An hour ago, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin not only said she would not run for re-election in 2010 but that she is also resigning from the position as Governor. This announcement comes after a failed Vice Presidential run in 2008 (sharing the ticket with Senator John McCain) while enjoying a high popularity rating among national Republicans. By resigning from her position as Governor, this frees Palin to take a more active and prominent part in the lower 48 States to position herself for a 2012 Presidential run against President Barack Obama.

I can understand the reasoning to not seek re-election. Currently, whenever she leaves Alaska to meet with national figures or attend Party events, Alaskan officials criticize her for shirking her duties as Governor (much like the complaints against Virginia Governor Tim Kaine serving as the head of the DNC). By not seeking re-election, she is free to travel not only domestically but internally as well. Additionally, she will be able to join various boards and commissions to increase the strength of her resume in preparation for a Presidential run.

I view the decision to resign her position as very worrisome. She already is a lightning rod for her detractors, especially following some of her unpolished responses in the early days of the 2008 election after she was tapped to be Vice President. The decision to “quit” during her term will be used to as the basis that she is not a serious politician and that voters cannot count on her to fulfill her duties if she were to be elected as President.

Justifying her action, Palin pointed to the “lame duck” mentality that many politicians have in the last year of their term when they know they are not going to be re-elected. She said:

So Alaska may progress, I will not seek re-election as Governor. And so, as I thought about … how much fun Governors have as lame ducks. And maybe travel around the state, travel to other states, maybe take their overseas international trade missions - so many politicians do that. Then I thought, that’s what’s wrong. Many just accept that lame duck status and they hit the road, they draw a paycheck, and they kinda milk it, and I’m not going to put Alaskan’s through that.

I’m determined to take the right path for Alaska. Even though it is unconventional and not so comfortable. With this announcement that I am not seeking re-election, I’ve determined it’s best to transfer the authority of Governor to Lt. Governor Parnell.

John McCain made an unorthodox decision last year to suspend his campaign to return to Washington to work on the TARP legislation. The decision was viewed as a great political calculation, but also a very risky maneuver if he was viewed as not being effective. The same can be said about today’s decisions by Palin.

If the people give her credit for achieving her campaign goals in only two years not wanting to waste state’s funds during the rest of her term, especially if she remains active in advocating for the state over the next two years on the national scene, then her popularity will remain high. However, if she squanders her achievements and comes across as weak on the national scene leading up to the various state elections around the country in 2010, then any credibility she might have as a viable Party Presidential candidate my be viewed as remote as her town of Wasilla.

Related articles:
KTUU TV - “Gov. Sarah Palin to resign her office July 26″
KTVA TV - “Palin will not seek re-election”
Politico - “Sarah Palin will not seek re-election”
Breitbart - “Palin resigning as Alaska governor”

The residents of Virginia went to the polls today to pick the person to represent the Democratic Party to challenge Republican nominee Bob McDonnell. The three competitors are Terry McAuliffe, Creigh Deeds, and Brian Moran. In what is being viewed as a reflection of the view of the Obama Administration, both of the two dominating parties are hoping to score big to justify their stance on national politics.

If you have followed my comments on the CNN’s boards over the year, you will know that I have viewed Deeds as the Democrats best chance to defeat McDonnell. If you remember back to the 2005 Virginia State elections, McDonnell defeated Deeds by just 360 votes, or 1.9% of the total votes cast in the Attorney Generals race. This investment into statewide name recognition, especially in the head-to-head race against McDonnell, would be difficult for Moran or McAuliffe to counter.

Additionally, Moran and McAuliffe have other issues facing them. While Brian Moran is a well-known figure Northern Virginia, so is his outspoken brother Jim Moran. Jim has a habit of making verbal gaffes, including insults towards the Jewish community and endorsing earmarks (with the use of swear words in the process). On the other hand, McAuliffe is seen as a political outsider, even though he lives in Northern Virginia. After years of being involved with Democratic National Committee, and working with the Clinton’s before that, some fear that he is trying to bring beltway politics down to Richmond.

UPDATE: The Associated Press is currently projecting Deeds as the winner, with 49.88% of the votes currently counted. McAuliffe has 26.16% of the votes, and Moran has 23.95%. In what is already viewed as the rematch of 2005, Virginia is possibly facing another close election.

Related articles:
Richmond Times-Dispatch - “Deeds is Democratic nominee for governor”
WTVR TV - “Campaign 2009: Polls Now Open”
The Washington Post - “Morning Fix: Virginia Governor’s Race Viewer’s Guide”

In less than two years time, Illinois residents will head to the polls to vote in the 2010 elections. On the ballot will be the Junior Senatorial seat currently held by Roland Burris. The question is will Burris’ name be on that ballot?

Roland Burris, one of the last official acts of deposed Governor Rod Blagojevich, has been the focus of media and political scrutiny ever since he was rumored to fill the vacated seat belonging to now President Barack Obama. Blagojevich was under investigation for attempting to sell Obama’s seat, leading to his arrest in December 2008. While lawmakers met in Springfield to debate impeaching the Governor and how to hold a special election, Blagojevich quickly acted and tapped Burris to be Obama’s successor. This appointment was seen as an insult to state lawmakers, even though the Governor had the right to make it.

While trying to distance himself from Blagojevich’s legal issues, Burris quickly departed Illinois and headed to Washington, DC to claim his seat. He was met by legal roadblocks and an inter-party concern over the association Burris might have with the Governor. Inquiries were made and Burris testified that he had not made contact or offered any concessions to Blagojevich in exchange for the Senate seat. However, this turned out not to be 100% accurate.

In February, Burris submitted an affidavit disclosing how he was in contact with the Governor’s brother, and that he wanted Burris to raise money for Blagojevich. Burris testified that he did nothing illegal nor did he raise money for the Governor while being considered for the Senate position. Faced with calls for resignation, Burris responded by saying, “I am not a tool of the Governor … I’m a tool of the people of Illinois.” This might be truer than he realizes.

Not only are there concerns over his integrity and honesty regarding his appointment, there is a growing sense of non-acceptance in Congress for his presence. Even his popular counterpart in Senate has suggested that Burris should resign. Senator Dick Durbin said, “I told him that under the circumstances, I would consider resigning if I were in his shoes.” Burris has chosen to remain, and as such more investigation into his involvement with Blagojevich has emerged.

Both the state prosecutor and the ethics committee are investigating if Burris lied under oath. The FBI has tape recordings of the conversations Burris had with Blagojevich’s brother, specifically regarding raising funds for the troubled Governor in the same conversation where Burris expressed desire for the Senate seat. Burris countered by saying the house legislature didn’t ask him that specific question during the hearings in January.  Durbin didn’t accept Burris’ explanation, saying “He didn’t come in and tell the whole story under oath.”  Some Illinois State Legislators agree.  Citing his inconsistancy in comments regarding his discussions with Blagojevich, they are calling for Burris to be either reprimanded or for him to resign.

Burris has less than two months to clear his reputation and to get some legislative victories under his belt. But with each passing week, he is drawn further and further into the web that snared Governor Blagojevich. Questions of his integrity and honesty will haunt him as next year’s campaign begins. Will his name be on the ballot? It is highly unlikely. What is likely is that the “Ghost of Blago” will lurk during the state campaigns and debates, making it harder for any Democratic challenger with the smallest association with the deposed Governor to be victorious. Burris, for his part, will most likely be watching the events from the sidelines.

Related articles:
The Washington Post - “As Burris Tries to Settle In, He Faces New Controversy”
Statesman Journal - “Burris a perjurer or smooth talker?”
The Chicago Tribune - “Burris says blame impeachment panel for their questions, not him for his answers”
Northwest Herald - “The disgrace of Sen. Burris”
MSNBC - “Congress: Durbin Spoke with Burris”
Chicago Sun-Times - “Durbin rejects Burris’ explanation”
FOX News - “Illinois State Legislators Call for Burris Resignation Over Wiretapped Conversations”
Associated Press - “Burris is an outcast in clubby Senate”

In listening to the news today, it seems odd that people seem surprised that Senator Arlen Specter switched parties from Republican to Democrat. He has been dodging rumors and claims that he was switching parties ever since the election. In fact, one of the articles on the March 13th edition of the Political Blog Weekly had an article entitled “Will Specter Go Democrat?” It just seems odd.

A current argument for his decision to switch parties is because he is trailing Pat Toomey in the Republican primary by 21% (Specter beat Toomey by 2% in the 2004 primary). If Specter wins the Democratic primary and faces Toomey in 2010, I wonder who would win. Out of curiosity, I decided to see how well Specter has performed in past elections in Pennsylvania to get an idea (data from Dave Leip’s Atlas of Presidential Elections):

- Won by 10% against Joseph Hoeffel in 2004
- Won by 27% against Bill Lloyd in 1998
- Won by 3% against Lynn Yeakel in 1992
- Won by 14% against Bob Edgar in 1986
- Won by 2% against Pete Flaherty in 1980

Other than the fact that Specter won in each of those elections, it would be hard to gauge how well/poor he will do against Toomey. It is my thought that, if 2010 is a Republican year as it was in 1994, Toomey has a chance to win. I base this on a strong Republican turn out in 2010 with a decreased Democrat turn out (compared to 2008). Specter has won Pennsylvania with Democratic support in the past elections, but his shunning of the Republican party might fire up the base enough for Toomey and tip the election in his favor. We will have to revisit this match up next year.

I can only surmise that Specter changed to the Democratic Party out of personal gain. If he truly found himself at odds over the current Republican philosophy, he should have switched to an Independent like Jim Jeffords did in 2001 or Joseph Lieberman did in 2006. However, by switching to the ideological opposite party does not reflect an issue over philosophy but rather political desperation. He needs to secure the Democratic Party endorsement in order to win in 2010. Unfortunately for Specter, this “flip flop” is instant ammunition for Toomey to use against him during the campaign.

Related articles:
Los Angeles Times - “Specter condemned Jim Jeffords’ party switch in 2001″
The New York Times - “We Didn’t Have to Lose Arlen Specter”
ABC News - “Biden Has Been Lobbying Specter to Switch Parties - for Five Years”
The Dallas Morning News - “Cornyn miffed, Hutchinson ’surprised’ at Specter switch”

In just eight days, the Inauguration will commence in Washington, DC, ushering in the Obama Administration for the next four years. The event will be marked with parades, parties, and pageantry, but most importantly the swearing in of Barack Obama as our next President. All of these events are causing the local authorities to project an attendance in the millions. However, I will not be one of them.

This Inauguration will be a historical event. You hear that mentioned everywhere you go. However, EVERY Inauguration is a historic event, just as is every election. Everyone should attend at least on Inauguration, and I have been fortunate to attend two. In 1989, I was fortunate to attend President George H. W. Bush’s Inauguration. I remember clearly standing next to the fountain on that cold morning, with thousands of my closest friends. There were 30 people lined up in front of the fountain spelling out “Congratulations President Bush” on their jackets. However, even though I was so close, I could not see nor hear the actual swearing in event.

Four years later, I had the rare privilege of participating in the Inauguration parade for President Clinton. Since staging for the parade took hours to coordinate, I was not able to see nor hear the swearing in event again, let alone take in many of the sights and other participants in the parade. I did have a unique perspective; however, as I marched past the viewing platform that enclosed President Clinton. Trying to keep my eyes and head pointed forward, it was difficult to make out the new President as we passed by.

I was out of town for the 1997 Inauguration, and the 2001 Inauguration was plagued by poor weather. I chose to skip the 2005 Inauguration for much of the same reason, as I will be skipping the 2009 Inauguration: traffic. Unfortunately, this year the traffic will be worse. Not because the roads will be crowded with cars, but because the roads will be closed. In preparation for this years Inauguration, the Virginia Department of Transportation and Homeland Security will be closing down the bridges across the Potomac River within the Beltway. Additionally, Interstates I-395 and I-66 within the Beltway will be reserved for buses, shuttles, and taxis only.

The primary entrance into the city will be through public transportation. Buses, as noted earlier, and the Metro (DC’s subway system). With the Interstates being closed within the Beltway, Virginia is limited to only four Metro stations; two stations on the Orange line, one on the Blue line, and one on the Yellow line. You can easily guess that with many visitors coming up from the South, access to these four stations will be difficult. With millions anticipated to be traveling into DC that day, the odds are that the Metro trains will be filled to capacity at these few stations in Virginia. As a result, many local businesses, and even some Government offices, are closing their doors for the day since their employees will not be able to make it into work.

With all that said, I will be staying home this year. I won’t have to commute to the event, meaning more hours to sleep that morning (not to mention the gas that I will be saving). The news channels will have cameras and microphones positioned close to the swearing in event, so I can hear and see the action. But, my most favorite reason is that I will have easy access to a clean bathroom. With millions of people projected to be in attendance, the likelihood is that there won’t be enough bathrooms available to meet the demand.

None of the above discusses the security aspects associated with the event, but that should be self-explanatory.

Related articles:
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority - DC Metro rail map
Arlinton County - “Arlington Road Closures on Inauguration Day”
Yahoo! News - “Bridges, streets being closed for inauguration”
Virginia State - “Presidential Inauguration 09: How to Get Around”