August 17, 2006; 6:54 AM ET
Categories:  General Assembly  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: No Tin Cup for Rales
Next: Wynn-Edwards Race Gets Hot--Now With Video

Comments

Sounds as if this guy is being vilified from supporting the freedom of speech for all citizens as opposed to limiting only to those people who say the things we like to hear.

Blaming it on Karl Rove? Sounds more like Dr. Goebbels to me.

Posted by: Rufus | August 17, 2006 8:58 AM | Report abuse

I have never been a big fan of Jamie Raskin, but when I received the "Real Democrat" flier, he got my vote. It is despicable to argue that an attorney fighting for the constitutional rights of his clients, whoever they may be, is somehow un-Democratic. This, combined with Senator Ruben's attempt to squelch endorsements by student groups she declined to even talk to, sealed my decision.

Posted by: Woodsider | August 17, 2006 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Let's try to proofread what we write on washingtonpost.com before posting it, Ms. Marimow.

Posted by: Eric | August 17, 2006 9:03 AM | Report abuse

Ida Ruben is a hack. Her games during this campaign have shown she is unfit for the office. Jamie Raskin is one of the most upstanding individuals running for office in the Maryland this year. His record of defending the Constitution is legendary and commendable.

Posted by: Marylander | August 17, 2006 9:18 AM | Report abuse

I was horrified to find that flyer in my mailbox. Ida Ruben showed her true colors with those cheesy distortions. Time for a change in the 20th district!

Posted by: Silver Spring | August 17, 2006 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Nevermind that Raskin has been endorsed by the grassroots organization 21st Century Democrats

Posted by: John | August 17, 2006 10:11 AM | Report abuse


Ruben has been trying to throw a wrench into the burgeoning Raskin campaign for quite a while, whether it was complaining about the Blair High School paper endorsement, or the recent mailing. It is really a shame, but the fact is that anytime an incumbent chooses to try to smear their opponent instead of standing behind their own record (like Bush 2004), people ought to realize that they are not running an honest campaign. I've been surprised by the level of activity recently from the Ruben campaign. We'll see if they can mobilize before the primary.

Posted by: JimPreston | August 17, 2006 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Look slike maybe it's time for Ida to book a room at the home alongside Willie Don

Posted by: jmsbh | August 17, 2006 10:54 AM | Report abuse

If it weren't so ugly it would be pretty funny. Jaime Raskin a conservative??? He's a wonderfully smart, energetic, and exciting lefty liberal Democrat who would be a great State Representative. I had no idea that Ida Ruben was so completely out of touch and would need to sink so low as to lie and mislead her constituents. She really doesn't deserve to hold that slot anymore. Jaime is a constitutional scholar and first amendment expert who works on important free speech cases along with the likes of the ACLU and most thinking Democrats. Jaime would probably even work to protect your right to lie and exaggerate Ida. You've sunk so low, I'm singing the MD basketball goodbye song ...nah,nah,nah,hey,hey, hey - Goodbye!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 17, 2006 11:30 AM | Report abuse

I seems to me that Ida Rubin, who has held her position for a long time, has acquired a sense of entitlement to it much like Senator Lieberman of CT. It is rather sad when a politician catches this disease and resorts to non-democratic and Non-Democratic methods, as this filier, to fullfill his or her sense of entitlement. If, eligable, I too will vote for Mr. Raskin.

Posted by: Ashley Hardwick | August 17, 2006 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Last night's mailer from Ida was almost as good. Ida thinks she's going to rescue us from high energy prices. This from the lady who voted like 7 times to de-regulate the energy industry which is why we have these grueling price increases. Has anyone else checked her contributions?

Posted by: gatsby46@comcast.net | August 17, 2006 2:53 PM | Report abuse

If the number of campaign signs around Silver Spring/Takoma Park is any indication, there is a lot of interest in the race. Is there any objective local polling on the race? Has the fund-raising advantage held by the incumbent changed?
When the challanger knocked on our door, he carried articles about the Silver Chips story. Has he expanded his positions to include any thing concrete ? Many voters in the 20th will not support the purple line under any circumstances. Others need to hear specifics about what the candidated support/oppose.

Posted by: district 20 voter | August 17, 2006 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Constellation gave Ida Ruben $250 in 2002.

Posted by: Marylander | August 17, 2006 4:19 PM | Report abuse

to district 20 voter:

here's the fundraising numbers for January through August:

Ruben 50,703.50
Raskin 184,784.89

As to positions, I suggest you go to raskin06.com. As I see it, the big issues between Jamie and Ida are (1) universal health care, (2) her terrible vote for energy deregulation in 1999, (3) she takes corporate contributions, he doesn't, (4) her support of the death penalty, and his opposition to it.

Posted by: raskin fan | August 17, 2006 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Raskin is a legend in his own mind.

Posted by: legend watcher | August 17, 2006 9:06 PM | Report abuse

The Washington Post has signed on as a Raskin fan from day one: it has nothing good to report about Senator Ruben and mysteriously ignores Raskin's underhanded lies, distortions and misrepresentations of her record. In a typical example, Raskin boasts that Ruben supports the Iraq War citing a resolution that passed in the Senate 44-0 that supported the U.S. Armed Forces and their families. See for yourself:

http://mlis.state.md.us/2003rs/billfile/sj0013.htm

The most obvious example of the Post's bias was when the Post ran a piece that stated Ruben was having trouble getting local officials to show at her fundraiser, citing Cong. Wynn and Ike Leggett's cold shoulders towards her. Both subsequently showed at the fundraiser: Wynn endorsed her and Leggett extended his support having had a career-long relationship with her that began when she endorsed and supported his candidacy for the Mont Co Council at a time when few other officials thought an African American could get elected. Sen. Mikulski, Cong. Hoyer and Cardin, the entire Mont Co Senate Delegation, MC Council Pres Leventhal and many other officials endorsed her. The Post never published a correct report of the outcome.

At the same fundraiser, former Maryland Governor Glendening endorsed her, citing the fact that she worked relentlessly on his behalf in his two Gubernatorial campaigns in 1994 and 1998 both of which were razor-thin victories. Where was Raskin at that time?

As for the direct mail piece, here are the facts: Raskin represented Perot in 1996, NADER IN 2000(!!!) and a pro life organization (whose strategy is to threaten, harass and otherwise intimidate abortion clinic workers and patients). Look up the cases. At the same time, Ruben worked for Clinton in 1996, Gore in 2000 and pro choice groups.

Decide for yourself who the loyal Democrat is: Ruben who worked for Clinton, Gore and Glendening or Raskin who worked for Perot, NADER and a pro life organization. When given a choice as to where to devote his efforts, Raskin chose to file lawsuits against the Democratic Party and its allies. Ruben stood proudly with them.

For a more balanced article, check out today's Gazette story:

http://www.gazette.net/stories/081806/polia%20s195557_31946.shtml

Posted by: Silver Spring Resident | August 18, 2006 6:28 AM | Report abuse

Looks to me like Ida's record, even after 32 years in office, is so meager that she has to take underhanded swipes at a real challenger. Ruben has floated thru the legislature for the past 32 years; Raskin is a recognized constitutional expert and public interest lawyer. Ruben's characterizations of the cases in the flyer, as well as those of "Silver Spring Resident" above show a lack of understanding of the cases.

On the abortion issue, Raskin represented environmental groups and unions who did not want the mafia racketerring laws to be used against protestors - the Supreme Court agreed, 8 - 1. Montgomery Co. NOW has even endorsed him.

On the Perot case, Raskin represented Perot to get him into the debates, after making it clear that Raskin supported Clinton/Gore. Even Clinton agreed that Perot, who was on the ballot in all 50 states, should be allowed in the debates. In fact, Raskin served on the Clinton/Gore transition team for the Dept. of Justice.

The final case cited in the Ruben flyer was a lawsuit challenging large corporate soft money contributions. It's not suprising that Ida, who receives most of her funding from corporations, would not like this case.


Posted by: Another Silver Spring Resident | August 18, 2006 10:56 AM | Report abuse

The dirty politicking is starting as those candidates looking to bring down a rival are willing to do anything to increase their poll numbers at the truth's expense.

My prediction is that you will see more mud from Ruben, Silverman, Perez and anyone who is behind or losing momentum.

Posted by: Mud Watch | August 18, 2006 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Jamie Raskin is the hack and he is underhanded (Note: the missing lawn signs of several Ida Ruben supporters). He has demonized Ida throughout is campaign by misrepresenting the MANY contributions she has made for District 20 and Maryland.

Raskin's parlor tricks and lack of vision for District 20 during this campaign have shown he is unfit for the office. Ida G. Ruben is one of the most upstanding individuals running for office in the Maryland this year. She cares about the people.

On the Perot case, Raskin represented Perot to get him into the debates, ripping away momentum from Clinton/Gore. Though Raskin may have served on the Clinton/Gore transition team for the Dept. of Justice, he underminded the Democratic push for the presidency campaigns. A true democrat? I think not....

The main difference between the two candidates is that Ida cares about her community (yes, you too Takoma Park). Raskin is using this campaign as a stepping
stone for his National agenda. I just hope the voters that are "aggressively" supporting him now don't get "stepped on" later.

Posted by: Rollie of TP | August 18, 2006 1:05 PM | Report abuse

I have been struck by the Post's lack of political coverage on the District 20 Senate race. The Post could do a service to its readers by doing a balanced news piece. Instead they take pot shots and run candidates press releases. And then the Post editorializes about about not voting.

When will the Post start practicing real journalism?

Posted by: Political Novice | August 18, 2006 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Ruben is, at best, a Democratic hack. Raskin truly understands what justice and fairness mean, and works in his everyday life to extend those values. If that's not being a good Democrat, who would ever want to be such a thing?

Posted by: Marylander | August 18, 2006 1:55 PM | Report abuse

After reading this...

"On the Perot case, Raskin represented Perot to get him into the debates, ripping away momentum from Clinton/Gore. Though Raskin may have served on the Clinton/Gore transition team for the Dept. of Justice, he underminded the Democratic push for the presidency campaigns. A true democrat? I think not....",

"As for the direct mail piece, here are the facts: Raskin represented Perot in 1996, NADER IN 2000(!!!) and a pro life organization (whose strategy is to threaten, harass and otherwise intimidate abortion clinic workers and patients). Look up the cases. At the same time, Ruben worked for Clinton in 1996, Gore in 2000 and pro choice groups",

and the mailings from Ida Ruben (excellent record for bringing positive change to my neighborhood), I must say that Raskin (Rascal?) sounds like a political opportunist and a charlatan. I hope that the voters in District 20 are smart enough to see past the smoke and mirrors...

Posted by: Now decided... | August 18, 2006 2:15 PM | Report abuse

What ever happened to us being the party that believed that, even if you don't LIKE the cause, they deserve the best possible legal representation.

Shame on you for attacking him because of his clients, thats very UN-Democrat

Posted by: Are you KIDDING me??? | August 18, 2006 2:25 PM | Report abuse

I believe that Jamie Raskin's supporters are certainly entitled to their opinions, but the rabidity and disrespect that they have shown in their writings and their treatment of Senator Ida Ruben is appalling. It's one thing to support Jaime Raskin, but whether or not you like Ida Ruben, she has done a lot for her District and all of you in the pitchfork brigade have benefited from all that she has done over the last 20 years. You may want to nay say it, but that is the simple truth. Don't vote for her, but show some damn respect.

Posted by: true supporter | August 18, 2006 2:46 PM | Report abuse

All of you are operating under some sort of historical amnesia with this whole crusade accusing Senator Ruben started negative campaigning. In his documentary, "Man against the Machine" and in a previous mailing Mr. Raskin has accused Senator Ruben of being a corrupt machine politician and also accused of her associating w/ Jack Abramoff and Enron, so please stop the hypocrisy. Your candidate is not running a clean and honest campaign. So, the proverb: He who is without sin should cast the first stone. is quite relevant here. Senator Ruben was well within her rights for giving him a dose of his own medicine.

Posted by: goida | August 18, 2006 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Support who you want to support, but please stop acting as though Jamie Raskin is a saint. I find Jamie Raskin supporters have forgotten the meaning of tolerance in this race. Yes, be enthusiasitic in your support of Mr. Raskin, but there no need to be so damn disrespectful towards Senator Ruben. I sure hope that should this District race go to him you don't feel used once he gears up for office at the federal level. And when he's sitting at the back of the legislature talking to himself or crying to the Washington post about some imagined slight, I sure hope you won't feel the effects of that either. You all won't have anyone to blame but yourselves.
Raskin is master at spin, particularly at distoring perception and reality. He is running an excellent campaign because he's got all of you DUPED. There is no great difference between Ruben and Raskin. One's got experience, the other doesn't. They are both Democrats. Simple calcuation if you ask me. I'll take the former not the latter.

Posted by: forrealinsilverspring | August 18, 2006 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Aaaah, here come the Rubenites. To Goida -- the documentary wasn't done by Raskin, but by an independent filmmaker. He interviewed Senator Ruben as well, in case you didn't actually see it.

And to true supporter, tell me, did Jamie Raskin ever call Ida Ruben "not a real Democrat"? No, he called her a machine politician -- a label she proudly admitted to at the Takoma Park debate in late July. So what disrespect, other than the fact of running, are you talking about?

See, this is the problem. For Ida and her acolytes, to run against Ida is to disrespect her. She deserves that seat, nay, she OWNS it. It's hers for as long as she wants it, the voters be damned. Apparently, the Ruben folks haven't heard of the fate of Joe Lieberman yet. You fail to effectively represent your constituents, they can vote you out.

Ida Ruben was rated the 7th least effective state senator by the Gazette -- not the Raskin campaign. What good is 30 years of experience if there's no effectiveness to go with it?

The recent smear campaign was just too much. Incumbents like Ida don't use those kind of tactics unless they know they're losing. Ida's losing, and she will do anything to keep her seat. Including insulting the intelligence of the voters and demeaning the integrity of the electoral process. Pathetic.

Posted by: Silver Spring | August 18, 2006 5:47 PM | Report abuse

To Silver Spring, okay, so what if it was made by an independent filmaker? He is obviously a Raskin supporter and the film reflects that. BTW, Yes, I have seen the film and the interviews of Ida. I am not sure why you are pointing that out. Just because Ida is also featured does not mean it is a balanced piece work. Go back and listen to the commentary.
Also, if you want to call me a Rubenite, thank you. I gladly accept the label. Too many of you Raskin supporters have been spewing their vituperative rhetoric and need to get some perspective.

If I printed out all the blogs that have been posted on this race some you would see all many of the bloggers use this as an opportunity to attack Senator Ruben, not offer useful or informative counterarguments.

Also, I don't think anyone thinks that to run against Ida is to disrespect her. But when you hear Raskin supporters calling her names, tearing down her signs, hissing at her in public forums, when her supporters have done none of that you begin to wonder what happened to civility and the good ole' progressivism that his supporters claim to believe in. This behavior borders on plain intolerance and it is downright shameful.
Raskin is a worthy opponent. He is a smart guy and very ambitious. However, he is not running an honest campaign and because his supporters have tunnel vision they refuse to acknowledge that he has been engaging in "dirty politics". His website looks like nothing more than propanda machine. His supporters go into attack mode should anyone raise questions about his commitment and his experience.
No one says Ida deserves the seat, but she has proven that she is the one who should be re-elected in my opinion. See I do support Ida, but I do not think she is perfect, and I don't agree with everything she says or does (because I am not a zealot). But, I do have perspective, which is a lot more than many Raskin supporters.

Posted by: goida | August 18, 2006 6:33 PM | Report abuse

To Silver Spring--I see that you are a "true beliver" (boy, did you drink the kool aid--a big gulp). Like many "true believers", they operate in extremes and ignore nuance. Perhaps when Raskin moves on from D20 and on to the national scene (and leaves all of his zealots behind) D20 can continue to reap the benefits that Ida has brought to her community.

Again distortions: Seator Ruben never proudly claimed to be a Machine Politician (she said that she was proud to be part of an institution: the MD legislature--and rightly so). Following your logic it sounds like Raskin wants to be part of the machine...Oooops....legislature, as well. She is also an unwavering Democrat...

You can talk about this alleged "smear campaign" all you want. No one wants to talk about the guerilla tactics employed by Raskin's supporters from calling Ida names at the Takoma Park forum to stealing her supporter's law signs--a crime, I might add.

Posted by: Rollie in TP | August 18, 2006 6:47 PM | Report abuse

It is amazing how Raskin supporters can quote the gospel according to Jaime Raskin to make their case against Senator Ruben. I don't know how many times I've heard: "Ida voted seven times for deregulation." By the way I called her office to ask about that and from what I understand Mr. Raskin is counting votes made in commitee...Oh well.

Or how about "Senator Ruben was voted the 7th least effective Senator..." I guess we can discount what she's done for Montgomery College, improving downtown Silver Spring, her support of English as a Second Language ( I personally was a beneficiary). No, let's go with some generalizations instead. How do you define least effective? What's your definition and what's your criteria?

Mr. Raskin does not have a record on most of the issues he claims he will work on. So, many of his supporters are going with their instinct, their feelings or dare I say going based on lip service? Well if that is the criteria for making a decision, I must say I am floored.

Wow--so many of you are "true believers". Rollie that was an adequate use of the term. I don't what he is doing, and what they're drinking but whatever it is, it must be good (but in the long run, bad for District 20).

Posted by: true supporter | August 18, 2006 6:59 PM | Report abuse

All of the foregoing comments have convinced me that I don't really want to vote for EITHER of these two candidates. As someone who is relatively impartial, may I suggest that you all take a deep breath, calm down, and try to act in a way that will make me glad I'm a Democrat.

Posted by: Disgruntled District 20 Dem | August 18, 2006 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Disgruntled,
I am sorry to hear that this turns you off. Most of these blogs can devolve into a battle of egos over who can come up with the snazziest comeback (of which I get caught up in as well). I would say call each candidates' offices. Ask questions. Gather as much information as you can and make the decision that is best for you. But, please don't discount yourself from participating in the process.

Posted by: true supporter | August 18, 2006 7:08 PM | Report abuse

Let's talk about being effective for a moment. Here is a list from Ruben's website of the awards she has received. This shows she is powerful, effective, and appreciated by the people of Maryland. I would post Raskin's awards too, but I don't see any listed on his website.


One Hundred Most Powerful Women, Washington Magazine, 1994, 1997, 2006
"Best of" award for most effective public official, Silver Spring Record, 1990.
Woman of Valor award, B'nai B'rith Women, 1992.
Carmen S. Turner Award, Montgomery County Dept. of Transportation, 1995.
Legislator of the Year, Montgomery County Medical Society, 1995.
Legislator of the Year, National Commission Against Drunk Driving, 1995.
Vince & Larry Award, Maryland Committee for Safety Belt Use, Inc., 1997.
Appreciation Award, Adventist HealthCare & Washington Adventist Hospital, 1998.
Leadership Award, Olney Theater Center, 1998.
Legislator of the Year, Greater Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce, 1999.
Legislative Appreciation Award, Maryland Association of Community Services, 1999.
Highway Safety Hero, Advocates for Highway Safety, 1999.
Maryland's Top 100 Women, Daily Record, 1999, 2001, 2004
(Circle of Excellence). Appreciation Award, American Lung Association, 2000.
Honoree, Maryland College of Art & Design, 2000.
Public Service Award, Washington Regional Alcohol Program, 2001.
Public Policy Leadership Award, American Cancer Society, State of Maryland, 2002.
Distinguished Public Service Award, American Lung Association of Maryland, 2003.
Distinguished Legislator Award, Maryland Impaired Driver Coalition, 2003.
S. Robert Cohen Award, Jewish Foundation for Group Homes, 2004.
"Arts Stars" Award for vision, leadership, and determination in helping to establish Arts and Entertainment District in Silver Spring, Montgomery College, 2004.

Posted by: Just the Facts | August 18, 2006 10:34 PM | Report abuse

I am supporting Senator Ruben because she is a liberal democratic leader of the Maryland Senate who has brought millions back to the community to revitalize Silver Spring and support the community.

She has been endorsed by NARAL (despite the deliberately misleading graphics on her opponent's page), the teachers (Apple ballot), Equality Maryland, League of Conservation Voters, Progressive Maryland, the unions, African American Democratic Club of Montgomery County, Coalition of Asian Pacific American Democrats of Maryland, Montgomery County Hispanic Democratic Club, and dozens more.

These are liberal groups that I respect and apparently they respect her.

It kills me that $184,000 was raised to defeat a Democratic woman with these kind of credentials when we still have to fight Republicans Erlich and Steele.

Shouldn't that money have been spent to actaully make Maryland more Democratic and possibly take back the U.S. Senate from a horrible Republican majority that sanctions torture, gleefully tries to drill in wildlife refuges, and supports a President who keeps trying to privatize Social Security and obliterate a woman's right to choose. Don't get me started on the Republican U.S. Senate -- I could go on for days. If we don't defeat Steele they will go on for years wrecking our future.

So, please Democrats, let's keep our eyes on the prize and focus our attention on getting the Republicans out of office and keeping good liberal Democrats in office.

Peace.

Posted by: Lets be Positive for Once | August 18, 2006 10:57 PM | Report abuse

I would like to know how you vote seven times for one bill.

By saying someone votes seven times, you seem to imply that it was over the course of many months or years. Is that actually what happened in this case? Maybe you vote once in Committee (1). Then there is the first reading on the Senate floor (2). Then there is the second reading (3). Then there is the third reading (4). When I looked up a few Senate bills it looked like you could vote three times on one bill in one day. Then do you vote to go to conference (6)? And again when you vote for final passage of the bill when it comes back from conference (7)?

I don't actually know what happened in this case, but I would like someone who does know to fill me in.

My hunch is that the number of times that she voted for it is really irrelevant. And what if someone like Chris Van Hollen voted for it one of those times? Does that make him responsible for a war in Iraq, a hurricane in the gulf, an incompetent energy policy by the Bush Administration, pulling out of Kyoto, the total collapse of Enron due to criminal activity, and the lack of investment in conservation technology that has led to skyrocketting energy costs? I don't blame Chris Van Hollen for that and I don't blame Sen. Ruben either. My guess is that skyrocketing fuel costs has much more to do with other factors than energy deregulation. Our gas prices didn't go from .89 cents a gallon under Clinton to $3.25 under Bush, because Senator Ruben voted for energy deregulation.

Also, does anyone know where to get a list of actual contributors to the campaigns? (BTW, I heard Raskin raised a lot of his money from people outside of Maryland (47%), and I wanted to see if that was true.)

My guess is Ruben didn't actually get any money from oil companies, Ken Lay, or Jack Abramoff, but I could be wrong. Also, when I did see a partial list at one point (I can't remember where) I noted very few corporations -- I did see one from the Discovery Channel and I think I saw one from a local hotel in Silver Spring. That is not my idea of "evil corporations" destroying our democracy.

Senator Ruben strikes me as a woman of strong convictions who thinks first and foremost of the people in her district, not someone who would be swayed by a $100 or even $1000 donation.

So, to all who repeat the claims of the Raskin campaign (voted seven times for a bill, caused energy price increases, was corrupted by corporate contributions), all I ask is that you don't accept the claims at face value. Ask yourself, "Am I really being told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth by this campaign?"


Posted by: Confused | August 18, 2006 11:58 PM | Report abuse

I clearly remember Mr. Raskin stating at the debate that only 6% of Senator Ruben's campaign contributions come from people who live in our District. Senator Ruben didn't even attempt to disguise her great appreciation for corporate campaign contributions and stated that she needs to see some clear evidence for why corporate contributions should be banned. She even touted the bill that she sponsored to make it possible for corporations to contribute $20,000 to campaigns, an increase of $10,000.

Even if Mr. Raskin has only 54% of his contributions from inside the district, it's far better than Senator Ruben's 6%. If 94% of her money comes from corporations and developers who do you think she's actually going to represent?

Posted by: Respectfully | August 19, 2006 2:06 AM | Report abuse

Confused:

As to campaign contributions, go to http://mdelections.umbc.edu/. You can look up anybody's campaign contributions there, and they are now current through last week. Very useful site. FYI -- the site is down until around noon today (Saturday) but then will be back up.

Posted by: Silver Spring | August 19, 2006 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Confused,

Really can we just talk plainly.
If you look at all that Senator Ruben has accomplished during her time as a Senator is quite clear that she represents her community.

Under Senator Ruben's leadership quality of life for many in her community has improved. I think many people living in a more difficult situation economically and socially would love to have the kinds of benefits we enjoy in this community would be disgusted at how people are wrangling over two Democrats who are not much different from each other.

Accepting contributions from corporations does not always equate to siding with "special interests". The simple fact of the matter is that many politicians (particularly local politicians) cannot run campaigns without donations from corporations. Futhermore, not all corporations are evil. The insinuation is that corporate donations equate to taking money from evil people. Again that type of reasoning is oversimplified.

That oversimplified reasoning also assumes that when it is time to vote that politicians will only for the corporations interests. That type of reasoning is inadequate, because politicians have to be accountable to their constituents who have the ultimate power to decide whether they should return to office again.

Yes, we all should be concerned about the potential influence of corporations on the behavior of politicians. But, once again Senator Ruben's record shows that she is for her constituents.

Can we cut it witht he rhetoric and offer some reasoned arguments?


Posted by: true supporter | August 19, 2006 10:40 AM | Report abuse

If Senator Ruben is "for her constituents," why have so few of them contributed to her campaign? In SEVEN YEARS of available online contributor data, Ida has received 112 contributions from District 20 residents.

In SIX MONTHS, Jamie Raskin received 639 individual contributions from District 20 residents.

Then look at the volunteer resources of each campaign. Ida has, for all intents and purposes, ZERO volunteers. Jamie Raskin, on the other hand, has hundreds of volunteers assisting with his campaign.

Ida --no money, no volunteers. Jamie -- hundreds of small contributions, lots of volunteers.

Throw in the corporate contributions to Senator Ruben's campaign, and the idea that Ida is "for her constituents" just doesn't add up.

Posted by: Raskin fan | August 19, 2006 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Rasking fan,

Your attempt to draw a correlation between volunteers and corporate contributions really does not work.

Volunteer support and community contributions really is more a matter of mobilization and strategy. So if you were to say that in terms of contributions Raskin has been more succesful than Ruben in mobilizing constituents from District 20 to contribute to his campaign I will take that argument as a valid one.

Posted by: rubensilverspringsupporter | August 19, 2006 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Senator Ruben is an incumbent and Raskin is a challenger. In terms of bodies, Mr. Raskin, may have more volunteers because he recruits college students from out of town and from the high schools to work for his campaign (who are likely getting credits and hours for their work). That of course is a brilliant campaign strategy that I cannot knock. But, in the end that does not necessarily translate into votes. We'll find out soon enough.

However, if Senator Ruben has to pull from your average rank and file folks that have everyday responsiblities (i.e. people that have jobs and families) she definitely will experience a greater challenge in terms of pulling volunteers relative to Mr. Raskin.

I have voluneetered for her campaign, and I have been to a number of her events where many people have come out for her. So, I don't know where you are getting your stats from. I will note that support does not always translate into dollars. So, I hope you are not knocking people who may support a candidate but do not give money.


Posted by: goida | August 19, 2006 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Poor Ida....she's got competition so she had to manipulate everything to try to win.

Hey Ida--you're an idiot. I don't mean to be rude, but incumbents that attack their challengers give them attention. This means you're either trailing in internal polls or you're running scared.

Posted by: Bryan | August 19, 2006 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Like it was posted earlier, show some respect. You do not have to like Senator Ruben, but there is not reason to call her an idiot. You are probably one of Mr. Raskins rude college students or high school kids who was not taught manners. I sure hope an adult would not post something as silly as that.

Also, please refer to Mr. Raskin's mailing in early July and ask yourself who's campaign has been about negativity from jump.

You Raskin supporters need some manners and training in civility. I sure hope Mr. Raskin does not endorse this type of behavior.

I am glad to see that Senator Ruben supporters (at least the ones that posted here) do not engage is such foolishness.

Posted by: short and sweet | August 19, 2006 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Poor Ida supporters...We get lawn signs to display our support and Raskin supporters steal them (theft is a serious crime for those that did not know)....

Also, glad to see that there are SEVERAL Ida supporters posting to the blog....GO IDA!!!!

Posted by: Rollie in TP | August 19, 2006 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the website info on campaign contributors. I had to search several times before I could find Jamie Raskin's file, since it was under Jamin Raskin, but I did find it. So, I checked to see if any Business Entity's came up. I thought I wouldn't find any, but these three came up and I was further confused. Now, I don't think Mr. Raskin will be swayed by $250 from some business entity in Chicago, but I found it odd.

Candidates Account Contributor Name(Address) Amount Date Received Contribution Type
Raskin, Jamin Friends Of Licking Creek
(Takoma Park, MD, 20912) $100.00 04/23/2006 Business Entity
Raskin, Jamin Friends Of Online Resources Corp
(Chantilly, VA, 20151) $100.00 04/10/2006 Business Entity
Raskin, Jamin Friends Of River North Sales and Service
(Chicago, IL, 60622) $250.00 02/23/2006 Business Entity

Now to be fair, Sen. Ruben's file does contain business entity money. There were more than 100 listed going back to 1999, but she admits it. Most of the companies were based in Md, Dc or Va but I did spot a couple from Colorado and one from Massachusetts.

I did see contributions from Discovery Communications, the Baltimore Orioles, the georgetown prep school, and even the AFL-CIO was listed as a Business Entity. We all know how evil labor unions are, right? (NOT) Of course, Progressive Maryland was listed as a Business Entity too and they have done "horrible" things in Maryland like raise the minimum wage and fight for better health care. (By horrible I mean of course "great".)

Then there is a "contribution" listed from a Business Entity known as the IRS (it lists a tax refund that way).

But that doesn't mean Sen. Ruben isn't corrupted by the $100 Business Entity contribution by "Bell Flowers" in Silver Spring. I have always hated the special privileges enjoyed by the flower lobby.

Now there is plenty of contributions from LLC type firms and real estate sounding companies too, but again, I doubt the contributions change the votes. They seem too insignificant in the big scheme of things since there are more than 800 contributions listed amounting to more than $300,000. My hunch is Sen. Ruben hates raising money like most politicians I know do and she would rather spend her time making positive changes to her community.

But thanks for the website info. I am sure there is a perfect explanation for the fact that Mr. Raskin insists he would never take corporate funding and yet he has contributions from Business Entities.

Posted by: Confused | August 19, 2006 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Well said, Confused!!

Posted by: true supporter | August 19, 2006 10:37 PM | Report abuse

Number one, it looks very clear the both campaigns' proxies are lining up on this site to spin their propaganda at us. So be it, but let's not pretend this is anything other than five or six campaign insiders from both sides knocking each other. Calm down.

Number two, I looked at both candidates' contributions on the MD system, and it is true that Raskin has three out of 1,300 or so of his contributions from business entities. But if you also look at his expenditures, he's RETURNING them (well, at least two of them are returned so far). So, let's not get hysterical about this yet.

If he says he's rejecting corporate contributions, I take him at his word (and the BOE backs that up). And, if Ruben says she's taking corporate money because its hard to raise money, I take her at her word. She doesn't have much individual money and she has a lot of corporate money (almost 1/4 of her total) -- but that could just be that she's gotten lazy with fundraising and outreach to the community.

Could be she votes okay some of the time but then doesn't reach out to constituents and bring them into the process. Maybe that's a deal to some voters, maybe some just care about the voting record strictly.

Frankly, for me, I'm leaning towards Raskin on this one because whether or not Ruben voted for energy deregulation one or seven times -- she supported it, excuses aside. I like Van Hollen and he voted against it (at least according to Raskin's site - I haven't verified this), and to me that says it wasn't just everyone voting for it.

On the issue of lawnsigns -- GIVE ME A BREAK -- I've heard BOTH RUBEN and RASKIN'S people complaining about the other side stealing their lawnsigns. Yes its a crime, and NO I'm sure NEITEHR campaign's staff/candidate condones or knows about any of their staff/supporters stealing lawnsigns.

I'm sure its just hysterical people. Again - CALM DOWN - this is a campaign after all and people do stupid things, but that doesn't mean it was the campaign doing it. Sheesh!

Posted by: Not Confused | August 19, 2006 11:05 PM | Report abuse

Not Confused:
You could be an issue voter and deregulation is your issue, but I am not convinced. However, I suspect that you are a Raskin "campaign proxy" trying very hard not to sound like the other Raskin bloggers. Why? You are hoping you don't come across as being as obnoxious as they have. I don't care if they are campaign proxies or regular people.

That comment about the lawn signs...just ludicrous. I had my sign stolen--no had the sign ripped off and the wire holding it up completely destroyed the night after the Candidate's Forum. This happened to my neighbors as well. I noticed that the signs for other candidates including Mr. Raskin's were not touched on my block. I am a Ruben supporter, and I personally don't have the time and will to engage in such nastiness.
But, maybe all those young people on Mr. Raskin's do.

I don't think Raskin ordered lawn signs stolen, but I think it is pretty low that his supporters would stoop to that kind of behavior.

I wonder if you know what it feels like to have someone trespass on your property and destroy something on your property just because they don't like who you support. You feel incredibly vulnerable. If they are willing to engage in that kind of behavior, what else are they capable of doing on behalf of their candidate's cause?

Posted by: hillandale voter | August 20, 2006 12:14 AM | Report abuse

Confused writes:

"Sen. Ruben hates raising money like most politicians I know do and she would rather spend her time making positive changes to her community."

Bwahahahahahahaha.

This is what happens when two people sit down to write a bunch of comments under different names and then forget who they are. The idea that Senator Ruben hates raising money is absurd -- she likes nothing better.

If you're going to be a sockpuppet for your own comments, confused, at least try to remember your lines, OK? Then maybe you might actually get people to believe you.

It's sad when a longtime incumbent can't find more than one or two people to post comments on her behalf. And even then, they're several days late and laughably ineffective.

On the other hand, that kind of sums up Ida's performance on the energy deregulation issue, so maybe it's fitting.

Posted by: Yeah sure you're confused | August 20, 2006 10:23 AM | Report abuse

Yeah sure you're confused -- Truth is, there are a lot of Ida supporters, and there some of them have voiced their opinions here. To suggest that there are one or two of us writing here is silly....

Further, there was an earlier comment about Raskin folks disrespecting Ida and taking lawn signs from her supporters, etc. These guerilla tactics (as well as making fun of Ida's supporters) are not really helping Jamin's cause

To quote myself in an earlier post (I'll be my own sock puppet, I guess):

The main difference between the two candidates is that Ida cares about her community (yes, you too Takoma Park). Raskin is using this campaign as a stepping stone for his National agenda. I just hope the voters that are "aggressively" supporting him now don't get "stepped on" later.

Posted by: Rollie in TP | August 20, 2006 11:46 AM | Report abuse

I'm a Raskin fan, I've got kids, and I have a lawnsign. It disappeared a couple weeks ago. I ordered a new one its back up.

I don't think Ida had anything to do with it. Maybe a rabid supporter did or some teens, but sheesh, I've worked on several campaigns and on EVERY one we've had lots of lawnsigns comedown mysteriously. Of course you'd always like to think that it was an accident. But no, I'm sure its always intentional - but sheesh, I'm shocked to see that Ida's folks are surprised that people's lawnsigns get stolen in a political campaign! You'd think she hasn't run a campaign in several years. Wait, she hasn't!

Lawnsigns get stolen in EVERY campaign. Bush and Kerry signs in '04 were the worst example - but hey, Ida supporters, I guess that Kerry is "brash, arrogant, "young, disrespectful" because RANDOM PEOPLE stole Bush lawnsigns?????

Please. Stop whining. Raskin signs are gone, I've heard Hucker signs have disappeared, and I'm sure Ruben signs are gone. That's called "consequence of a campaign" -- does it stink? Yes. Well, then stand by your window and catch the punks in the act. Otherwise order a new one and move on.

Posted by: Raskin Fan | August 20, 2006 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Hmm. Raskin Fan,

You sound like another "campaign proxy"(thanks Not Confused) trying to make your camp seem less rabid than they really are. I'm not impressed. Thing is given how warped Raskin supporters are (at least the ones on this blog) I figured we would have been reading about missing lawns signs as much we are reading their rhetoric about deregulation (if in fact Mr. Raskin signs were stolen).

I'm so tired of the rants. I think we've all exhausted ourselves. Hopefully, we'll have another opportunity to wax poetic next week if the Post prints another article.

Signing off until next time.

Posted by: true supporter | August 20, 2006 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Okay true supporter, tell phil olivetti to stop posting ten times.

Posted by: true supporter | August 20, 2006 3:56 PM | Report abuse

To those critics who make baseless claims that the Senator "has no accomplishments", here are just a few from the 2006 session:

As Chairwoman of the Montgomery County Senate Delegation, Senator Ruben championed the following:

She was a sponsor and floor leader for Geographic Cost of Education Index (GCEI) legislation. GCEI is an integral component of the Thornton Bridge to Excellence in Public Schools Act of 2002 that Governor Ehrlich has failed to fully fund. She assembled a coalition of 23 co-sponsors from throughout the State to ensure that the Senate passed the bill. Unfortunately, it stalled in the House. If Senator Ruben's historical persistence is any indication, she will certainly fight for GCEI in the next Session.

She also sponsored a bill that increased funding to $6 million for English Speakers of Other Language (ESOL) programs at community colleges throughout Maryland. This follows her effort to create the program in 1995 with a $1 million original funding level and increasing the funding to $2.5 million in 1999. She recruited 19 co-sponsors from throughout the State which ensured its passage.

She sponsored legislation on affordable housing, prescription drug affordability, drunk driving, smoke-free workplaces and environmental preservation. She co-sponsored legislation to fund stem cell research, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve teacher pensions, provide emergency contraception, improve energy conservation in state buildings, keep MARC commuter train stations open, provide for public financing of campaigns and voter-verified ballots, extend the Minority Business Enterprise Program and freeze college tuition rates, among other initiatives.

As Vice Chair of the Capital Budget subcommittee, she negotiated and secured $6 million for the Silver Spring Transit Center, funds for the construction of the following District 20 schools: Burnt Mills and Roscoe Nix Elementary Schools, renovation of Francis Scott Key Middle School, a nine classroom addition to Broad Acres Elementary School, Montgomery College campuses, modernize roads and other necessities for the FDA campus consolidation, the Takoma Park Community Center, the Silver Spring Easter Seals Intergenerational Center the Olney Theater and many other Montgomery County community-based institutions.

Moreover, she is a full-time Senator for District 20. Mr. Raskin has not vowed he will resign his law school teaching position nor withdraw from his commitments to various national organizations, speaking obligations and other punditry activities that will certainly detract from his availability to study the community-based issues and advocate on behalf of D20 residents. 90 minute town hall meetings are not a substitute for routine weekday and evening meetings with community groups, local and state elected officials and local business owners the way Senator Ruben does.

As well, several of the Montgomery County Senators and delegates have chosen not to run for re-election. Of the three Senators that represent Silver Spring (Districts 18, 19 and 20) only Senator Ruben can return due to the decisions by Senators Grosfeld and Teitelbaum to not run. Can Silver Spring afford to have three brand new Senators? I don't think so.

Newly elected representatives are not given leadership positions: if they defeat incumbents who are in leadership positions, legislators from other jurisdictions who possess tenure and seniority assume those leadership posts. The newly elected officials start off in the back of the room and on "do-nothing" committees, not Budget and Tax, where Senator Ruben sits.

It is therefore critical that we elect a Democratic Governor and re-elect our present effective leaders so that Montgomery County's leadership positions are retained.

Posted by: Montgomery County Resident | August 20, 2006 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Hi "Yeah Sure You're Confused",

I hate to break it to you, but your response just left me more confused.

Who uses the word "sock puppet"?

"Remember my lines??" What are you talking about? What are my lines?

Then you say I am laughably "late", but your comment comes even later than mine?

Then you make the silly and appartenly false claim that there are only one or two Ruben supporters posting comments. So, I had to respond myself even though someone else already did, just so you would know that there are more than one of us. Boo!

Finally, you talk about Ruben being late on energy deregulation and ineffective. This may not please Ruben supporters, but she couldn't come late to the issue, since she was there when it passed and if she was so ineffective then why did her position prevail?

When the Ehrlich-appointed regulators failed to ensure pro-consumer policies, Ruben called for their resignation and called for a special session to bring some relief to consumers. She has already taken specific steps to reduce energy costs. Obviously, Raskin is not in the Senate and hasn't done anything to lower costs, but just because he won't take corporate contributions doesn't mean he can pass legislation to lower our energy bills.

Anyway, good night all.

Posted by: Confused | August 20, 2006 11:20 PM | Report abuse

Raskin is a lawyer. It's his job to use smoke and mirrors to manipulate the facts. He lies to voters and unfortunately voters are not informed enough to know any better than what he tells them. Raskin threw the first mud in this campaign and has NO right to complain when Sen. Ruben exposes his lies. Raskin and his campaign are being hypocritical.

Does D20 really need someone who probably won't run for reelection? Raskin has an agenda and is willing to use D20 and step all over us to feed his ego. (Look out Van Hollen!) D20 has a strong proven progressive leader who has done great things for MoCo. Don't let a liar win.

Posted by: Will Vote Ruben | August 21, 2006 11:49 AM | Report abuse

A resident of Silver Spring, I have found myself extremely excited by Raskin's candidacy. It has inspired me with hope. Seldom do voters have a real opportunity to elect someone that decent, outspoken and principled. It would be a tremendous credit to our community if he were elected.

Posted by: Jeremy Good | August 22, 2006 7:29 PM | Report abuse

To "Will vote Ruben": are you really sure you want to attack lawyers? Got any idea how many of us voters in District 20 are lawyers? And keep in mind that Ida's husband is a lawyer, too. Was it his job to use smoke and mirrors to hide the truth?

Posted by: Pepe le Moco | August 22, 2006 7:53 PM | Report abuse

Raskin's Out-Of-Jurisdiction Fundraising Strategy Contradicts His Own Law Review Article

Jamin Raskin, a candidate for State Senate in Maryland's 20th Legislative District, has violated a legal argument he himself advanced in a law review article he co-authored in 1993, which raises serious questions as to his principles.

A detailed analysis of Mr. Raskin first Maryland campaign finance report reveals that Raskin raised significant campaign contributions from outside of Legislative District 20 as well as outside of Maryland:

68.77% of Raskin's total contributions came from outside legislative district 20.
52.88% of Raskin's total contributions came from outside Montgomery County.
47.57% of Raskin's total contributions came from outside Maryland.
40.64% of Raskin's total Maryland donations came from Maryland jurisdictions outside of legislative district 20.
These findings are particularly problematic in light of the fact that Mr. Raskin co-authored a law review article in the Yale Law and Policy Review entitled: "Equal Protection and the Wealth Primary" that, among other things, harshly condemns the practice of political candidates soliciting and receiving campaign contributions from donors who live outside of the candidate's jurisdiction:

"C. Out-of-State Money
The constitutional principles of one person/one vote and election by 'the people' are especially offended by the spending of campaign money in House and Senate races raised out-of-state from persons who do not even have the right to vote in the election. If it is debatable whether poor people in South Carolina must tolerate the vote dilution caused by $1000 contributions given by wealthy people in South Carolina, it seems much harder to defend the legitimacy of $1000 contributions coming in from Florida, New York, or Texas. These cash constituents from afar are affecting, in many cases decisively, who ends up representing the people of the district or state conducting the election. This process tends to dilute the zealous independent representation of the people of each state and to exacerbate the political neglect of the home-state poor by making elected officials more accountable to the nationalized interests of specific wealthy groups and industries. It also potentially expands the political power of wealthier states, like New York and California, while reducing the power of poorer states, perhaps even implicating Article V's requirement that 'no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.' At any rate, as seen above, a number of senators are very near the point of receiving one hundred percent of their money from out-of-state. Can the nationalization of the wealth primary system in this way really be compatible with the principles of one person/one vote and election by 'the people'?"

"Equal Protection and the Wealth Primary," YALE LAW AND POLICY REVIEW (1993) Jamin Raskin and John Bonifaz, p. 306 (emphasis added).

"Apparently, Mr. Raskin believes in the philosophy of: 'Do as I say, not as I do' " said Phil Olivetti, Ruben's Campaign Manager.

Raskin raised more than $16,000 from New York residents, $3500 from Florida residents, more than $5200 from California residents and more than $3100 from Texas residents. Raskin also raised more than $9800 from Virginia residents and more than $35,000 from Washington, D.C. residents. Even more puzzling, Raskin raised more than $2000 from U.S. citizens who live overseas.

"Because he solicited tens of thousands of dollars worth of large contributions from donors in New York, California, Virginia, Connecticut and elsewhere, residents of District 20 have a right to know whose values and priorities Mr. Raskin represents," Olivetti said, adding "Even more importantly, Mr. Raskin's blatant hypocrisy raises serious questions as to whether the good people of Maryland can believe any of his other campaign declarations seeing as he has sold out his principles to curry favor with out-of-state wealthy benefactors in his very first campaign."

In stark contrast, Senator Ruben's fundraising demonstrates strong support within Montgomery County and the State of Maryland:

82.6% of Ruben's total contributions came from Maryland.
79.1% of Ruben's total Maryland donations came from Montgomery County.
65.34% of Ruben's total contributions came from Montgomery County.
The resounding demonstration of hometown support can be attributed to the fact that Senator Ruben is the Senate President Pro Tem and Chairwoman of the Montgomery County Senate Delegation. As a result, the Senator has many long-time, cherished friends throughout Montgomery County and the entire state.

Posted by: Raskin is a Hypocrite! | August 23, 2006 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Jamin Raskin, a candidate for State Senate in Maryland's 20th Legislative District, has violated a legal argument he himself advanced in a law review article he co-authored in 1993, which raises serious questions as to his principles.

A detailed analysis of Mr. Raskin first Maryland campaign finance report reveals that Raskin raised significant campaign contributions from outside of Legislative District 20 as well as outside of Maryland:

68.77% of Raskin's total contributions came from outside legislative district 20.
52.88% of Raskin's total contributions came from outside Montgomery County.
47.57% of Raskin's total contributions came from outside Maryland.
40.64% of Raskin's total Maryland donations came from Maryland jurisdictions outside of legislative district 20.
These findings are particularly problematic in light of the fact that Mr. Raskin co-authored a law review article in the Yale Law and Policy Review entitled: "Equal Protection and the Wealth Primary" that, among other things, harshly condemns the practice of political candidates soliciting and receiving campaign contributions from donors who live outside of the candidate's jurisdiction:

"C. Out-of-State Money
The constitutional principles of one person/one vote and election by 'the people' are especially offended by the spending of campaign money in House and Senate races raised out-of-state from persons who do not even have the right to vote in the election. If it is debatable whether poor people in South Carolina must tolerate the vote dilution caused by $1000 contributions given by wealthy people in South Carolina, it seems much harder to defend the legitimacy of $1000 contributions coming in from Florida, New York, or Texas. These cash constituents from afar are affecting, in many cases decisively, who ends up representing the people of the district or state conducting the election. This process tends to dilute the zealous independent representation of the people of each state and to exacerbate the political neglect of the home-state poor by making elected officials more accountable to the nationalized interests of specific wealthy groups and industries. It also potentially expands the political power of wealthier states, like New York and California, while reducing the power of poorer states, perhaps even implicating Article V's requirement that 'no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.' At any rate, as seen above, a number of senators are very near the point of receiving one hundred percent of their money from out-of-state. Can the nationalization of the wealth primary system in this way really be compatible with the principles of one person/one vote and election by 'the people'?"

"Equal Protection and the Wealth Primary," YALE LAW AND POLICY REVIEW (1993) Jamin Raskin and John Bonifaz, p. 306 (emphasis added).

"Apparently, Mr. Raskin believes in the philosophy of: 'Do as I say, not as I do' " said Phil Olivetti, Ruben's Campaign Manager.

Raskin raised more than $16,000 from New York residents, $3500 from Florida residents, more than $5200 from California residents and more than $3100 from Texas residents. Raskin also raised more than $9800 from Virginia residents and more than $35,000 from Washington, D.C. residents. Even more puzzling, Raskin raised more than $2000 from U.S. citizens who live overseas.

"Because he solicited tens of thousands of dollars worth of large contributions from donors in New York, California, Virginia, Connecticut and elsewhere, residents of District 20 have a right to know whose values and priorities Mr. Raskin represents," Olivetti said, adding "Even more importantly, Mr. Raskin's blatant hypocrisy raises serious questions as to whether the good people of Maryland can believe any of his other campaign declarations seeing as he has sold out his principles to curry favor with out-of-state wealthy benefactors in his very first campaign."

In stark contrast, Senator Ruben's fundraising demonstrates strong support within Montgomery County and the State of Maryland:

82.6% of Ruben's total contributions came from Maryland.
79.1% of Ruben's total Maryland donations came from Montgomery County.
65.34% of Ruben's total contributions came from Montgomery County.
The resounding demonstration of hometown support can be attributed to the fact that Senator Ruben is the Senate President Pro Tem and Chairwoman of the Montgomery County Senate Delegation. As a result, the Senator has many long-time, cherished friends throughout Montgomery County and the entire state.

Posted by: Not Askin' For Raskin | August 25, 2006 9:56 AM | Report abuse

"Raskin is a Hypocrite"and "Not Askin for Raskin": I have heard this campaign stuff about Raskin's out-of-state and out-of-county money -- but why doesn't this jibe with the contributions data reported by the Unversity of Maryland?

Posted by: New Voter | September 7, 2006 6:33 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company