Thursday Open Thread [6.21.12]

Filed in Open Thread by on June 21, 2012

The Lies of the Lying Liar, Willard Mittens Romney, Pathological Liar Extraordinaire.

“We remember the president’s own party had a super majority in both houses for his first two years.”

A number of the more purist liberals also believe this. A super majority is Constitutionally defined as two thirds, or 67%. The truth is the Democrats never enjoyed a super majority in the House of Representatives. During the 2009-10 session, Democrats held a majority of 257 to 178, or a share of 59%.

So in one House of Congress, Romney just straight out lied. He does that. A lot. And often.

In the Senate, the Democrats also never held a super majority of 67 seats. But perhaps Romney the liar is referring to the magic number of 60, which apparently is the number of seats you need in the Senate to get anything done, according to the Republicans when the Democrats hold the majority.

The Democrats held 60 seats from the time Al Franken was finally seated on July 7, 2009 until the point that Teddy Kennedy passed away on August 25, 2009. And during those seven weeks, Robert Byrd was also terminally ill and rarely on the Senate floor. Then Paul Kirk was appointed to replace Kennedy in September 2009, and he served until February 2010, at which point Senator Scott Brown took over the seat. Throughout this time period, from September 2009 until February 2010, Senator Robert Byrd would have been the 60th vote. But again, he was rarely on the floor, as he was often hospitalized prior to his death in June 2010. So even when the Dems technically had 60 seats, they didn’t. Remember, one of those 60 was Joe Fuckin Lieberman.

About the Author ()

Comments (200)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. puck says:

    Mitt must have been thinking of the Republican supermajority rules. Democrats need 90 senators to have a supermajority. Republicans only need 41.

  2. SussexWatcher says:

    This was forwarded to me today:

    TREASURY’S STATEMENT ON BUDGET BILL CHANGES
    Proposals Restrict Treasury’s Ability to Fix Ailing State Portfolio; Confers Power to Appointed Cash Management Policy Board
     
    At the request of the Markell administration, language has been inserted into S.B. 260, the FY 2013 Budget Bill, to prevent the Delaware State Treasury from following the state’s open and competitive procurement laws in issuing contracts for the state’s banking and investment services tasked with investing the Delaware’s $2 billion investment portfolio.  The new language would also limit the ability of the Treasury’s recently hired investment consultant, Credit Suisse, to provide independent analysis to monitor and recommend options to restructure the state’s investment portfolio to reduce risk while enhancing returns.
     
    The language inserted into the Budget Bill would also give the state’s Cash Management Policy Board the authority to extend any investment contracts or hire any new investment managers for an additional year, without having to follow procedures established in the state’s procurement laws – thus eliminating an open and competitive process.
     
    “The Markell administration, without public discussion and without consultation with the Treasurer’s office, is attempting to interfere with the established operations of the office of another statewide elected official, and is attempting to give an unelected board, primarily filled with his appointees, that meets only twice a year the authority to bypass state laws in awarding contracts for the daily operations of the Treasury.  This is a tremendous shift of power to the Governor without debate or discussion,” State Treasurer Chip Flowers said.
     
    The Treasurer’s office announced the agreement with Credit Suisse, one of the world’s leading financial services providers, on June 1, following an extensive Request for Proposal (RFP) process.  In addition to bypassing the state’s procurement laws, the measure places restrictions on the ability of Credit Suisse to provide independent analysis to the Treasury. 
     
    “The Markell administration, through the Joint Finance Committee process, is restricting the state treasurer from doing what he was elected to do — to ensure that the state receives the safest and best possible returns on its investments. Giving the Cash Management Policy Board authority to bypass procurement requirements eliminates essential protections written into law to ensure that the state’s funds are used properly,” Flowers said. “Such interference with established procedures designed to reduce conflicts of interest of Board members and create separation of powers among elected officials cannot enhance the standing of the state of Delaware within the investment community or the state’s rating agencies.”
     
    “I believe that differences in personality are prompting these proposed changes. It is not good governmental practice to make policy decisions based on personality,” Flowers said.   “Regardless of these actions, the Treasury will maintain integrity in the disposition of public funds.  Unless changed by the General Assembly, after July 1, 2012, the Treasury will defer to the Cash Management Policy Board to carry out the new mandates imposed through the budget bill, even though the Treasury believes such mandates fail to achieve a high standard of transparency and fairness deserving of any business seeking a state contract.  The Treasury has had tremendous achievements and accomplishments over the past year and despite this new obstacle, we shall not be deterred from discharging our fiduciary role in an honorable manner as public servants. 
     
    “If the Markell administration has suggestions for changing the legal authority of the state treasurer, or of any other elected official, the proper approach is to propose legislation so that it receives a full airing before the General Assembly after careful deliberation and research,” Flowers said. “Changes impacting a $2 billion investment portfolio should not be slipped into a budget bill without notifying the Treasury.  It is a dangerous practice.  Inserting such changes in the fine print — more than 160 pages into a bill of more than 260 pages — at the very end of the legislative session counters the principles of transparency that the citizens of Delaware deserve.”

  3. cassandra m says:

    Does it really say TREASURY’s Statement? Really? The.DRAMA.

  4. cassandra m says:

    So here is what the Section in question says. This is on page 163, not page 160 as referenced. There may be more, I haven’t exhaustively looked through the entire document:

    Section 100. The State Treasurer, having retained an investment consultant to review the state’s
    13 investment portfolio, and said consultant having not completed its analysis for the Cash Management
    14 Policy Board to review its finding and recommendations during this fiscal year, is hereby authorized to
    15 present such findings and recommendations for consideration by the Board during the state’s fiscal year
    16 ending June 30, 2013. To afford the State Treasurer opportunity to present those findings and
    17 recommendations, the Cash Management Policy Board is authorized, notwithstanding any provision of
    18 Chapters 27 or 69 of Title 29, to exercise its responsibility to designate permissible investments with
    19 judgment and care under the circumstances by extending for up to one additional year any existing
    20 contracts for banking and/or investment services expiring in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2013. The
    21 State Treasurer is not otherwise authorized to retain banking and/or investment services without the
    22 consent of the Cash Management Policy Board and funds under the custody of the State Treasurer shall
    23 be invested consistent with Cash Management Policy Board guidelines pursuant to Chapter 27 of Title 29.
    24 Section 101. Amend 29 Del. C. § 2716(d) by making insertions as shown by underlining and
    25 deletions as shown by strike through as follows:
    26 (d) Powers and duties of Board.
    27 (1) The Board is authorized and empowered to adopt rules and regulations for the general
    28 administration of its duties
    1 (2) The Board shall establish a policy with respect to the creation of all checking accounts by the
    2 State or any agency or department by the State or any agency or department of the State, and the State
    3 Treasurer shall enforce that policy.
    4 (3) The Board shall be authorized to enter into agreements to employ or contract for the services
    5 of private and public consultants, for research, technical or other services and for facilities, whenever the
    6 same shall be deemed by the Board necessary or desirable in the performance of the functions of the
    7 Board. No such agreement shall be binding or enforceable unless the State shall have appropriated money
    8 to pay the obligations incurred by the Board hereunder.
    9 (4) The Board shall prepare and publish an annual report to the General Assembly concerning its
    10 activities.
    11 (5) The use of teleconferencing or videoconferencing is authorized for use in conducting
    12 meetings of the Cash Management Policy Board.

  5. puck says:

    Apart from the general stench of “power grab,” there’s really only one objectionable clause in the Treasury revisions quoted above:

    The State Treasurer is not otherwise authorized to retain banking and/or investment services without the consent of the Cash Management Policy Board

    This is clearly the Governor allying with the old-school banks to evade any chance of independent inspection (if this story checks out, that is).

    Assuming this carries, the proper responses are:

    a. Find alternate means to provide said independent reporting;
    b. Publicize all activities of the Cash Management Policy Board;
    c. Issue annual reports showing performance of Board policies vs. alternate policies;
    d. Shine a bright light on the membership of the Board;
    e. Push for more balanced representation on the Board.

  6. cassandra_m says:

    Or you could see this as a clarification of duties to an elected official who is botching his own power grab.

    Interestingly, Credit Suisse (a bank more than 150 years old, so it doesn’t get more old-school than this) gets to do their thing until next year — meaning that if they have any value to add, you’ll know it by then.

  7. SussexWatcher says:

    Yes, it does say Treasury. That was one of the first things Flowers did – change the name from the State Treasurer’s Office to the Delaware State Treasury. Such an egomaniac.

  8. cassandra_m says:

    Yes, well, it’s abit precious to have the TREASURY have a statement instead of the person who was elected to run that office.

  9. anon says:

    Sussexwatcher, how does changing the name from office of state treasurer to delaware state treasury show flowers as an egomaniac. Wouldn’t that be evidence of the contrary? However, a gov taking power and extending contracts without an open process isn’t? This wasn’t jacks finest moves, seems petty and retalitory for flowers speaking out against him.

  10. cassandra_m says:

    Here we go again with the anonymous sockpuppets.

  11. puck says:

    Here we go again with the trivial nitpicking.

    You are right, Cassandra, I do need a better adjective than “old school banks.” How about “Delaware Way banks?”

    Here is a clip from the minutes of Jack Markell’s last meeting serving on the Cash Management Policy Board in June 2008 (retrieved from google cache). This is a remarkable piece that gives some insight into the Board process and how Markell thinks the board should interact with Treasury (or at least, how he thought in 2008):

    UPDATE ON BANKING SERVICES CONTRACTS:
    Mr. Maxwell provided the Board with the attached handout that displayed the banking services contracts that required action by the Board. The first item on the handout was the Electronic Collections contract. Mr. Maxwell advised the Board that Mr. Slatcher attended the Electronic Collection bid presentations along with members of the Treasurer’s Office and the Division of Revenue. The presenters were the Bank of New York Mellon and JP Morgan Chase. Mr. Maxweil gave an oral summary of the presentations and a brief rationale for the recommendation to award the contract to the Bank of New York Mellon. Mr. Maxwell continued down the list of banking services’ contracts and the proposed recommendations. At the conclusion of Mr. Maxwell’s briefing, Mr. Siatcher, Chairman of the Banking Services Subcommittee, made the motion to accept the proposed recommendations. Mr. Engle abstained from the vote, due to his position at PNC Bank. Mr. Markell seconded the motion. The motion was carried with no objections.

    See, Jack thinks the Board should have authority over which investment firms to hire, as long as they are Mellon and Chase.

    Did you catch the deliberation process described in the minutes? The Board voted with no objections, based only on Treasurer Markell’s sayso that another member had attended a presentation. D’ya think the fix was in? That’s the bad kind of juice.

    I can’t find any minutes more recent than that.

  12. cassandra m says:

    What is interesting about those minutes is that there is nothing there about the actual bid presentations. So what was the criteria for winning the bid? What was the ranking of the bidders? What bids were defective? What were the best value tradeoffs? You don’t know anything about what was up for decision. As far as you know, the winners may have been giving away their services. So fundamentally you don’t know anything about their deliberation process — which could be fixed with making these meetings public or requiring more detail in reporting them out.

  13. puck says:

    It just dawned on me Jack Markell has been in control of Delaware’s investment decisions for the last ten years, and he wants to keep it that way.

    Jack Markell is like the accountant who suspiciously never takes a vacation. Cui bono?An ongoing independent evaluation is clearly called for.

  14. SussexWatcher says:

    puck is confusing Maxwell with Markell.

  15. puck says:

    No, I’m not confusing Markell/Maxwell, although both are from Treasury and Maxwell presumably worked for Markell. Markell wrote the minutes (or at least signed them).

    If you can’t get a sense of the process from those minutes, try again.

    In the first topic, on the Collections contracts, notice who is leading the discussion and giving out the handouts on the investment services – Maxwell. Maxwell isn’t even a member of the Board – he’s from Treasury.

    Slatcher is apparently the only member in the room who attended the presentations, along with other unspecified members of Treasury, which may or not have included Maxwell or Markell (wonder why it’s not specified? I bet Markell was there).

    Yet it’s Maxwell from Treasury who is summarizing the presentations and making recommendations. Slatcher’s role was limited to moving to accept the recommendations (seconded by Jack Markell, which signifies ownership). Markell’s role was presumably limited to smiling approvingly as the meeting unrolled the way he had planned it.

    Just saying, there’s a lot of revelation in that little snippet of minutes. And oddly, I can’t find any record of Board meetings after that, or any announcement of upcoming meetings. Maybe I just don’t know where to look. Or maybe I just don’t have enough juice.

    These are open meetings, as far as I know. BTY, how does that work on a conference call?

  16. SussexWatcher says:

    Oh my god you are a fucking moron who has never read minutes in your pathetic life. Idiotic twit.

    In 99.99 percent of public meetings, it is the staffer who gives the presentations and answers questions. That’s exactly what happened here. No grand conspiracy, no back room meetings.

    As far as conference calls, you can’t hold a public meeting that way. Some public bodies can have members call in, but there still has to be a physical meeting location the public can attend, and it all has to be done on speakerphone so everyone can hear. You’d know that if you bothered to research FOIA instead of misinterpreting innocuous meeting minutes.

    You are a mindless asshole.

  17. puck says:

    Mindless assholes are the ones who swallow crap without questioning it, and like it.

    Say, aren’t you the same dope who thought I was confusing Markell and Maxwell? Maybe you still don’t know how to read comments.

    I know it is the staffer who gives presentations. My point is that it was a Treasury staffer. The Board has a Chairman; why is Treasury leading the discussion in 2008, but now needs to be stripped of power in 2012? Read my comments before you go straight to the ad hominem.

    I know conference calls don’t lend themselves to open meetings – but the alleged addition to the budget law (remember? the thing we are discussing here?) says that “The use of teleconferencing or videoconferencing is authorized for use in conducting meetings of the Cash Management Policy Board.”

    So… if the Board meets by conference call, are they then in violation of the Open Meetings portion of FOIA? Just asking, I don’t know.

  18. SussexWatcher says:

    What you said was: “The Board voted with no objections, based only on Treasurer Markell’s sayso that another member had attended a presentation.”

    Markell didn’t say that. Maxwell did. Ergo, you confused them.

  19. puck says:

    Okay, you got me there. I mis-spoke, but wasn’t trying to misrepresent. I was trying to get across the idea that all the recommendations and guidance were coming from Treasury. Just as you said, staffers usually speak for their bosses, so in that sense Maxwell’s recommendations come from Markell.

    Yet now Treasury is supposed to take a back seat, because Markell has changed jobs.

  20. Podium says:

    This paragraph was slipped in on page 163 of a 267 page budget document with little more than a week left in the legislative session. It should have been done transparently through a stand-alone bill which would have allowed the public input into the proposed changes.

  21. puck says:

    I don’t think the language takes away any authority the Treasurer already has (does it?), except the ability to hire his own advisors without the vote of some bankers and executive appointees. That’s not right, and sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen.

    That’s a non-starter for me, and should be for the GA too if they get a chance to stop and think about it.

  22. SussexWatcher says:

    No, the State Treasurer’s Office (not the Treasury – you sound like a self-important dipshit when you say that, just like your boss) is supposed to continue doing things like it has for years, NOT change things up because Flowers wants to be Governor in four years. Your maximum leader is using the same approach as Sheriff Nutsack in Sussex.

  23. Podium says:

    How is “Treasury” more self-important than “State Treasurer’s Office” which references the official in question?

    Velda ran on that platform and lost by almost double digits. Even the Republican nominee ran on reforming the office. It is not progressive to say an office should forever function the same way, especially when practically every other states has a more robust role for their treasurer. You people do realize there are 49 other states, right?

    If Chip’s sole goal is to become Governor his best bet is to stay quiet, play the game and wait his turn. Instead he is trying to get things done. He could do nothing controversial for years like your guy Denn is doing as the #2 man in state government.

    The language shifts power from the state treasurer to Markell’s appointees on the Board.

  24. puck says:

    Now I see how Delaware Treasurers get to become Governor, by cultivating cozy little Wall Street relationships and making sure they never change. These Board meetings seem to be a big part of it. I guess that’s how Markell gets “juice” on investment decisions; whether he is Treasurer or Governor doesn’t seem to matter. But isn’t that sort of the opposite of good government?

    My goodness, look at the lengths the Governor will go to to make sure those relationships aren’t questioned, not even by somebody with no power to change them. Something struck a nerve.

    BTW, “Treasurer” and “Office of the Treasurer” are the right usage. “Treasury” is careless, not meaningful on my part. I’ve used both interchangeably, and no I am not going to proofread my fucking blog comments for SW.

  25. TruthTeller says:

    It’s so sad when people have to use profanity when they lack a valid argument or just accuse flowers of wanting to be governor. I am proud that we finally have a democrat standing up against a bad system. There is no excuse for giving contracts outside the process or telling an elected official that they can’t enter a contract without permission from the governors Board. This is corrupt and people may go to jail for this one. The Republicans must be laughing.

  26. puck says:

    By way of analogy, Matt Denn has put out an awesome report showing the advantages of shifting education funding from administrators to the classroom – a clear good-government suggestion. Yet I don’t see Markell rushing to strip the Lieutenant Governor’s office of power to direct education funding, or to consult with outside experts. I guess that’s just some special vitriol he saves for the Treasurer.

    Flowers’ intention to bring outside scrutiny to Delaware’s investments is a similar good-government suggestion. There’s no risk in having someone outside that tightly-puckered Cash Management Board take a look at it.

  27. The Delaware Way says:

    Has any school administrator given Markell tens of thousands of dollars? Board member Dave Marvin has given at least $55,000 to Markell’s PACs.

  28. The Delaware Way says:

    Guess who chairs the subcommittee that will approve these contracts?

    Ps this isn’t Nancy

  29. Geezer says:

    “Assuming this carries, the proper responses are:

    a. Find alternate means to provide said independent reporting;
    You might look to CRI on this one, provided they are willing to take on the big banks. I don’t know who else would fund the research for such a report, which would run into six figures. Who’s going to order one up? The administration? Obviously not. The GA? Less obviously not, but unlikely. Chip? With what money?

    b. Publicize all activities of the Cash Management Policy Board;
    There’s nothing stopping anyone from doing that.

    c. Issue annual reports showing performance of Board policies vs. alternate policies;
    With whose money? Chip will have to do this if it’s going to be done.

    d. Shine a bright light on the membership of the Board;
    Half are bankers. How much more light do you need?

    e. Push for more balanced representation on the Board.
    All depends on what you mean by “balanced,” dunnit?

    I would add:

    f. Push for more frequent meetings of the CMPB.

    “how does changing the name from office of state treasurer to delaware state treasury show flowers as an egomaniac. Wouldn’t that be evidence of the contrary?”

    No. The key is in the word “changing.” There was no valid reason to change it, other than whim — or a signal that he intended to wield the power of his office.

  30. cassandra m says:

    And that outside scrutiny still exists until this time next year.

    There’s a difference between submitting a report with recommendations and usurping the duties and responsibilities of an established Board. Again I’m going to make the point that good management is about building consensus when you don’t control the pieces on the board. Too bad Chip does not get that.

  31. Geezer says:

    “This is corrupt and people may go to jail for this one.”

    If you look at the existing code, you’ll find the board was exercising what I think they call its “statutory authority.” Look, if Chip wants to pretend he’s Sarah Palin, go for it. But you silly groupies sound like crazed barracudas.

  32. Geezer says:

    Puck: I admire your skepticism.

    You should know that the board was created to curtail the power of Republican Treasurer Janet Rzewnicki, who was elected after Tom Carper ascended to Woodburn. Jack Markell, like Chip Flowers, had a seat on the board as part of his duties as treasurer. I would point out that, unlike Chip, Jack cultivated those people and, while they still didn’t endorse him for governor because he wanted to skip ahead of John Carney for the post, they did trust him enough to put him in line.

    As for the fishiness of the contracts, you should know that once in the not-so-distant past (IIRC it was in 1975), the state government was in the habit of keeping its funds in a single homegrown bank, Farmers Bank. When it went under it almost took the state with it, ushering in 16 years of Republican governors (DuPont and Castle). So there’s history behind the current set-up. It’s not there to make things easy to screw up, it’s there to make them hard to screw up.

    I don’t object to the idea of revisiting the current arrangement. But the proper way to go about it would be to prepare a report on how other states invest, what their risk is and what their return is. Instead of playing with color wheels, do some actually valuable research.

    Of course, keep in mind that Delaware’s small budget means we’re talking small potatoes here. Even Chip said the possible gains are only $1 million to $2 million. This is quite a lot of drama over an order of small fries, isn’t it?

  33. Geezer says:

    Oh, Truth Teller: On the profanity issue, please pound sand up your fucking ass. I wanted to make that comment separately, so you don’t get confused by my profanity. My comment on how full of shit you are is entirely unrelated to this one, which concerns you being a pansy-assed prig.

  34. Valentine says:

    @Truth Teller: This is DL. Disagreement always comes with a large dose of profanity and name calling. And when making a point, it’s the norm to be as vulgar as possible.

  35. Geezer says:

    Valentine: Fuckin’ A, Bubba.

  36. TruthTeller says:

    Whatever, Geezer. I did not know about the 50k donation and I am more concerned now that the GA allowed that provision to slip into the budget. Actually, I agree with you Geezer that the arrangement needs to be revisited. I don’t think the governor imposing his will on a separately elected office was the right way. Plus, as Dems we should never be in favor of a process that is not open and fair. This is what we stand for. If members of the board have given the governor this much money, how could you say that they are independent? Sorry, I find it odd that this board and jack seemed to be opposed to flowers. All he said he wanted to do was work to reduce risk and get the state some extra bucks. now, they strip him for speaking out and favoring an open process? Weird and suspicious.

  37. Valentine says:

    Geezer: Damn right, asshole. 😀

  38. SussexWatcher says:

    Does Chip have a PAC?

  39. Geezer says:

    “Plus, as Dems we should never be in favor of a process that is not open and fair. This is what we stand for.”

    This is the kind of bullshit I expect from the Tea Party faction when talking about Sarah Palin. This is politics, not beanbag. You pick a fight with the governor, you get a fight. Grow the fuck up.

    “If members of the board have given the governor this much money, how could you say that they are independent?”

    Who said they were independent, and who cares? Did you miss the point where I criticized all this drama over a small order of fries?

    “All he said he wanted to do was work to reduce risk and get the state some extra bucks.”

    And I want a pony. What the holy Christ is wrong with you? You can’t reduce risk and increase return at the same time. If he actually said that’s what he wants, he’s more like Karen Weldin Stewart than I already thought.

    “now, they strip him for speaking out and favoring an open process? Weird and suspicious.”

    I think you meant, “Precisely what you should expect to happen to an overreaching asshole who tried to take on his own party’s popular sitting governor.”

    There. Fixed it for you.

  40. TruthTeller says:

    Fuck you, Geezer. Pricks like you give our party a bad name. How much is jack paying you to espouse your shit. Your arguments don’t even make sense! See I can have a potty mouth too. I’m glad that we have a dem with values. Popularity or alleged popularity has nothing to do with no bid contracts. Who the fuck appointed you an investment guru? Who the fuck appointed you the non-ethics police? I noticed how you casually accepted that a 50k contribution was normal. Are you fuckin dumb as Sarah Palin. Only Sarah would say something that fucking stupid. You actually think delaware voters are going to accept that shit? You must be Castle’s campaign manager. Do you also see Russia out your window at night? Maybe you look up jacks ass at night? Either way, if you espouse dumb shit and try to pretend that you are knowledgeable, sell that shit to Cassandra and SW because they are the only people buying your bullshit tonight.

  41. SussexWatcher says:

    *hands Geezer five bucks*. You win the bet … They’re utterly deranged.

  42. John Prickinson says:

    From the second report of the People’s Treasury:
    “It is with renewed hope and optimism that the State Treasurer, reflective of the wisdom and experience gained during the first year of service, humbly submits this Second Report of the Delaware State Treasury (the ‘People’s Treasury’) for the consideration and acceptance by the People of the State of Delaware. As Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the United States Treasury, duly noted, ‘Public opinion [is] the ultimate arbiter of every measure of Government’ and the People’s Treasury is not exempted from this principle. In furtherance of this principle, combined with a mandate inherent in the constitutional duty of the State Treasurer, this report is offered to the People to assess the condition and future of their treasury.”

    Holy shit, what a fucking blowhard. He’s way worse than I ever imagined.

  43. TruthTeller says:

    Ok John (aka Brian Selander) .it’s funny how the Markell lovers have ignored puck and the no bid issue to a politically connected board to attack flowers. He’s not a blowhard, he’s an intelligent African-American man who is fighting for principles. I would be threatened as well.

  44. JoeSixPack says:

    Did anyone notice that the consulting firm that was hand picked by “The People’s Treasurer” was just downgraded today by 3 notches? Seems like par for the course – a risky firm for a risky Treasurer. Forget running for Govenor in 2016, Chip will be out on his ear in 2014, if not sooner with these stupid ass moves.

  45. TruthTeller says:

    I see Selander is astroturing. Credit Suisse is consulting for the Treasury, not holding money. Nice try. However, a few of the banks that are holding state money by the contracts given by jack and the board were downgraded today – they now get an extension thanks to jack and the GA. Selander get your facts straight playa!

  46. Podium says:

    Along with 14 other firms including JP Morgan, which was picked by Treasurer Markell.

    The problem is the precedent this sets. The usual suspects are here taking the anti-Chip position but even they should not be cheering this development. What if a future governor, or Markell again, opts to sneak in a paragraph in a 276 page budget bill stripping a favorite of yours of power? Or–God forbid!–what if the person in the governor’s office is a person you hate? No progressive should be cheering this under the table power play.

  47. Delaware Dem says:

    TruthTeller, if Brian Selander was posting under a sock puppet, not only would he be banned, but I would tell the Governor to sanction him for posting on state time. 😉

    Joe Sixpack is not Selander. I don’t know who he (or she) is, but its not Selander.

  48. John Prickinson says:

    On a more substantive level, The People’s Treasurer’s press release is remarkable. Never before have I read a document that was crafted entirely of horseshit. For example:

    “The new language would also limit the ability of the Treasury’s recently hired investment consultant, Credit Suisse, to provide independent analysis to monitor and recommend options to restructure the state’s investment portfolio to reduce risk while enhancing returns.”

    — Survey says… fuck no! The epilogue language says something that is completely contrary to that nonsense: “The State Treasurer, having retained an investment consultant to review the state’s investment portfolio, and said consultant having not completed its analysis for the Cash Management Policy Board to review its finding and recommendations during this fiscal year, is hereby authorized to present such findings and recommendations for consideration by the Board during the state’s fiscal year ending June 30, 2013.”

    “The Markell administration, through the Joint Finance Committee process, is restricting the state treasurer from doing what he was elected to do — to ensure that the state receives the safest and best possible returns on its investments.”

    — Survey says… My mother would slap my ass if I said something even remotely resembling this dumb-ass shit! I don’t know what The People’s Treasurer believes “he was elected to do,” but he has no statutory authority “to ensure that the state receives the safest and best possible returns on its investments.” None. Zero. Don’t believe me? Check the Code. Here, in a nutshell, are the Treasurer’s statutory duties. (If you don’t like reading legalese, feel free to skip to the text below the line.)

    Title 29, § 2705. Custody and investment of state funds.
    (a) The State Treasurer shall have custody of money belonging to the State, including, but not limited to, money in the School Fund. All money belonging to the State, except money deposited in any pension fund of the State, and received by the State Treasurer, shall be invested daily.

    § 2706. Checks and drafts; signatures; time limitation on honoring.
    (a) The signing of checks or drafts by the State Treasurer may either be by hand with a pen and ink signature or by a facsimile signature of a process approved by the State Treasurer.

    § 2716. Cash Management Policy Board.
    (e) Powers and duties of State Treasurer. —
    (1) The investment of money belonging to the State shall be made by the State Treasurer in accordance with policies established by the Board and subject to the terms, conditions and other matters, including the designation of permissible investments relating to the investment of the money belonging to the State.
    (2) State agencies and departments, and school districts shall provide the State Treasurer with such reports and projections of receipts and expenditures as well as other data he or she may request to enable the Treasurer to provide the Board with accurate cash flow forecasts.
    ———————-

    So, in simple English, the statutory duties of The People’s Treasurer are as follows:
    1. Invest state money as directed by the Cash Management Policy Board.
    2. Provide the Cash Management Policy Board with “accurate cash flow forecasts.”
    3. Sign the damn checks.

    You know what’s not on that list? How about the following responsibilities?
    1. Establishing policies for the investment of state money.
    2. Determining the terms, conditions and other matters relating to the investment of state money.
    3. Designating what is and is not a permissible investment.

    You know why these responsibilities are not on The People’s Treasurer’s list of statutory duties? Because someone else has them. Or more accurately, something else. Can anyone guess what that “something” is?

    Brad from Pulp Fiction: “The Cash Management Policy Board?”

    The Cash Management Policy Board! Exactamundo! Check out the big brain on Brad! Under Title 29, Section 2716(a), the Cash Management Policy Board is responsible for “establish[ing] policies for the investment of all money belonging to the State or on deposit from its political subdivisions, except money deposited in any state pension fund or the State Deferred Compensation Program, and to determine the terms, conditions and other matters relating to those investments including the designation of permissible investments.”

    Does The People’s Treasurer have a role in this process? Why yes, little Johnny, he does. You see, The People’s Treasurer is himself a member of the Cash Management Policy Board. Perhaps we should call it The People’s Cash Management Board? Oh, never mind. The good news for The People’s Treasurer is that he can indeed fulfill his dream of establishing statewide investment strategies. The bad news is that he has to share his power with 8 other stodgy old people. If The People’s Treasurer could just put aside his petty personal animus and play nice with the other kiddies in the sandbox, all would be well. But why am I having trouble believing that will ever happen?

  49. TruthTeller says:

    I don’t think the markell lovers want to brag about the bank downgrades. Wasn’t it flowers that warned everyone that the state portfolio was overexposed to the financial sector? If this is true about the downgrades, then his position is supported. Uh-oh, if the state had significant losses due to the downgrades, flowers will be boosted. He could announce the total losses today due to the downgrades and that would silence the critics. The only question is whether the treasury will release the number. Don’t worry, Markell will be there to tell you it was flowers fault due to jacks screw up. Unreal.

  50. John Prickinson says:

    “The problem is the precedent this sets … What if a future governor, or Markell again, opts to sneak in a paragraph in a 276 page budget bill stripping a favorite of yours of power?”

    Two simple questions, Podium. (1) What power belonging to the Treasurer is being stripped? (2) What is the basis of that power; is it statutory?

    Yes, that’s 3 questions. That semicolon isn’t fooling anyone.

  51. puck says:

    And here’s the smears once again:

    You know what’s not on that list? How about the following responsibilities?
    1. Establishing policies for the investment of state money.
    2. Determining the terms, conditions and other matters relating to the investment of state money.
    3. Designating what is and is not a permissible investment.

    They are smears because the Treasurer is already not authorized to do those things under current law. So pretending that Flowers is about to do these things unless he is stopped, is chickenshit.

    For those of you who think these changes are “clarifying” the Treasurer’s responsibility, they are not. They are just reiterating current law in an act of political grandstanding. The only new thing is the “no consultants” rule.

    Glenn Kenton was assigned to spread these smears in a WDEL interview, but Loudell called him out repeatedly on it, by pointing out that Flowers did not have these authorities without new Legislation. Poor Glenn was flustered each time and just didn’t have an answer, because that wasn’t on the script.

    But new people kept being sent out to read the script, some of them right here on this blog. They don’t care if they are called out or not, because if they keep flinging shit long enough, enough of it will stick for their purposes. They just have to make the lies big enough and repeat them enough.

    In general, the form of the lie is that Flowers is about to do some (awful thing) with our money unless he is stopped. But the truth is the opposite: Flowers can’t do anything different from previous treasurers without new legislation.

    Except for one thing – provide an independent analysis of the cozy little deals worked out between the Governor’s people and the banks. And that is actually the only substantive thing in the Governor’s proposed changes. Because independent review must be what the Governor fears most: “The State Treasurer is not otherwise authorized to retain banking and/or investment services without the consent of the Cash Management Policy Board”.

    By the way, Board discussions of investment strategy are exempt from FOIA – what a shock. And the Governor’s proposed changes draw the blinds down even tighter on their little investment club.

    I encourage Flowers to keep looking for ways to bring sunshine and independent review to the closed society that manages Delaware’s investments. A society which somehow always seems to be dominated by one Jack Markell, no matter what office Jack currently holds.

    Interestingly, the law also provides that the Treasurer may call a special meeting of the Board. I bet something could be done with that power.

  52. puck says:

    Which leads me to another question: Since the proposed changes are substantially similar to current law, but worded differently, will we be going to court to iron out the differences? Is it really worth it just to display some political chest-beating?

  53. John Prickinson says:

    “They are smears because the Treasurer is already not authorized to do those things under current law. So pretending that Flowers is about to do these things unless he is stopped, is chickenshit.”

    With all due respect, what the hell are you talking about? The issue is that The People’s Treasurer claims that he’s being “restricted from doing what he was elected to do — to ensure that the state receives the safest and best possible returns on its investments.”

    My point is, he has no authority over state investments. If I’m wrong, kindly point me to where in the state code he is granted that authority. If not, keep your irrelevant screeds to yourself.

  54. JJ says:

    Janet Rzewnicki had her powers stripped/ curtailed when she got out of line. Guess its par for the course–the Delware Way- when you ‘make too many waves’.

  55. I’ll have to check Jack Markell’s January budget against the recently released legislative budget to look for the language changes between now and then. Chip is a pretty sharp dude. I doubt if what he is saying – that Markell is stripping his legal authority via the budget bill – is irrelevant screed.

    Thanks puck for the Loudell – Kenton link. Priceless.

  56. Geezer says:

    “Fuck you, Geezer. Pricks like you give our party a bad name.”

    I am not the slightest bit interested in furthering the interests of your party.

    “How much is jack paying you to espouse your shit.”

    I’ve been espousing my shit for 30 years now, long before Jack entered politics.

  57. Geezer says:

    “Chip is a pretty sharp dude.”

    Wow. You fall over like a sack of flour when someone pays attention to you, don’t you?

    If Chip were a smart dude, he wouldn’t be picking a fight he can’t win. But he’s not stupid, so I have to assume he’s already tired of the job. He’d better be, as he’s going to have an uphill fight to re-election at this point.

  58. jpconnorjr says:

    Chip will have an even better margin of victory than Karen will have against your boy in September:)

  59. Geezer says:

    To expand on my last comment, the question to ask here is, “What is Chip up to?”

    He can’t be so dim that he thinks this will make him friends or influence anyone in power in a positive way. Judging by the jottings of his nameless supporters (no, I’m not talking about Puck or Nancy), he is making a bid to expose the good old boy network’s cozy interrelationships.

    This is the political equivalent of a “Hail Mary” pass — if it succeeds, it jumps him into the front rank of public officials as a do-gooder. If it doesn’t, he might as well head back to the public sector pronto.

    Is his law firm struggling without him at the helm? Because it’s a lot more likely this will end his political career than enhance it.

  60. Geezer says:

    No offense, Joe, but you’re pretty close to the last person I”m going to turn to when predicting the future. If you have any actual insight, meet me at The Grove this weekend.

  61. jpconnorjr says:

    And I give a s”t about your opinion, Not.By the way I heard your boy cant pay his tab for campaign expenses:), Cheers!

  62. Is there anything more ironic than a KWS lapdog claiming that someone else can’t pay their campaign expenses?

  63. Idealist says:

    Actually, since the endorsement, I’ve heard the Crane camp has had a nice boost in fundraising.

  64. heragain says:

    I don’t understand the mayhem here. If there’s anything Chip can be given credit for, it’s adherence to his campaign promises. He said he wanted to be treasurer so he could turn the office upside down. People gently (and sometimes not so gently) pointed out that his plans exceeded the statutory limits of the office. He got elected, and clearly believes that means he has a mandate for his grandiosity.

    I wish Jack had bothered to softsoap him. Jack hands out a few doughnuts and everyone in the room signs in blood. Man has talent. If he’d applied that talent to Chip we wouldn’t be looking at a mudpuddle struggle between 2 statewide D’s.

    It’s stupid.

  65. Geezer says:

    “If he’d applied that talent to Chip we wouldn’t be looking at a mudpuddle struggle between 2 statewide D’s.”

    So think about it. Jack had a choice, and this is the choice he made. Ever wonder why? Hint: Would you want to be forced to clean up the mess every time Chip decides his name hasn’t been in the papers in too long?

  66. The Delaware Way says:

    Markell wants to make sure he gets campaign contributions from the banks. This protects them from their underperformance being exposed. $2 million in contracts (signed by Markell) to banks for less than 1% in returns? The guy who will be chairing the subcommittee for future contracts has given him $55,000. This stinks to high heaven.

  67. Geezer says:

    Hey Joe — ever consider posting anything that wasn’t an insult of people who don’t have your reasons for sucking up to particular politicians? You have plenty of intelligent things to say elsewhere. Why not here?

  68. Geezer says:

    “Markell wants to make sure he gets campaign contributions from the banks.”

    Oh, absolutely. He’ll need many millions to defeat this year’s GOP tomato can.

  69. Geezer says:

    “They are smears because the Treasurer is already not authorized to do those things under current law. So pretending that Flowers is about to do these things unless he is stopped, is chickenshit.”

    But Chip campaigned on being given the authority to do those things. So pretending that he has some agenda beyond his personal interest in political glory is chickenshit, too.

  70. cassandra_m says:

    This is courtesy of SussexWatcher who is having some technical difficulties posting this:

    From the State News:

    In response to media questions regarding the press release later in the day, Gov. Markell spokesman Brian Selander said via email that once the General Assembly returns in January, there will be ample opportunity for a full debate on the issue.

    “No past state treasurer has taken Mr. Flower’s position that they could unilaterally select the State’s investment advisors and alter longstanding investment guidelines,” Mr. Selander said. “The language in the bill merely preserves the status quo during the period when the General Assembly will not be in session.”

    Mr. Selander said that Board members and the Treasurer had discussed these issues and the Board had hoped to resolve these issues by agreement and sought a meeting with the Treasurer and the full Board this month for that purpose.

    “However, the Treasurer told members he was unable to meet during the month of June,” Mr. Selander said.

    Mr. Selander pointed out that the state Controller General proposed the language to the Joint Finance Committee during a public meeting, and the members held a public vote on it, where they voted to include the language in the budget.

    Source article

  71. JPConnorjr says:

    I did not take your comment as an insult though I could have chosen to to commence the silly little game you now engage in……. but hey:)

  72. anon1 says:

    Selander’s comments make no sense. If you have to pass a law to keep the status quo, you wouldn’t need to pass a law. What a moron! Thanks, Cassandra for showing how much a moron Selander is. Why didn’t you post the entire article Cassandra? Stop covering for the administration. People in Leghall are pissed that the administration lied to them!

  73. Geezer says:

    Silly game? You’re the one, not I, who keeps up the running criticism of Mitch Crane because you feel beholden to Karen Weldin Stewart. I asked you to post a defense of her job performance, and you claimed to be unwilling because an internet troll is out to get you.

    You were once a political insider, and you have all sorts of ties to all sorts of people in the Delaware political system. I have never been an insider, do not claim any inside knowledge of anything and owe no favors to anyone.

    Who’s playing silly games again?

  74. Geezer says:

    @anon1: Jesus, you’re stupid. The contracts run out before the General Assembly meets again. This preserves the status quo until January.

    Nobody in Leg Hall is pissed about anything. Chip Flowers is revealing himself as the moron, and people like you are helping further that image immensely.

  75. Sussex Watcher says:

    Thanks, Cassandra!

    Anon1,

    You can’t repost the whole text of an article because that’s theft. There is a link to it at the bottom, though.

    So where’s Chip going on vacay this month that he can’t take a few hours to meet with the people he’s attacking? Who declares a whole month off-limits?

  76. anon1 says:

    Sorry, Geezer. You are the fucking moron. I told you I know about this issue and the contracts expired last year. The treasury was planning to issue an RFP this year for new managers under the state’s procurement laws. If you are going to call someone out, get the fucking facts straight. The treasury is pissed that the managers are making over $2 million for poor performance. I guess you support that shit as well. Since you know so much, on what date do the fucking contracts expire? I guess you also can show us the public notice to the board meeting that selander alleges that flowers could not attend. Where is the agenda showing that the markell proposal was being discussed? Shut the fuck up and do so got damn research.

  77. Cute says:

    SussexWatcher so feverishly trying to post Selander’s statement he e-mailed it to another blogger! Was somebody mad, maybe a boss, it took you until past noon to get the Markell team’s statement out here?

  78. cassandra_m says:

    @the sockpuppet anon1:

    1. Why didn’t you post the entire article Cassandra?
    So you are not only a sockpuppet but one who can’t read, apparently. i posted that on behalf of a commenter who couldn’t. ALSO, we abide by the rules of Fair Use here. Which is why there is a LINK to the entire article at the end of that post. If you were genuinely interested in the information rather than just demonstrating what a moron you are, you would have clicked on the link.

    2. We frown on sockpuppetry here. And you, anon1, have been here under at least two names. You are done here.

  79. cassandra_m says:

    And TruthTeller is moderated and his IP banned. Not only because he is one of the fact-free sockpuppets showing up here in this ChipNutz thread (thank you, SW!), but because he has usurped the pseudonym of one of our regular commenters.

  80. socialistic ben says:

    damn, it’s like the end of Storm of Swords here today.

  81. Sussex Watcher says:

    To anon1’s point: there would be no notice or agenda if the key person declares he can’t meet for an entire month to discuss an issue he’s regularly bitching to the press about. I guess marketing yourself as a change agent is more important than actually discussing the specifics of what you want to change.

  82. Geezer says:

    “The treasury is pissed that the managers are making over $2 million for poor performance.”

    The TREASURY is pissed? You know, there’s a process to be followed here. Chip, and you his employee, apparently think it’s too important for someone as busy as Chip is to follow. I guess he’s busy buying more suits — or getting them tailored.

    “Where is the agenda showing that the markell proposal was being discussed?”

    As I understand it, Flowers turned down the whole month. No public notice of a meeting that isn’t held. Have you been drinking?

    “Shut the fuck up and do so got damn research.”

    I’m sorry, isn’t that your job, as opposed to posting on blogs? Seeing as you apparently are part of THE TREASURY? As I noted somewhere earlier, if Chip wants to make a case, why doesn’t HE do the research and release the results?

    I sincerely hope Cassandra doesn’t ban you clowns, because as I said you are burying your guy so deep they’ll find Jimmy Hoffa before they find the remains of his political career.

  83. Sussex Watcher wrote:

    “To anon1’s point: there would be no notice or agenda if the key person declares he can’t meet for an entire month to discuss an issue he’s regularly bitching to the press about. I guess marketing yourself as a change agent is more important than actually discussing the specifics of what you want to change.”

    Especially since the month we’re talking about is June, the final month the legislature’s in session. I honestly can’t imagine an elected state official unavailable to meet and discuss concerns like these during the month of June.

    Chip? Chip??

  84. Podium says:

    The Board didn’t request a meeting about Credit Suisse, which was a fait accompli or the administration’s legislation. What the Governor’s spokesman is referencing is the bi-annual meeting of the Board. Chip wanted to delay it a few weeks so Credit Suisse could complete their analysis and he and the Board could review it at the next meeting. (The Board is very adamant about keeping the number of meetings down…) The legislation was a blindside hit.

    What’s with the obsession with Chip’s political future among his critics? You don’t see me obsessing over your favorites.

  85. puck says:

    The Treasurer can call a meeting of the Board whenever he wants. Which is exactly what he should do when the Credit Suisse report is done.

    Also, Selander continues the smear:

    “No past state treasurer has taken Mr. Flower’s position that they could unilaterally select the State’s investment advisors and alter longstanding investment guidelines,” Mr. Selander said.

    (that’s not Flowers’s position, no matter how many times they put those words in his mouth)

    and Selander admits to grandstanding:

    “The language in the bill merely preserves the status quo during the period when the General Assembly will not be in session.”

    “Status Quo” – I think Selander just found his boss’s re-election slogan!

    And – who the hell introduces duplicate legislation to preserve the status quo? What kind of freakish stunt is that, and why would our legislators put up with it? Which waterboy introduced this turd anyway?

  86. Sussex Watcher says:

    Selander said in the article the board wanted to discuss the larger issues. I trust him a hell of a lot more than I do Chip’s workers and family members posting here, so until your guy can prove otherwise – which should be a fairly simple task if it’s true – I’ll continue believing that Chip Flowers is a big-headed egomaniac who just doesn’t want to do any work during the month of June.

    Y’know, maybe we’re being too hard on the People’s Treasurer. Perhaps he has no time free because he’s following in Hamilton’s footsteps and signing all those checks by hand …

  87. Funny SW, as usual.

    Flowers mentioned the practice of electronic check signing in his presentation to the Civic League last Tuesday – its been in place for decades, no doubt. He covered a lot of the controversy with Markell’s Cash Management Board in detail although he hadn’t seen the budget bill language yet.

    I expect to find haters on Del. Lib. comments – people who don’t mind stretching the truth to smear or demean – protecting their favorite DEMs. What is unpleasant is seeing how ‘disagreeable’ haters are dealt with. As long as you are hating on the ‘right’ people you won’t be bothered. But god forbid you type in opposition to the HIGH DEM cabal!!!!

    I mean, puck has been commenting around here forever. Why is his/her independence being questioned? People can form strong alliances without being workers or family and sometimes those alliance are simply gut reactions to over-the-top smear jobs that smell bad and almost demand an independent vetting.

  88. cassandra_m says:

    “No past state treasurer has taken Mr. Flower’s position that they could unilaterally select the State’s investment advisors and alter longstanding investment guidelines,” Mr. Selander said.

    This isn’t a smear — this is partly the work that Flowers wants his office to be able to do. Why do you think there is a tug of war over this turf *now*? I’m going to remind you that I was one of the people who took a good look at his campaign promises for this office and asked in detail how he was going to wrest these items from the Governor’s control. And now we know — he isn’t. And nor does he have the skills to make the case for changing these things.

    Too many of you get wrapped up in some phoney *speaking truth to power* narrative without paying attention to either policy detail or the state of play of the pieces on the board. And once the facts threaten to get in your way, you want to call it a smear.

  89. puck says:

    Believe me, I am a totally independent commenter. I’ve never met Chip, and I tuned out of the Chip/Velda campaign posts. I just had a strong visceral reaction to Cassandra’s post which brought my attention to the News Journal article, so I decided it was time to end my ignorance, and started digging into the facts. I may be one of the few people who learned about this situation WITHOUT preconceptions and emotional distractions.

    The thing is, despite the smear artist’s assertions, Flowers is NOT demanding unilateral control of investment decisions, nor is he in a position to do so any time soon. So when people keep asserting that he is, that’s the giveaway that it’s a smear campaign, based on creating fear of something that’s not even possible. Everyone who repeats this smear owns the lie too.

    If I ever meet the guy, I may decide he’s not my cup of tea. But for now, the over-the-top immune response of the Establishment led by “Governor Status Quo” tells me Flowers is doing something right. And I don’t care if he ever becomes Governor or not.

  90. cassandra_m says:

    Flowers is NOT demanding unilateral control of investment decisions, nor is he in a position to do so any time soon.

    If he is trying to manage the state’s cash accounts without the Cash Management Board, then he is working at unilateral control of investment decisions — by definition. If he wanted to reduce the role of this Board and increase his own there is a way to do it and that isn’t just pretending you have authority you simply do not have.

    But the latter part of that sentence seems quite right — and mainly for persistently insisting on acting like a newbie.

  91. puck says:

    “If he is trying to manage the state’s cash accounts without the Cash Management Board, then he is working at unilateral control of investment decisions — by definition. ”

    That’s a big IF, Cassandra, Where’s the evidence for the rest of your claims? Or are you just getting your facts from the Governor’s hit squads?

    All I know is that Flowers has made proposals to lawfully change the governance for how investment decisions are made. What the hell is “unilateral” about that?

    I don’t even feel strongly about his proposals, but he sure has the right to make them.

    What the Governor fears most is not unilateral control of investments, but the independent authority of the Treasurer to review the current process. That is what the new language is trying to take away.

    And that is what makes it a smear campaign.

  92. cassandra_m says:

    That’s not an especially big if, if you are really watching this play out.

    And this, for the record, is what counts as a smear:
    Or are you just getting your facts from the Governor’s hit squads?
    Because, really, if you had better *information* rather than your usual bullshit, you wouldn’t need to resort to this.

    He is not only making his proposals, but whining that he isn’t getting his way. And the whining is umseemly as is the incredibly stupid way he continues to go about trying to get these proposals implemented. As fa as I’m concerned, someone who can’t make his case by building consensus among the people he has to make that case to — but gets his diva on in public as if he had some mandate to get this stuff done — isn’t someone with executive management skills capable of the job. Full stop.

    And I don’t have a strong opinion one way or another about the proposals. I’m still where I started — how do you convince the Governor to give up some of his own turf in order to execute the proposals Flowers has been selling from day one. The way it looks from here is that not only is he not capable of making the sale to the Governor, but he’s willing to stamp his feet in public over it. Silly.

  93. cassandra_m says:

    And this:

    but the independent authority of the Treasurer to review the current process.

    Show us where he had all of this independent authority to review the Cash Management Board in the first place.

  94. puck says:

    Cassandra, I did’t see any link to where Flowers asserted he had or wanted unilateral authority to make investment decisions.

    Instead you responded with more assaults on character, which has been typical of this debate.

    I am aware of a report when the Board shunned Flowers’ checking account proposal, and Flowers supposedly hinted he might have a legal way to do it without Board control. But nothing came of it, so I suppose he didn’t find a workaround.

    And that weak shit about “review” of investment decisions. He’s a member of the Board – the only elected, independent member not appointed by the Governor – and of course he has the right to review its process and its decisions. That’s not even in the same zip code as “unilateral control”

    You’ve got nothing to back up your claim “he is working at unilateral control of investment decisions.”

    You are busted.

  95. Podium says:

    Geezer, the research and analysis of the state’s current investment policy and past performance is what Credit Suisse is doing. Puck, that was the point of delaying the meeting, since the Board doesn’t like meeting more than twice a year. Credit Suisse’s analysis will be shared and discussed with the Board.

    Of course you trust Selander. You creamed your pants over his statements in an article. If you are calling me Chip’s worker then…Selander, who has nothing to do with the Board (you just insinuated I do), also said Chip was putting pensions at risk which I proved was demonstrably false. (The anti-Chip crew has not said a peep about the risk to pensions, which the Governor’s Office of Pensions is chasing 24% returns for, since. Phony outrage much?)

    There is the ego attack again. A statewide politician with an ego. How shocking. It is strange how only Chip is attacked for having a ego. Your favorites (some who may or may not be your employer) don’t have egoes? I don’t see why he is singled out for this phony character attack. He is just like the others except…

    “I expect to find haters on Del. Lib. comments – people who don’t mind stretching the truth to smear or demean – protecting their favorite DEMs.”

    Great point. The Chip bashing comes from the same 4-6 people in every thread. There clearly are agendas here. Creaming your pants over Selander’s statements in an article for Pete’s sake…There also is a penchant for attacking Chip without even being bothering to do homework. The interest is in bashing Chip, not the issues.

    “This isn’t a smear — this is partly the work that Flowers wants his office to be able to do.”

    Really? It would be illegal for him to do something like change investment guidelines. Has he presented legislation to change that? Do you think he wants Credit Suisse to present to the Board just for kicks? The point of the Credit Suisse presentation is to sway the Board.

    Correct, puck. They know, or are very ignorant about a guy they love to talk about (negatively). It is either a smear or an attack driven by a combination of ignorance and dislike of Chip, for whatever reasons.

    These are the same people who pushed the pension smear, who attack Chip as the only statewide politician with an ego, etc.–in every Chip thread. Nancy hit it on the head…There is not any evidence to suggest he is demanding unilateral control of investments.

    “If he is trying to manage the state’s cash accounts without the Cash Management Board, then he is working at unilateral control of investment decisions — by definition. ”

    Too bad he isn’t. Where is the evidence for this?

    Chip’s critics here frequently get worked up about things he isn’t doing or can’t even do (i.e. pensions or unilaterally change state investment guidelines). I don’t see this strange tendency vis-a-vis any other elected official.

  96. Podium says:

    “Cassandra, I did’t see any link to where Flowers asserted he had or wanted unilateral authority to make investment decisions.”

    Don’t expect one because it doesn’t exist. It is as real as his threat to pensions.

  97. cassandra_m says:

    Speaking of busted.

    It isn’t a character assault to point out the the guy’s management skills are non-existent.

    But since you can’t point me to the place where the Treasurer’s office has the independent authority to review the Cash Management Board I’m thinking that we are all pretty clear that this is all you’ve got. Twisting a specific criticism into a “character assault”. GASP.

    It is the assumption that he has this authority that has all of your knickers in a twist in the first place. Too bad you won’t groundtruth your own assumptions.

  98. cassandra_m says:

    And Podium. Who continues to be a persistent sockpuppet with multiple names in this place. No lessons learned from your predecessors, huh?

  99. puck says:

    But since you can’t point me to the place where the Treasurer’s office has the independent authority to review the Cash Management Board I’m thinking that we are all pretty clear that this is all you’ve got.

    Nice switcheroo, but you continue to be busted on your claim:

    “If he is trying to manage the state’s cash accounts without the Cash Management Board, then he is working at unilateral control of investment decisions — by definition. ”

    He doesn’t need explicit authority to perform a review, as long as it is not proscribed. That’s how constitutions work.

    The Treasurer the only independent member of the Board. That plus the existing descriptions of the Treasurer’s duties give him enough interest in the Board’s decisions to allow him to perform independent review.

    Besides, aren’t you the teeniest bit interested in an independent review of this classic smoke-filled back room? The Treasurer watches the money come and go and is in an excellent position to provide such a review.

  100. puck says:

    “It isn’t a character assault to point out the the guy’s management skills are non-existent.”

    What duties of the treasurer has he failed to perform? Or perhaps there is some exodus of his staff I haven’t heard of?

    So far all I know is the Governor is having a hissy-fit, using the political capital (or as some call it, “juice”) he has accumulated by ten years of doling out tribute to Wall Street via the Cash Management Policy Board. Or at least that is the appearance. Is that what passes for management skills now?

  101. Geezer says:

    “What’s with the obsession with Chip’s political future among his critics? You don’t see me obsessing over your favorites.”

    I neither know nor care about anyone else’s “obsession” with his political future. I talk about it because, unless you’re accustomed to following the news from Myanmar, it’s highly unusual to watch someone immolate himself or, in this case, his career.

    And make no mistake, Chip’s political career is the true subject of this entire incident, or collection of incidents. Unless you think he just has a deep, powerful hankering to be a state Treasurer, he ran for the position so it could serve as a stepping-stone to higher office, just as it did for Tom Carper and Jack Markell. Face facts: Most of the electorate would have a very hard time caring less about where the state parks its cash between collection and disbursement. I talk to the general public every day; you’ll have to trust me that I’m not making up the lack of interest in the details.

    So let’s accept this as Fact No. 1, shall we? That Chip’s motivation in all this is furthering his career? Because if you’re going to pretend this is about some grand conspiracy to keep the cash in certain large institutions instead of different accounts at other institutions, or if you have the habit of codifying these grand conspiracies by typing HIGH DEMS at every opportunity, there’s no point in reading any further, unless you’re interested in something focused on normal human behavior instead of political skulduggery.

    Chip had to know — people like me certainly told him, in person and to his face — that he was going to meet a great deal of resistance to his plans for the office. (In fact, the prospect of the chaos his plans would cause prompted me to oppose his candidacy.) The duties of the office were curtailed by the entire General Assembly and turned over to the finance department; if Chip wanted to undo those changes, he was going to have to convince the governor’s office, the General Assembly, or preferably both, that there was some advantage to THEM, not just himself, in doing so.

    As with the takeover of a public company, there are two main ways to do this — friendly or hostile. Granted, Chip ran on his plans for “reforming” the office (in actuality, returning the office to its former duties), which made it sound like he wanted to forge ahead come hell or high water, but that could have been dismissed as campaign rhetoric had he elected to go the friendly route.

    There’s one big problem with this route: It takes a long time. Markell was treasurer for 10 years before becoming governor, and if he had waited his turn he would have spent another 8 years as Lt. Gov. He was able to jump the line because he spent those years building bridges, connections and alliances. He was also able to command a certain amount of respect because his vote totals jumped impressively each time he ran, and indication that he was succeeding at raising his profile. So 10 years is useful as an indication of how long it takes even a rebel to put together a campaign for governor. (Carper spent two years at DEDO and six as Treasurer, then 10 in Congress, but he was an establishment choice so I consider his case less instructive here.)

    Chip had a tougher row to hoe than Markell, because he first had to overcome a party-backed time-server in a primary first. He did that, but the skepticism about him was not entirely dispelled by the general election, in which he defeated Colin Bonini by only about 6,000 votes (not 3,000, as I remembered incorrectly several days ago). This was roughly 20,000 fewer votes than were cast for John Carney in his victory over Glen Urquhart, and Bonini got 20,000 more than Urquhart. Other races showed similar totals, meaning Flowers ran 6%-7% behind other Democrats in the general election.

    We can posit several theories for why he underperformed the rest of the ticket. Racism certainly must have played a part, as Flowers is the first and still the only African-American to win a statewide race. Retribution from Velda Potter-Jones supporters angry about her loss in the primary surely played a part, too. Someone with more time on their hands could look up the vote totals by district to determine which played a bigger role; the important part to me is that Flowers had no “mandate” to change the office, and therefore precious little to sustain him in a hostile situation. Further, he comes from no existing camp in Delaware Democratic circles, meaning nobody with any pull behind the scenes is invested in his career. It’s nice to have independence, but it’s also lonely.

    All this argues for taking the cautious route, doesn’t it? Chip was 35 when he was elected. Even if he had to wait 12 years (one more Markell term, two for Denn or whomever), he would still be only 47 when he ran for governor. Considering that he had no governmental experience before his election, an apprenticeship of this sort can hardly be seen as unnecessary. If he wanted to use the office as a stepping-stone in the manner of Markell, this would be the obvious path to take.

    Chip apparently lacks the patience, the temperament or both to take the 10-years-to-glory route, and has chosen the hostile route instead. Whether Chip’s positions and arguments in this fight are justified is immaterial. Rather than argue those positions quietly, he has chosen to cast public aspersions on the governor of his own party. There are only two possible outcomes: he wins or he loses.

    How can he win? Only if it turns out that there truly is a deep, dark conspiracy and someone’s hand is in the till. Let’s consider the likelihood of that. The governor has engaged in closed-door negotiations to bring two multi-million-dollar businesses to Delaware, Fisker Automotive and Bloom Energy. Let’s pretend for a moment you, dear reader, are a crooked public official. Would you see more potential for skimming in the low-return contracts for parking the state’s money, or in the multi-million-dollar transactions from two businesses you yourself helped recruit? I doubt you have to think hard to come up with the answer. Further, would a man who built his own fortune (something in the tens-of-millions range as I understand it) really be ready to have his political career torn to shreds over such behavior? Again, it goes against common sense, and to those of us who personally know Markell, it’s absurd. To be fair, it’s not Chip but his online supporters, however many they number, who are floating that theory. Still, it’s the only way Chip can win, because the public just doesn’t care about a turf war over such an unimportant subject.

    If the state is guilty of nothing but the typical don’t-rock-the-boat good-ol’-boyism, it’s ridiculous to think this will rally the public to Chip’s side. IF it’s true that Delaware’s system is risk-averse to the point of costly the state a couple of million dollars, Chip has picked a fight with the most powerful elected official in Delaware — the governor of his own party — with no more potential payoff than gaining a little more power for the Treasurer’s office.

    For a moment, let’s forget the risk-benefit analysis of which bank the state uses. Let’s look at the risk-benefit ledger sheet for this political decision: Tremendous risk, small potential reward. How does that reconcile with trusting Chip Flowers to handle the state’s money? Do you want a guy who will chase such a small payout at such tremendous risk to himself and his own career in charge? If he cares that little about his own future, why would you give him the power to negotiate with money that ISN’T his?

    Chip Flowers is a bright guy, but his ambition blinded him. It’s a shame he has chosen self-immolation, especially in so dubious a cause as restoring the power of an office he expected to use only as a stepping-stone. Had he thought ahead, he would realize that if he ever becomes governor, he, like Markell, will prefer to have the power rest with his own finance department rather than an independent treasurer’s office.

    So what I see when I look at all this is a guy who lacks patience, foresight and an ability to assess risk vs. reward. If he is to survive as a politician, he will have to disprove each of these traits that he, not anybody commenting on him, has demonstrated himself.

  102. Geezer says:

    Puck: Where’s the smoke-filled back room? The contracts are given out after competitive bidding, aren’t they?

    Have you ever considered the parallels between this and the Sheriff Woody situation down in Sussex?

    “The Chip bashing comes from the same 4-6 people in every thread. There clearly are agendas here.”

    The Chip support comes from even fewer people. And by all means, explain my agenda to me. Even better, explain away my analysis of the situation.

    And keep in mind, I don’t give a shit where the state parks its money. It’s a non-issue.

  103. Geezer says:

    From Puck: “They [governor’s office] are just reiterating current law in an act of political grandstanding.”

    So let me get this straight: They put together a secret act of political grandstanding. Brilliant fucking analysis there, sport.

  104. puck says:

    Geezer, you just proved the point about obsession over Flowers’ prospects for Governor. I don’t care if he becomes Governor or not; that’s his problem, not mine.

    I think the poke at the Fisker deal was a fair shot in return for the Governor’s team circulating smears about pensions and unilateral control. Apparently the Governor can dish it out but he can’t take it. Who’s the whiner?

    Besides, (as far as I know) the Fisker quote was internal-only until released to the News Journal.

  105. puck says:

    So let me get this straight: They put together a secret act of political grandstanding. Brilliant fucking analysis there, sport.

    I think you are starting to catch on.

    By the way, anything negative about Flowers that is sent to Cassandra is NOT a secret.

  106. Geezer says:

    A secret act of political grandstanding is an oxymoron, illustrating that you are a regular moron.

  107. Geezer says:

    It’s not my obsession, you dope. It’s his. Christ, are you really this stupid?

    “I think the poke at the Fisker deal was a fair shot in return for the Governor’s team circulating smears about pensions and unilateral control. Apparently the Governor can dish it out but he can’t take it. Who’s the whiner? ”

    Chip. This isn’t about fairness, it’s about power. If you don’t understand this, how do you follow politics at all?

  108. puck says:

    “Have you ever considered the parallels between this and the Sheriff Woody situation down in Sussex?”

    Yes. And Woody would be perfectly within his rights to issue reports on crime, arrests, or whatever the hell he wants, as long as he is doing his required duties. Like Flowers.

    If Sheriff Woody had limited his activities to making lawful proposals and reports, like Flowers did, he wouldn’t be in a lick of trouble.

    But unlike Flowers, Woody not only claimed unlawful powers, he acted on them. So the parallels are very superficial.

  109. puck says:

    “A secret act of political grandstanding is an oxymoron, illustrating that you are a regular moron.”

    It wasn’t secret; I read it here. Now, I know you aren’t a moron. So when you knowingly repeat a lie, that makes you – what?

    Besides you were the first one to say anything about “secret” – what’s that all about?

  110. Geezer says:

    “It wasn’t secret; I read it here.”

    I see my comments aren’t the only ones you don’t read. If you read the comments by Chip’s interested supporters (I know you are independent), you’ll see that one of the complaints is that this was orchestrated in secret. Either do your homework or drop the class.

    I hate pulling rank, but I’ve been doing this for 30 years. If anything, I have a vested interest in keeping this fight going, as controversy is my business. But, being the pontificating asshole that I am, and given that I actually like Chip and would like to see him succeed, I’m giving him the benefit of my analysis.

    You might learn something, too. But you’ll have to actually read the comments for that to happen.

  111. Geezer says:

    You missed the point of the Sheriff Woody comparison. Both fights are about what the elected official would like his office to do, and both have a Constitutional argument to back them up. If you think that’s superficial, you have more to learn than I thought.

  112. puck says:

    I am only an amateur bullshit artist, so I will have to defer to a professional.

    Geezer, you are right that Chip is likely to get stomped on. He is fighting ten years of political juice paid for with taxpayer money. I don’t care if he is Governor or even wins another term as Treasurer.

    My problem with this debate though is that whenver I make a point, I get an energetic rebuttal that always addresses some other point, but not the one I made. So all my factual claims remain unchallenged. Because they are true.

    I’m trying my best to stay reality-based, but apparently I’m the only one who cares about that.

    And no, I am not responsible for defending comments made by other people unless I choose to.

  113. Geezer says:

    “I am not responsible for defending comments made by other people unless I choose to.”

    But you are responsible for addressing facts. A sentence slipped into a multi-hundred-page bill is, by its very definition, not “grandstanding.” Grandstanding is what Chip is doing, not the administration. That’s just a fact.

    Yeah, you will have to defer to a professional. When your analysis matches up with reality on a regular basis, you might have some call for comparison. There are plenty of commenters here with more experience than I in Delaware politics. You are not one of them.

    Like you, I am not going to defend the statements of others who are not on Chip’s side (you’ll notice, by the way, the measured tone of Cassandra’s first post on this subject, as opposed to the hysterical screeching of most of his defenders. Ask yourself why the response was so much more emotional and hysterical than the original post.) I don’t spend much time thinking about pie-in-the-sky proposals that won’t go anywhere in the real world, and I put Chip’s in that category, just as I put the McDowell single-payer bill there. I am not interested in theories of perfect governance, which is why I pay no attention to the proposals of libertarians, either.

    Now, if you haven’t done so already, read the long comment I wrote about what’s going on here. Tell me the parts where your analysis differs from mine.

  114. Geezer says:

    “So all my factual claims remain unchallenged. Because they are true.”

    I don’t know if they’re true or not, because I’m not interested in doing the research. I know the history, I know the political science, and I know with a high degree of probability how this will end.

    If I thought Chip was following a plan rather than flying by the seat of his pants, I might think differently. But routinely so far in his young political career, he has reacted with a frenzy just short of panic to every development, major or minor. This is what I mean by him lacking the temperament for the job.

    That, to me, means far more than where the money gets parked. It’s not merely about his next job; it’s about doubts he is raising about his ability to do this one without screwing something up. The job requires a cautious man, not a risk-taker — especially a risk-taker who has either a non-existent or poorly calibrated risk-reward analysis scale.

  115. puck says:

    At some point again, the Governor will stand before us and will somberly tell us “We have to cut X dollars in services.. hard choices… fiscal responsibility… etc.”

    The last thing he wants is a Treasurer’s report telling us we are passing up X dollars in returns on our money.

    And yes, the report would also include a risk analysis – that is why you hire an expert firm to do the analysis.

  116. puck says:

    “I don’t know if they’re true or not, because I’m not interested in doing the research. ”

    Similarly, I am not interested in your analysis of Chip’s post-Treasurer future. At this time, I find the facts much more compelling.

  117. Geezer says:

    I’m talking about his PERSONAL risk. And if you’re not interested in how this move affects his career, you have no hope of understanding it.

    The reason the money returns so little is that under the current system there is virtually no risk at all.

    Some of his supporters here have said he wanted a better return for less risk, which is impossible.

    “The last thing he wants is a Treasurer’s report telling us we are passing up X dollars in returns on our money. And yes, the report would also include a risk analysis – that is why you hire an expert firm to do the analysis.”

    This is not the way you win the fight Flowers is fighting. This is Delaware, and the suggestion that we take on more risk for a bigger return will not play well with our fiscally conservative electorate. Indeed, that fiscal conservatism is what marks the Democrats in high elective office in this state. Perhaps you have noticed that?

    Whether we should accept more risk is a debatable point. Flowers, by his ill-considered allegations (such as that this is “about personality,” which is laughable, and his supporters’ charge that it’s about race, which is offensive), has made himself less likely to win such a debate.

    I am ignoring an unimportant issue. Your are ignoring the most important issue.

  118. puck says:

    “This is Delaware, and the suggestion that we take on more risk for a bigger return will not play well with our fiscally conservative electorate. ”

    If that is true, then surely the independent reports will validate the status quo, and the Governor should welcome them. The resistance to seeing the numbers is highly suspicious.

    The underlying point is that there are a range of low-risk investments to choose from, and even within the low-risk category we may be paying a premium.

    If after a few years the independent reports show we are already getting the best possible deal and lowest risk, then I’d be the first to say let’s stop wasting money on the reports.

  119. PleaseStopCassandra says:

    It is really good to see a healthy discussion on this issue from puck and geezer. I don’t want to interrupt but I want to say one point in response to geezers comment about increasing return while reducing risk. it can be done. Earlier this week, almost all the banks were downgraded. Flowers’ report warned that the state had too much invested in the financial sector, over 20 percent (I could be wrong about the number). If true, the state probably took an unnecessary risk by failing to diversify. So, by diversifying, the state could reduce risk and increase returns by spreading the funds in safe instruments in other sectors (industrials, larfe caps, etc.). I know you may disagree geezer, but flowers could have told the press about the money lost due to the Cash Board and Governors strategy and the proposed increase in power. Im sure this blog would have taken a different tone. Anyway, I dont want to nterrupt the good discussion between you two as the politicos and staff people will descend on this like flies on shit.

  120. Podium says:

    “What duties of the treasurer has he failed to perform?”

    None. In fact he has made a series of good government changes, including increasing transparency in his office. He actually gets sneered at by the “Dirty Half Dozen” for his annual report which spells out what he wants to do in the coming year and what he did previously. He is the first treasurer to do this and you would think progressives would applaud him for it.

    “So let’s accept this as Fact No. 1, shall we? That Chip’s motivation in all this is furthering his career?”

    No, how about we not accept this fact. If that is his sole goal his best bet would be to stay quiet, play the game, not do anything controversial for years and wait his turn. He is by far the youngest of the state’s top officials. He isn’t an idiot–see his educational credentials. He knows what the safe and most likely route to the top is. Ask Denn or Carney.

    On the one hand he is destroying his political career but on the other all he cares about is becoming Governor in 2016. If his career is over in two years, as some claim (hope!) it will be, all this talk about Governor should be academic.

    What difference does it make to you if he does achieve higher office? I don’t obsess over your guys’ future prospects. Does Chip threaten your personal future plans/employment or something? Is Governor Flowers so much worse than Governor Denn for you?

    Why did he lag behind the ticket? Name recognition, using up nearly all his funds in the primary while Bonini was loaded for the general election. To expect him to match the far better known Carney and Coons is unrealistic. The real test of his popularity will be 2014.

    I prefer Chip gets promoted to higher office but I am not going to obsess over it. Be honest: you all realize he is not dead and have various reasons for fearing his promotion. It is no coincidence it is the same 4-6 people bashing him, with or without the facts, in every thread involving him.

    The Chip support does come from about the same number of people. The difference is our agenda is transparent: we like Chip and are defending him.

    Your agenda? I think you have some odd personal fixation with the guy. You are not personally threatened by him. Your radio show will continue regardless of what he does.

  121. cassandra_m says:

    In fact he has made a series of good government changes, including increasing transparency in his office.

    Actually, he hasn’t. I certainly don’t know any more about that office than I did previously. And a report on an office that oversees money that is so devoid of numbers isn’t especially reliable. YMMV. But don’t come here and expect that the people who read and write here don’t know better.

    And what is interesting about this is that you’d think that if Chip wanted to break the crockery, he could do it right here. Why not just publish the minutes of the Cash Management Board meetings? Why not just publish what the Delaware Way bankers are supposed to be not doing? Why not tell people (in numbers) about the state of the cash accounts?

    I’d be way more sympathetic to this claim of transparency if there actually was any. What he does (and what that report does) is churn up alot of marketing spin that gets sold as transparency. If that office exists to manage the cash and you give me a report that doesn’t tell me the state of that cash, then your report is bullshit. If Chip was running a revolution he would throw the doors wide open and let it fall where it may. But that’s not the agenda — the agenda is more power and turf for Chip and he can’t figure out how to get there. You can defend that if you want, but there is nothing about this that demonstrates any chops whatsoever for higher office.

    Unless he wants to run as a republican, in which he’s got the whining skill down pat.

  122. puck says:

    Why not just publish the minutes of the Cash Management Board meetings?

    Good point – Chip should start doing that, and also issuing public notice of the meetings. I’m not sure who keeps the minutes now. Guess who kept the minutes when Jack Markell was Treasurer?

    Why not just publish what the Delaware Way bankers are supposed to be not doing?

    …um, that’s what the independent consultant is for. The independent consultant Markell doesn’t want the Treasurer to have.

    Why not tell people (in numbers) about the state of the cash accounts?

    These reports are available on the Finance website, although not in high detail regarding investments. Also, the Board is supposed to submit annual reports to the GA – not sure if those have been published or not. The Board is exempt from FOIA on the topic of investment strategies – but as the Governor’s team has shown, nothing prevents Board members from discussing them publicly. So yeah, Chip should do that.

    there is nothing about this that demonstrates any chops whatsoever for higher office.

    There’s that obsession again. Since when is that a requirement for Treasurer?

  123. puck says:

    LOL… here’s why the minutes aren’t published:

    It was immediately clear the session would be contentious. The board could not even agree to approve the minutes of its previous meeting. Flowers had drawn them up. Bullock, the secretary of state, suggested they did not reflect the heat of a discussion that took place then about Flowers’ plan. The minutes were set aside.

    That’s right – the Governor’s man didn’t feel the minutes included enough smear.

  124. Sussex Watcher says:

    One disturbing item has come out of this. FOIA says of meeting notices:

    “In addition, all public bodies in the executive branch of state government that are subject to the provisions of this chapter shall electronically post said notice to the designated State of Delaware website approved by the Secretary of State.”

    That site in Delaware is the Public Meetings Calendar site, and a search reveals no meetings of the CMPB – ever.

    Who dropped the ball and broke the law?

  125. puck says:

    Past meetings are on the schedule at calendar.delaware.gov (look for meetings by agency, under Treasurer). But the most recent meeting noted is October 6, 2011. There are no future meetings noted. The the last minutes posted were on Feb 23, 2009, signed by Velda.

  126. Sussex Watcher says:

    Thanks, puck. Funny, I figured searching for “cash management policy board” would bring up the cash management policy board …

    So both Velda and Chip have failed in providing proper transparency by not posting the minutes. What I’d also like to see are draft minutes posted. Otherwise, minutes wouldn’t be posted until after they’re approved and official at the next meeting – and this body only normally meets twice a year, so the public unable to attend would find itself shut out.

    I’d also suggest to anyone still paying attention that meetings be rotated among the counties or held in Dover, a central location. Buena Vista may be nice, but it’s also a long way from Sussex.

  127. puck says:

    “So both Velda and Chip have failed in providing proper transparency by not posting the minutes”

    Where does it say the Treasurer is responsible for posting the minutes? Responsibility ultimately lies with the Chairman, who is not the Treasurer. The Governor controls this Board so he’d better start taking responsibility for it. Also, this.

    The Chairman is also responsible for posting public notice. Unless he is claiming all Board activities are exempt from FOIA.

  128. Thetempest says:

    This account has been created sine a string of flowers supporters can’t seem to post on DL. Wonder why Cassandra. Anyway, please stop the bs and letvpeople express their views. We haven’t abandoned you, puck! We’ve been silenced. This post was sent to me by PleaseStopCassandra who has blocked with a few others.

    “The treasurer is not part of the executive branch.  Also, if the minutes were not approved there its nothing to post.  Did anyone see the NJ article today.  I find it insulting that the editors keep using adjectives to describe flowers.  Why is the states only african american official seem to get an adjective in print.   Bawky treasurer, bombastic treasurer.  They are one step away from calling him that Ni—- treasurer.  I’ve never seen such blatant labeling in a newspaper.  I guess we are  the south.  Finally, I dont remember flowers’ statement mentioning closed doors.  Didnt he claim the treasury didn’t know about it.  Our paper really sucks and apparently is a little racial.”

  129. Geezer says:

    “His best bet would be to stay quiet, play the game, not do anything controversial for years and wait his turn. He is by far the youngest of the state’s top officials. He isn’t an idiot–see his educational credentials. He knows what the safe and most likely route to the top is. Ask Denn or Carney.”

    Yes, precisely. He isn’t an idiot, yet he’s taking a suicidal course of action. I’ve met and talked to Chip Flowers many times. I don’t think he has the patience to go about this the less risky way. And once you look past his educational credentials, ask yourself why he washed out at Skadden Arps. I don’t think he has the personality to wait patiently for anything.

    “Why did he lag behind the ticket? Name recognition, using up nearly all his funds in the primary while Bonini was loaded for the general election. To expect him to match the far better known Carney and Coons is unrealistic. The real test of his popularity will be 2014.”

    Agreed. But I think racism and bitterness over the primary also played major roles. Either way, he can’t claim to have the public behind him after a narrow victory.

    “Your agenda? I think you have some odd personal fixation with the guy. You are not personally threatened by him.”

    I have an odd fixation with behavior that falls outside what I’d consider normal parameters. This is the strangest behavior by an otherwise intelligent person I’ve seen in a long time. I think I made that clear by comparing it to self-immolating Buddhist monks.

    I also have an odd fixation with challenging phony “unaffiliated” comments by people who very obviously have an affiliation. Cassandra banned some people because they have the same IP address. I don’t think they’re all the same people; the writing styles are different. I think they’re all posting from the same office. Guess which one I think it is. That’s the only reason I got involved in this issue in the first place.

    If the Flowers supporters were attaching their names to their comments — heck, even if they’re regular commenters like Puck — I’ll take them seriously. But I am troubled by the tenor of the attacks on the governor that, dollars to donuts, came straight out of the treasurer’s office. And I suspect I know where it comes from. Chip has, in his short career, already compared the governor to Hitler and Nixon. Can Stalin be far behind?

    So, to your comment about which one I prefer for governor, Denn or Flowers, it’s no contest. Matt Denn was the most pro-consumer insurance commissioner in at least 30 years, and fights like a piranha. If Chip Flowers gets in the water against him, he will be stripped to a skeleton in minutes.

    It’s a shame, really. He’s the first African-American politician with great credentials and no ties to the cesspool of Wilmington politics. But to get higher he needs allies, and I’m not convinced he knows how to make them.

  130. Geezer says:

    “They are one step away from calling him that Ni—- treasurer. I’ve never seen such blatant labeling in a newspaper.”

    Thank you for illustrating my point. See, Podium and Puck — this is the kind of shit that will kill Flowers.

    Hey, treasury employees: There are names for Flowers’ behavior. Balky and bombastic are accurate. I’m usually the first to criticize the newspaper’s shortcomings, but this is ridiculous.

    The true editorial board of the newspaper (several names there are people with other duties who in reality have nothing to do with writing the editorials) consists of two people — John Sweeney, who is white, and Rhonda Graham, who is African-American. You don’t have to be in The Treasury to calculate that the staff is therefore 50% African-American.

    By the way, just because the office is independent of the executive does not mean the treasurer isn’t part of the executive branch. It’s not legislative and it’s not judicial.

  131. puck says:

    Thanks guys, but I’m doing OK by myself.

    Speaking of sock puppets, the Governor’s smear campaign cranks into high gear, enlisting some anonymous sock puppet at the News Journal to publish more lies under the byline “Dialogue Delaware.” So much for the credibility of traditional media vs. blogs. At this point it is obvious that the Governor’s team knows they are lying but just doesn’t care. They have the ability to make the lie appear in enough places that it shapes the debate.

    Where to begin… other than the un-journalistic tone biased against Flowers, start with the headline:

    Administration reigns in balky treasurer through budget bill

    Wrong – Selander said the changes only preserve the status quo. Which is it?

    So what was the language in the bill? It allows the policy board to extend those management contracts for an additional year while Credit Suisse and Flowers conduct their review of the portfolio’s performance and report back.

    Wrong. The contracts are already in place; the Board isn’t a party to them and isn’t extending them.

    Many saw the move as an inappropriate attempt to gain more control over a couple billion dollars in state investments.

    There’s the “Many people say” style of journalism. It’s what you do when you got nothing. A perfect vehicle for a smear campaign. There won’t be a real source cited, because the claim is a lie. So now we have an anonymous journalist citing anonymous sources.

    The budget language – which was inserted into the budget at the request of Controller General Russ Larson during a public Joint Finance committee mark-up meeting

    So now we have a name – good. That’s something to work with. Now we just need the name of the waterboy legislator who filled the request. Shouldn’t be too hard to find.

    And then there’s Selander himself with an explosion of the usual smears for the grand finale:

    “No past state treasurer has taken Mr. Flowers’ position that they could unilaterally select the state’s investment advisers and alter longstanding investment guidelines.

  132. Thetempest says:

    Sorry, Geezer, I’m not a staffer. Can you name one example of the NJ using an adjective to describe an elected official and manipulating a written statement? You are intelligent Geezer and I presume you read the statement. Did he say anything about closed doors? Come on Geezer, even you have to agree with this. Puck is right, it’s the Chairs job with the minutes. As far as the political analysis, flowers is not on thee ballot this year and no one is questioning his competency. I’m not a pollster but I think it not wise to assume if a person is pro-Markell they are anti-flowers and vice versa. Ironically, the last politicians that were accused of not waiting were Markell and VP then Councilman Biden. So that argument is not strong. By the way, I know Chip and he left Skadden to go to Harvard and then started his own law firm, which is very successful. You are very wrong in saying that he washed out at his prior firm by leaving to go to Harvard. We agree, he is intelligent, but I’m not sure the people on this blog know his true political goals. When I talk to him, it seems like he gets annoyed about people assuming that he wants higher office. he is young, bright and talented and I’m not sure that he acts to move up the ladder. Personally, as you know Geezer if you know him, he is honest and focused on trying to do the right thing. I think (just my opinion) he really likes being treasurer and challenging the status quo. Too early to tell if voters will accept or reject this shift. Voters in New Jersey did. So, let’s not assume that Chip is done, when most people thought he wouldn’t win a primary or the general when he did.

  133. I agree that Chip’s going out on a limb is a personal risk but in my view a brave one. He may or may not have ambitions to challenge Denn in 2016 for Governor……the fevered comments here seem to believe it and out comes the hate!! I say grow up. Chip is in his late thirties and will probably enjoy a long career in Delaware politics regardless of this current kerfluffle.

    The NJ story was precipitated by Markell’s people, not the Treasurer after all. Chip jumped in to tell his side.

    One Cash Management Board investment risk he mentioned last Tuesday, in purchasing lump sum JPMC bonds for example, was high-lighted the day the story broke about JPMC’s own continued risky dark trading taking a 2 billion (and guessed to be many more billion) dollar hit.

    Chip’s feels that the CMB assessment will suggest a more reasonable investment policy via diversification of the investments and with that a better return.

    The OMB’s management of our Pension garners a %20 return precisely because it is in risky investments, right? All Chip is looking for is a safer, more diversified investment strategy for the CMB.

  134. Geezer says:

    Puck: If you’re trying to figure out who’s threatened by upending the status quo, you ought to widen your circle of suspects. Jack Markell is hardly the only important Delaware Democrat with strong ties to the banking world. And the current system was designed and put in place by the one who’s been there longest, Tom Carper.

    There are a surprising number of agencies that date back to Carper’s time as governor that the Senator, or his acolytes, take a strong interest in preserving.

  135. Geezer says:

    “Chip is in his late thirties and will probably enjoy a long career in Delaware politics regardless of this current kerfluffle.”

    Now there’s a bet I’ll take.

  136. Dave says:

    “Also, if the minutes were not approved there its nothing to post.”

    If a meeting was held, minutes are required. If the minutes as presented were not approved, corrections are made and the corrected minutes are approved. There is no case where minutes are not approved. If multiple meetings are conducted and no minutes are published, the board process has a failure.

    Meetings/documents of the board relating to investment strategy or negotiations concerning investments are exempt from FOIA. So even though minutes must be kept, they are not required to publish or release the minutes when they pertain to investments, which presumably almost every meeting does.

  137. Geezer says:

    “The NJ story was precipitated by Markell’s people, not the Treasurer after all. Chip jumped in to tell his side.”

    Comparing the governor and his staff to Nixon might be “telling his side,” but it’s doing it in the typical inflammatory, ill-considered Flowers style.

    “Ironically, the last politicians that were accused of not waiting were Markell and VP then Councilman Biden. So that argument is not strong.”

    I already covered this. Markell spent 10 years waiting, not one and a half. Biden never expected to win.

    “By the way, I know Chip and he left Skadden to go to Harvard and then started his own law firm, which is very successful. You are very wrong in saying that he washed out at his prior firm by leaving to go to Harvard.”

    Bullshit. Nobody leaves a partner-track job at Skadden to do anything else — especially not somebody who likes money as much as Chip does.

    “Personally, as you know Geezer if you know him, he is honest and focused on trying to do the right thing.”

    I said I know him, not I worship him. He is no more honest than your average politician, and no more focused on doing the right thing than the average politician.

    “I think (just my opinion) he really likes being treasurer and challenging the status quo.”

    When the status quo have the same letter after their names that you do, challenging it is a suicide move.

    “Too early to tell if voters will accept or reject this shift. Voters in New Jersey did.”

    They voted out one party and voted in another. And none of those people had Chip’s drawback of no party structure and no personal following — you few excepted — behind him.

    “So, let’s not assume that Chip is done, when most people thought he wouldn’t win a primary or the general when he did.”

    He won the primary because his opponent had the political instincts of a three-toed sloth. He won the general by the skin of his teeth against a guy considered a clown even by his own party.

  138. Thetempest says:

    Geezer, while I respect your opinion, we will have to disagree on your anaylsis. Why be partner at a firm whn you can own the firm! Again, he is smart with money. Dave, you are incorrect. The proposed minutes were probably posted, but the Chair probably didn’t want the draft posted as puck researched. That NJ article was bs, but what else is new. Its clear that he is thorn to most peoples future political plans and all stops will be put out to get rid of him in 2014. I think this strategy will backfire. Time will tell.

  139. cassandra_m says:

    This account has been created sine a string of flowers supporters can’t seem to post on DL. Wonder why Cassandra.

    It isn’t a string of Flowers supporters. It is a couple of you who can’t seem to pick one name and stick with it. That would be the rule here — one name. And you can’t usurp anyone else’s name, either. Sockpuppets get no quarter. So tell Chip the next time he sends folks over here to make the arguments he can’t sell anyplace else, that he should tell his folks to abide by the rules.

    If you want to be here as a regular commenter, you will need to email me directly with the pseudonym you intend to use.

  140. puck says:

    Geezer – I know about the Nixon reference. The quote was “Nixonian smears,” which is pretty darn close to the mark. It’s more accurate to say “Nixonian smear” than to claim there were no smears.

    But do you have a reference and a quote for when Flowers compared the governor to Hitler? I’d like to see that, can you produce it?

    And you are still insisting on talking about Flowers’ future, when the issue is in the present.

  141. Sussex Watcher says:

    Dave,

    Incorrect. Minutes have to be made and posted no matter what. They are the official record that a decision was made. Minutes of executive sessions are exempt from release, but even if the entire details are exempt, there should be minutes saying a meeting was held on this date, these people were present, these topics were discussed and the board voted to do this.

    I hope there are actually minutes, but the failure to post them for several years suggests a lacksidasical attitude toward transparency that is not comforting.

    By the way, it’s perfectly reasonable to expect the Treasurer -excuse me, the Treasury – to take minutes. He has the professional staff that advises the board and he posts the notices, after all.

  142. puck says:

    By the way, it’s perfectly reasonable to expect the Treasurer -excuse me, the Treasury – to take minutes.

    The Board can select anyone it wants to take minutes. Do you know who they selected? Me neither. Especially since they aren’t posting minutes.

    But if it’s not getting done, the responsibility (and the legal obligation) falls on the Chairman to make sure it gets done. And if the Chairman can’t or won’t do it, the buck stops with the guy who appointed him. You know, the guy with all that juice and all those management skills – why can’t he make sure minutes are lawfully published?

    He has the professional staff that advises the board

    Well, until the new budget language is passed he does.

    and he posts the notices, after all.

    Where do you see that it is the Treasurer’s responsibility to post the notices? The Board is within the Executive branch.

    Since neither the minutes or the notices are being posted, I’d hope to see Flowers post them even if he has to go rogue to do it, since he is the only one who has shown an interest. But it’s not part of his duties. It’s part of somebody else’s duties.

  143. Sussex Watcher says:

    Flowers posted the last several notices that I looked at.

    The last minutes were prepared by Velda. Celia reported Chip prepared one set of minutes.

    Ergo, in the absence of contradictory facts, it is reasonable to expect that the Board has selected the People’s Treasurer to serve as secretary.

    Again, as Geezer has stated, Chippie is in the executive branch, too. As are Beau, KWS and Wagner. There’s the judicial, legislative and executive branches of government; the independent agencies clearly don’t fall into the J or L categories.

  144. puck says:

    Jack Markell is hardly the only important Delaware Democrat with strong ties to the banking world. And the current system was designed and put in place by the one who’s been there longest, Tom Carper.

    Back then the Cash Management Policy Board was the good-government reform. Now the Board is 35 years old, and today’s good-government reform is the outside review of the Board. The intense resistance to that review is the giveway something is rotten inside. Chip is definitely onto something here.

  145. puck says:

    “in the absence of contradictory facts, it is reasonable to expect that the Board has selected the People’s Treasurer to serve as secretary.”

    This is stupid speculation. Even if that’s what happened – which is unlikely – that’s not how committees work. You can’t compel someone to take minutes by majority vote. They have to accept, and may decline or resign later.

    The Board has been anything but reasonable. And based on the way the Board has treated Chip, I’d be damned before I served as their secretary.

    On second thought, if I were Chip, if they asked me to take minutes I’d tell them “Sure – as soon as you approve the last set of minutes I took.”

    But I would publish my own Treasurer’s notes on the meeting. Then the Board can go f**k themselves for official minutes.

  146. Sussex Watcher says:

    … Aaaaand he hasn’t done that, either. So much for transparency and good government and shining a light on the good ol boy network of bankers and Markell. Your guy can’t even figure out an Internet site.

    (One can also hear the phrase “Jewish bankers” coming from the mouths of the Chipster’s legions of fans here who, except for puck, only seem to post during the work week … Might be interesting to FOIA a list of state government IP addresses and compare to the sockpuppets …)

  147. puck says:

    Aaaaand he hasn’t done that, either.

    I’m sure there are thousands of other things he hasn’t done that also aren’t his job. Your point?

    There may be reasons of courtesy for not publishing unapproved minutes. But the governor’s team has now forfeited courtesy.

    By establishing a web of smears, fabrications, and omissions surrounding the Treasurer’s office, the Governor is himself putting Delaware’s financial credibility at potential risk. Even more than outside review, investors hate dishonesty.

  148. anon says:

    Geez, enough with the Flowers bashing. The guy is doing a good job and voters don’t care about this petty crap. When was the last voter to vote on minutes. Who cares? No one but staffers.

  149. puck says:

    Just noticed the News Journal sockpuppet’s Freudian slip in the headline:

    Administration reigns in balky treasurer through budget bill

    And professional journalism is more credible than blogs… why again?

    I guess they laid off the copy editor as well as the factchecker.

  150. Dave says:

    “Incorrect. Minutes have to be made and posted no matter what.”

    I don’t think so. Minutes are always required but do not have to be posted.

    DEL CODE § 2716 : CASH MANAGEMENT POLICY BOARD. (5) Meetings and/or documents relating to investment strategy or negotiations concerning investment of money belonging to the State shall be exempt from Chapter 100 of this title.

  151. puck says:

    “Exempt from FOIA” doesn’t mean they CAN’T be released. Just ask the Governor’s office about whether it’s OK to release internal communications among board members. Like I said, Flowers should release Treasurer’s notes on the meeting, without wasting time asking for approval from people who have no interest in transparency.

    I know Geezer has spent a lot of time laying out how Flowers needs to toe the line of the Delaware Way. But does anyone seriously think the misinformation campaign against him will stop if he does? I can’t imagine Flowers’ silence buying any support whatsoever from this Administration. The grudge began when he beat their yes-(wo)man candidate, and it’s not going to stop for anything. The only way out is forward.

    The misinformation campaign is effective and, as Geezer says, will prevail. The engineering of it is a thing of beauty. The News Journal sockpuppet article provides yet nanother vehicle for commenters to redistribute the smears. It’s a tsunami of lies, both told knowingly by the malicious, or unknowingly by the gullible.

    Look at the first comment on the NJ article. I suppose after posting this I will have to come back and point out the errors for those who can’t spot them. Giving the benefit of the doubt that the commenter is an earnest independent, the comment shows the effectiveness of the combined media/governor’s office smear campaign:

    Hopefully Mr. Flowers understands that there are still $650 trillion in derivatives on the world markets that can take a bite out of the market at any time, just like they did in 2008. Look at the recent JPMorgan trades. So he better proceed cautiously with taxpayers money. Everyone wants higher returns, but with those higher returns comes higher risk. I have no doubt that Credit Suisse is offering higher returns, but the risk involved may explain why they were recently downgraded 3 levels.

    Even though Treasurer is an elected office, that doesn’t mean the office stands alone, any more than a CFO does. They have to stay within the risk management tolerance and policies of the institution. And yes, there needs to be oversight. Delaware has seen way too many cases of misappropriation and mismanagement in other levels of government, and we certainly don’t want to see it at the state level.

    http://www.sfgate.com/business/bloomberg/article/Credit-Suisse-Cut-3-Levels-as-Moody-s-3653420.php

  152. WilmingtonDEDem says:

    Wow! It’s amazing what this post has turned into this week. Puck, who is always on DL, brings up some interesting points. People rip him and make it personal. Cassandra is now censoring the blog. Being a regular poster, I hope my post actually makes it. Then again, who knows since I never thought I would see such censorship on a liberal blog! Our paper prints a completely one-sided opinion piece and tries to disguise it as an actual news piece and “liberals” on here try to defend it. It’s nice to see the News Urinal picking sides in another situation where they should just deliver facts. It is a joke of a paper and here is another example of how classless they can be.

  153. puck says:

    The funny thing is, I support Markell in general, and of course I did and will vote for him. It’s just that now he has a shitstain on his pants. I’d rather he had used his political skills to avoid that. All he had to do was let Flowers have an upperdown vote on his proposals, and this whole thing would have been properly resolved in an orderly and unquestionable way. But the Governor took the drama queen route.

  154. Geezer says:

    “But do you have a reference and a quote for when Flowers compared the governor to Hitler? I’d like to see that, can you produce it?”

    I think it’s back in the DL archives, which I don’t know how to search. IIRC the quote, it was something along the lines of, “So Markell wrote a book. You know who else wrote a book? Hitler.”

    And it doesn’t matter how ACCURATE the Nixon reference was (and it was). The point is it’s incredibly IMPOLITIC. It’s not the sort of thing you say about a fellow Democrat unless you have decided you are never going to get along with the person so you might as well declare war.

    It’s not as if Markell was Minner, who could have used a thrashing from her fellow Democrats. I understand your suspicions, but I’ll be quite surprised if there’s anything to find in a review except a conservative, possibly over-conservative, strategy for where to put the money. It doesn’t mean it’s impossible, but I’m having a difficult time determining a motive, considering that Markell is personally rich and has no opposition to speak of in November — by which I mean neither he nor his campaign has any need of money, so I rule out money as the motive.

  155. Geezer says:

    “Being a regular poster, I hope my post actually makes it. Then again, who knows since I never thought I would see such censorship on a liberal blog!”

    You can’t be that regular; this is hardly the first time Cass has blocked commenters. So get over being shocked! shocked! about it. That’s some lame-ass crap right there.

    “Our paper prints a completely one-sided opinion piece and tries to disguise it as an actual news piece.”

    Horseshit, bucko. If you think the original article was “one-sided,” when it quoted Chip extensively, you’re too stupid to be a regular poster here.

  156. Just an interesting aside:

    How much power does Geezer have on this blog to be posting anonymously his/herself? Geezer’s day job holds the responsibility of and ability to heavily influence local politics.

    Yet here, those who may choose to argue against Geezer’s position or object to his characterizations of topic subjects may be cowed if they can’t do so under an anonymous handle…..because of who they are publicly and/or that their identities are known even under the anony handle.

    With the often petty and vituperative comments from old Geez, who wants to place a target on their back if they also, for one or another reason, also must or want to engage Geezer during the day job? Quite a few of these low brow attacks if done during the day job would cause Geezie’s boss to force apologies all around.

    It is just uncomfortable tying to guess how much cross over antagonism may be likely.

    I can imagine that some simply are silenced altogether under this blog’s administration’s unyielding rooting and exposing and even banning those choosing to place their comments under occasional anonymity. Geezer is by far the most ubiquitous typer including all of the blog’s administration rolled into one.

  157. anon says:

    Motive for Markells Nixon strategy is obvious. Geezer, you are right, money is not the motive. Jack runs for President in 2016. Being, Jack, he wants his cake and he eat too. He knows he won’t likely get it, but Carper is unlikely to serve out his term. Sooooooo, he figures he needs someone in the Governors chair to appoint him to the Senate. It sure won’t be Governor Flowers. He needs Beau to become Governor to avoid a fight for the seat. Didn’t anyone notice Markell started this after the White House recognized Flowers. He figured I better stop this guy. Who do you think is pushing the Biden for Governor stuff. Not Beau but Jack. Sorry, Denn. Politics is politics.

  158. socialistic ben says:

    this thread is more entertaining than Jerry Springer…. i think im going to make actual suck puppets and reenact it.

  159. Geezer says:

    Yeah, Nancy, and I know some HIGH DEMS, too.

    “Geezer’s day job holds the responsibility of and ability to heavily influence local politics.”

    My last day job had more. I got in a lot of trouble at that one for attacking my bosses’ favorite politicians — you know, another of those guys you like because he pays attention to you and you don’t know when you’re being used.

    “Quite a few of these low brow attacks if done during the day job would cause Geezie’s boss to force apologies all around.”

    And out comes the censorship card. Funny how I only ever get that threat from “liberals.”

    Nice to see I have a Nancy nickname now. You have a great deal of nerve calling anyone else “lowbrow” when you can’t even type the name Paul Clark without adding the -y to show that you’re — what, 10?

  160. Geezer says:

    “Jack runs for President in 2016.”

    Call 911. I’m sure they have something to counteract whatever you’ve been ingesting. Bath salts can be nasty stuff.

  161. ‘. The point is it’s incredibly IMPOLITIC. It’s not the sort of thing you say about a fellow Democrat unless you have decided you are never going to get along with the person so you might as well declare war.

    Geezer’s own words sort of sum up what I feel he is doing. Being impolitic. He’s constantly throwing down the gantlet of war on other typers. Just substitute ‘say about a fellow Democrat’ with ‘say about a fellow Delawarean’ and you’ve got it. Geez is an anony handle but the person in certainly not an anonymous, powerless individual here in my state. The bullying gets old.

  162. That is the perfect example of stupid asinine crap that Geez likes to pull. That I am being used by Tom Gordon because Geez is the be all end of Gordonberry. What ever. Snore.

    Next I expect an exhortation like ‘well na na na I am going to support Paul Clark (because that’s how I can punish you), Nancy’.

  163. puck says:

    More importantly, this debate is being monetized in certain other media outlets. Outlets that depends on staying on the Governor’s good side.

  164. Geezer says:

    Nobody is forcing you to read it, Nancy. And I am not in politics, so I have no reason to be politic.

    Your act of sucking up to politicians because you think they can help you destroy Paul Clark gets old, too, but I don’t try to stop you from pursuing it.

  165. Geezer says:

    Nancy, I’m one of the first people who paid attention to you, and I’m one of the few who has all along. I happen not to share your anything-to-hurt-Clark obsession, but I don’t like him, either.

    How “secret” do you think my identity is? I’m not taking anonymous potshots here. I have said everything I’ve written here to Chip himself. The stuff I’ve said to his acolytes I would say to their faces, if they would show them — and it’s complete bullshit that they’re afraid to identify themselves because of my supposed great power.

  166. Geezer says:

    “this debate is being monetized in certain other media outlets. Outlets that depends on staying on the Governor’s good side.”

    I’m not sure to which outlets you refer. I have interviewed him once in his years in office.

  167. Geezer says:

    I’d also point out, Nancy, that you, not I, named your bosom buddy. So who’s impolitic again?

    Try to stay out of the deep end of the pool until you get your floaties on.

  168. I am not censuring you Geezer. Just pointing out a painful fact. Your anony handle allows you to cow us into submission with no apology in part because of the power and responsibility of your day job. I am not going to run and tell your boss like a certain missy did. No worries. Just your conscience may be getting some exercise I hope.

  169. Who do I suck up to again? Riiight.

    I joined with the Gordon campaign in 2008 because of certain things I learned (the hard way) about Chris Coons. Coonsie and Clarky acted in tandem to do the damage to the county code that was done since they took their respective positions of power in 2006.

    Don’t kid yourself that you aren’t ‘in politics’. Please.

    And your ‘clever’ omission of Gordon’s name is just as pathetic a cloak as the name Geezer. See through.

  170. another anon says:

    I would gladly post under my real name if that were required of every poster. It is hypocritical to allow a powerful radio host anonymity, as well as others (only Nancy uses her full name in this thread) and then demand supporters of one politician you hate operate under another set of rules. If Geezer is not a sock puppet what is?

  171. cassandra_m says:

    How much power does Geezer have on this blog to be posting anonymously his/herself?

    Geezer is not the issue here and he isn’t anonymous. He is a known pseudonym and you should get clear about the difference, Nancy. You still do have your own blog, right? In which case, you need to conduct your blog management lectures over there.

  172. cassandra_m says:

    And for the newbie sockpuppets who don’t even know what they are talking about, here is a good definition from Wikipedia:

    The term—a reference to the manipulation of a simple hand puppet made from a sock—originally referred to a false identity assumed by a member of an internet community who spoke to, or about himself while pretending to be another person.[1] The term now includes other uses of misleading online identities, such as those created to praise, defend or support a third party or organization.[2] A significant difference between the use of a pseudonym[3] and the creation of a sockpuppet is that the sockpuppet poses as an independent third-party unaffiliated with the puppeteer.

    You are free to be a pseudonym — which has a meaning that you will need to look up — and you are free (for the moment) to be anonymous. You just can’t be here plumping up your guy from multiple names pretending that there is some groundswell of support. No one requires you to post under your real name, although we could accommodate you on that if you want to persist in this argument.

  173. another anon says:

    How do you sign up for a pseudonym? I understand all Flowers supporters have been banned and have to register and show their papers. Is SussexWatcher here posting Brian Selander’s statements for kicks? Of course he is for the right pols so he isn’t threatened.

  174. cassandra_m says:

    You don’t sign up for a pseudonym. The sockpuppets that have been banned for using multiple names are the only ones who have been asked to email me the pseudonyms they agree to use from here on out. They’ve decided not to use that route, so at least they know that fooling our readers is just not on.

    And SussexWatcher minds his own business as we would expect you to mind yours.

  175. puck says:

    I remember the Hitler thing now. I wasn’t paying attention at the time. That was a pretty stupid comment, the kind that deserves a personal apology. I hope one was given in private.

  176. anon says:

    Flowers never called Jack that. The video is on YouTube and it shows flowers stating it is important to read a politicians plan. He said if more people had read Hitler’s plan, the world could have stopped him. To the Markell lovers, it has been used to pretend that Chip called Jack that. The video clears him, but who cares about honesty when you use Nixon tactics. Yes, I’m calling the Governors approach similar to Nixon because it’s slimy, dishonest, and based on lies.

  177. anon says:

    Isn’t it funny how the Markell camp is doing everything to avoid talking about the no bid contracts to banks for millions – which was the original issue. Somehow, they got us talking us about his political future. Lets talk about those no bid contracts Jacky boy!

  178. puck says:

    2002 article in DLC’s Blueprint Magazine:

    Ed, a 68-year-old Delaware retiree, was stunned to learn that most of his retirement funds were poorly invested, earning far below their potential. Thanks to a free class offered by the Delaware Money School — a nonprofit program founded by State Treasurer Jack Markell — Ed was able to take control of his funds for a better return on their investment.

    Markell 2002: “The more people know about what to do with their money, the better it is for the financial industry at large.”

    Markell 2012: “The State Treasurer is not otherwise authorized to retain banking and/or investment services without the consent of the Cash Management Policy Board”

    Ten years serving as the gatekeeper for Delaware’s investments can certainly change a man’s mind. And I guess DLC’ers are especially susceptible, since they are halfway there already.

  179. Sussex Watcher says:

    Dave,

    Even if part of a meeting is conducted in exec session, minutes still have to be prepared and released showing what happened in public – at a minimum, the things I identified above. All meetings have to begin and end in open session. That applies no matter what.

  180. puck says:

    @SW – I think we better check the budget bill to see if that clause has been removed from FOIA.

  181. Sussex Watcher says:

    Please look again at the definition of sockpuppet, you idiot motherfucker.

    I am not in the employ of any Delaware politician or political party, not have I ever volunteered for or contributed to same. Chip Flowers and Jack Markell could not pick me out of a crowd, and I have never exchanged more than a handful of pleasantries with either (all during the campaigns). I am an unaffiliated voter and owe no allegiance to anyone.

    I wanted to like Chip – young, articulate, educated – but from the start of his campaign, he has impressed me only with his amateurish approach and boorish behavior. He is a self-absorbed whiner who got really lucky two years ago. His policy ideas may be wonderful, but I do not trust him to be in charge of anything more important than a bake sale. His judgment is piss-poor, and he does not deserve any position of authority in this state. I will take great pleasure in voting to send him back to his law firm in two more years.

    For the record, I do not believe Delaware needs a treasurer any more than we need a county sheriff, register of wills, recorder of deeds or clerk of peace. The job is simply not needed and should be abolished. It exists as part of the politicians’ farm team system. Markell gained a grea deal of unwarranted credibility and exposure from a do-nothing job, but he’s governor now, and a damn good one at that.

  182. Sussex Watcher says:

    Puck,

    Your intentional ignorance is getting quite tiresome.

  183. puck says:

    There’s a media-wide effort to create false implanted memories about what Chip did or didn’t do. By the next election cycle, there will be those with a lingering negative impression about Flowers, but nobody will be able to recall exactly what it was. All records proving the opposite will have been deleted. Hell, even the News Journal articles will be behind the archive paywall in 30 days, but the stench will linger on.

  184. puck says:

    “Your intentional ignorance is getting quite tiresome.”

    Then go take a nap, lightweight. Didn’t count on having every point challenged with facts, did you? I’m sure you are exhausted.

  185. JPconnorjr says:

    Chip Flowers the KWS of 2014 he will win too;)

  186. puck says:

    “The more you tighten your grip, the more minor elected offices will slip through your fingers.”

    I don’t know who’s going to win, but Markell is leaving KWS alone because she is pushing the way the Wall Street money wants to go. Flowers on the other hand is pushing against the money.

  187. Sussex Watcher says:

    If there were actual facts being discussed here, I’d be thrilled. All the Chippettes can muster up is fake outrage against a smarter guy than their boss, false claims about secrecy and some ridiculous faux-populist rhetoric. You jackasses can’t even bother to read FOIA, perhaps the most clear section of state law. Your savior cloaks himself in empty words and makes sure the phrase “the people” is in every other sentence. You have no leg to stand on when it comes to criticizing others.

    Joe, I’m really sorry you’ve drank the Karen-Ade. You used to be a smart guy. In January, you’re just going to be looking for another patron to glom on to.

  188. It is definately time to call up your state senators and representatives and tell them to support an amendment to remove this offensive usurpation of Chip’s ability to conduct an independent assessment of the state’s investment strategy. Period. That is going to be my aim in the following days. Spread the word. These people don’t like to buck the Governor’s will – he tends to take it personally from what I have heard – but in the face of enough public pressure to do the right thing, maybe they will.

  189. Cass, once when I opted to type a barb under anony – forgot the context but it was probably something to do with a candidate I liked and you all hated – you rooted, exposed and publicly called me out for it. Classy Cassy.

  190. puck says:

    I wonder how many public libraries are IP-banned here by now. It’s so easy to change your home IP address, banning is basically on the honor system anyway.

  191. JPconnorjr says:

    Hey Sussex watcher the revenue I have collected in 2 years is less than I made last week now that my career is back on track. It’s about both loyalty and when actually examined by what you call actual facts she clearly deserves re election. At least I have the balls to post here in the open and take and receive shots head on, just sayin’

  192. cassandra_m says:

    And you know what, Nancy? That one time was you being a real sockpuppet, which I’m delighted you’ve admitted to. Thank you for confirming that pretty much everyone going the sockpuppet route gets the same treatment.

  193. Delaware Dem says:

    Soooooo… I go off grid for a couple of days to finish packing and I see there has been some unpleasantness.

    What is going to happen next week when I actually move?

  194. Sussex Watcher says:

    Unpleasantness, my fat redneck ass. We’re just going for the records of the longest-lived Open Thread and Most Comments (non-Donviti category).

  195. Of course I admit I tried to duck placing a target on my back while making a dicey comment by going as anony.

    Yet, I see that you allow a person who is featured here regularly in terms of the day job and actual identity to continue to post anonymously. To protect the day job….which is a valid motivation. But that privilege is not conferred to others.

    You all have a person, your most vociferous typer, who admits ‘everyone knows my real identity’ — who is allowed to juggle both real name and anony handle when convenient — and you think it is fine. yeah, Geezer types under one name and is featured on admin posts under another name. And that’s okay?

    I think the pats on the back for exposing sockpuppetry in others are a bit hypocritical. But I don’t expect a chorus of agreement. Natch.

    There is one KWS stalker who has appeared on this blog under probably twenty names yet no objection is raised. I am guessing that the rooting and exposing is done on a bias. The red flag is only raised when the topic raises ire, perhaps?

  196. socialistic ben says:

    “Geezer types under one name and is featured on admin posts under another name. And that’s okay?”

    maybe IOKIYAC? (contributor)

  197. cassandra m says:

    How many times do you need to be reminded to mind your own business, Nancy?

    There is a difference between pseudonymous and anonymous. On *this* blog, we understand the difference quite well.
    Yet, I see that you allow a person who is featured here regularly in terms of the day job and actual identity to continue to post anonymously.

    And this person is here pseudonymously. If you have a problem with that, you have your own blog to play with. No need for you to even be here, right?

    Geezer types under one name and is featured on admin posts under another name. And that’s okay?

    This isn’t even true. But that is par for the course for a Nancy Willing post.

  198. Geezer says:

    Nancy: What can’t you say to me because I use a pseudonym? You want to trash me, go ahead. You want to counter my arguments, go ahead.

    The issue isn’t my pseudonym, it’s the sudden appearance of Flowers supporters on this blog every time someone mentions his name. The notion that it happens by chance seems remote to me, but if you want to argue that, go ahead.

    In my experience, politicians with an excessive interest in controlling what’s said about them are paranoid and unwilling to trust the public to reach its own conclusions, so they try the opinion equivalent of cloud-seeding. Indeed, what are we seeing here but an extended temper tantrum — not by you, but by some of the newbie commenters — over some of us voicing the opinion that Chip’s actions are self-serving rather than brave?

    I wouldn’t ban these commenters, but I don’t do anything on this blog beyond post comments, so it’s not up to me. Personally, I was enjoying over-the-top silliness of people who think Chip Flowers will be ready to govern the state by 2016, when here in 2012 he can’t even convince the governor of his own party to give him the time of day.