Rep. Chris Van Hollen (MD-08) met with constituents last night in his first "town hall" meeting of the year. I voted for Van Hollen in '03, the year that I moved to town, mostly because he was a youngish, energetic Dem. This time I want to know what he truly stands for. I went to the meeting expecting to learn more about my neighbors' politics and Van Hollen's positioning in the House. Turnout exceeded the seating capacity of the school's APR, about 300 and a decent sample size of Dem voters in the 2004 election. But without my calculator, I figured, I might as well bask in the live response.
He circled top-line policy. His 45-minute report on Congress' shennanigans didn't break news. And after the docents began to pass around the mike, he might as well have left.
In one way, MD-08 is mature Dem territory, a state of the Union to which one suppose the dKos republic is headed. It is midnight blue -- deeply liberal (in principle), fiscally conservative. It's one of the nation's wealthiest districts -- home to 662K with median 1999 HH income of $95K, according to 2002 data. At that time, nearly 1/3 were aged 50 or older and nearly 1/3 were foreign born residents. Less than 5% of families reported poverty level income. Along with MD-07 and Baltimore County, this population is an island amid a sea of GOP faithful -- rural, blue-collar and landed gentry. Dem density is what carries the state. Many residents here are lawyers, association and NGO lifers, and retired government employees. To judge by mane, seniors were well represented.
On the other hand, MD-08 demographics sure aren't average. But since I spotted a Dem driver's (modified) Van Ho bumper sticker, I suppose that MD-08 is keyed to issue-oriented politics driving voter turnout. Some talking point "analysts" rely on focus group, others monthly poll smoking.
Well, just for fun, here are mySimple Resonance Registers. The left column, the (Talking Point) Meter, indicates a level of audible audience response to Van Hollen's message, summarized at right. The TP Meter scale is 0-5, polite silence to sustained applause +/- whistles 'n' such. Follows the "data".
THE TOP-LINE BUSINESS
Van Hollen's opening remarks echoed most of the notes of MSM coverage: national security, withdrawal from Iraq, immigration, gas prices, lobby reform, global competition. Only his remarks that resonated at all are recorded here, in order of occurance.
METER | TOP-LINE ISSUES |
3 | Discharge petition on H.J. R 55, Withdrawal of US forces from Iraq |
3 |
On lobby reforms: "Snake oil!" |
4 |
On lobby reforms: "This administration is adrift." |
2 | On fuel dependence: "We're reaping sour fruits of not having done what we should have years ago." |
2 | On immigration: Tighter border security |
1 | On immigration: Don't crimminalize undocumented workers |
When I walked in (15 minutes late), Van Hollen was making his segue from NSA to national security: "We are less secure as a nation." His allusion to Adlai Stevenson was a bit oblique for my taste, but the neighbors remained patient, while he continued to develope his picture of a standing army and "spiraling" sectarian violence in Iraq -- equal to the deeply rooted hostilities from which war erupted into Bosnia. When he said "total withdrawal" and discharge petition, the kids awoke. Then they truly seemed to doze off through his discussion of "political settlements" (e.g. Galbraith, Gelb, & Biden proposals) in Iraq and Dafur, domestic solutions to "long-term" problems like tariffs and subsidies, lobbyists, and energy dependence. Immigration, especially the prospect of formula to legitimize the status of thousands of landscapers, home care, and domestic workers, barely raised eyebrows. After all, policy is a Van Hollen hallmark; it's the speciality that leveled the playing field for him in '02. What this district of seasoned bureaucrats wanted to hear, apparently, was his honest opinion, in a word or few.
ADMINISTRATION ADRIFT (doh)
I hope, Van Hollen wasn't surprised that his constituents were prepared to follow with pointed directions, stemming from their contempt for the administration. Education just fell off the priority map. All topics raised are recorded here, in order of occurance, whether they "registered" or not. Quotes are given as I was able to transcribe accurately. (heh). Otherwise, the speaker's remarks are faithfully paraphrased. Frequently, lengthy preamble burdened the direct question.
METER |
Q&A SESSION TOPICS |
0 |
CVH's sense of geopolitical or foreign policy solutions to US energy demand |
1 | As Congress is considering medical insurance relief for SMBs, when can individuals expect similar support? |
0 | CVH's sense of US diplomacy in re: Iran and the likelihood of US military engagement before the November elections |
2 | "Bolton is an embarrassment." Can we assign a "special envoy to negotiate" UN reform measures? |
0 | "Mexico keeping their people in Mexico" |
0 | CvH's sense of US Ahmadinejad's letter as a form of diplomatic opening. |
2 | Status of DC Fairness and Representation |
3 | "Is phased withdrawal a valid strategy?" The kid says, Nixon's history with Vietnam suggests not. |
4 | As IL legislature and Rep. Conyers are pursuing impeachment procedure, what is the possibility of your public endorsement? |
3 | Fightin' elder physician on enrollment deadline: How does Congress intend to resolve the Medicare Part-D "rip off"? |
0 | What is your position on nuclear energy, in re: waste disposal and global warming? |
Van Hollen's replies disappointed me. He's a personable speaker, but his answers to pressing issues are unoriginal. Sure, he's got one foot in the Judiciary Committe now and one still in the Basement Hearing. He won 75% of the votes (44% turnout) in the last election. So has heavy DCCC gilt got him down? It seems not. Actually, he's sitting on $1.1M chest, 20% financed by PACs -- that's down nearly 10% from the '04 cycle -- and no challengers in '06. So WHFP problem?
Van Hollen's campaign message ("policy before action") is uninspired. As in his warm up, his balanced analysis didn't quite register with his base. It was unnecessary. And that is a sorrowful reminder of how important cross-over appeal -- passionate statements about our nation's future -- is to realize a 50-State strategy.
BUT ...
He just didn't have it in him, heart, that is. Or timing.
- "I understand the strong feelings ... Congress has been essentially AWOL on oversight."
- "From a policy perspective and political perspective it's a mistake to talk impeachment now ... We need to focus on the issues that American people care about ... to take back the House."
- "I would love to see a [seniors' Part-D] march on The Mall."
As people began shuffling out, he offered to stay to answer more questions. I kinda sorta wish that I had accepted that offer to have another chance at the mike. Thing is, Van Hollen, Jr, junior member of the house, stands for the party line.