The final debate of the Presidential campaign….and, the winner is? Kristen Welker, the moderator! She actually managed to moderate a discussion of sorts.

The key question to ask, after watching the debate or hearing the news reports, are you more inclined to vote for Donald Trump?

Going into the debate, I know of no poll suggesting the momentum had shifted. Polls tell us where voters are at the moment; and, at the moment a decisive majority of voters have trended to Joe Biden.

All the Trump campaign can do is wake up this morning and seek opportunities in key states.

However, to create an opportunity for Trump, voters in Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, Iowa, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Florida and even Texas would have to had seen something about President Donald Trump to encourage them to support his reelection. Only time will tell whether this final debate made a difference in these key states.

There is a good deal of talk about how 48 million people have already voted. Truth is, that really is not all that relevant. Those voters had already made up their mind and it is highly unlikely that anything in last night’s debate would have moved them in a new direction. For most people, the discussion probably reinforced their views going into the evening.

What is important, is how many people go out and vote this weekend. If the numbers are high, it would suggest that people waited for the last debate and then decided. I would not be surprised to see early voting growing.

One other challenge for President Trump. While millions of people watched the debate and the follow on press coverage, millions will also watch President Trump’s performance this Sunday evening on 60 Minutes. And, thanks to the decision by President Trump to release his video of the interview, we know how that will go. And, there is no chance the 60 Minutes version of the interview will be better than the Trump video. What is clear is that most of the interview was a verbal battle over whether the President has a health care plan and on just how damaging Hunter Biden might be to his father’s campaign.

Health care is an important issue, but after watching the 60 Minute interview, Lesley Stahl will repeatedly remind people that the President has no health care plan. And, to the extent the President spends time trying to advance a Hunter Biden story, he is, in my opinion, dwelling on a topic few care to understand and even fewer will be moved by when it comes to their vote. Even on the President’s video, on neither topic did he look particularly strong.

So, the two major media events in the final days of the campaign stand little chance of moving the needle much when it comes to the electorate. In the end, the outcome surely hinges on something as old as elections themselves, voter turnout. If you care about how this election turns out, go out and vote!

Craig Fuller served four years in the White House as assistant to President Reagan for Cabinet Affairs, followed by four years as chief of staff to Vice President George H.W. Bush. Having been engaged in five presidential campaigns and run public affairs firms and associations in Washington, D.C., he now resides on the Eastern Shore.

I first learned that James A. Baker III would likely be President Reagan’s chief of staff just prior to the 1980 election. After the election and his announcement, my friend Mike Deaver told me Jim Baker wanted to see me in the Washington D.C. Reagan Transition office.

The meeting lasted minutes, but put me on a path for which I will always be grateful.

While we had met weeks earlier, he really knew me through Mike Deaver, slated to be the deputy chief of staff. He also knew me as a Californian who had been in the Reagan world since my days at UCLA when Reagan was governor. In the rush that is a presidential transition, I offered a California/Reagan lineage that helped Jim Baker as he was building a White House staff.

Craig Fuller and James Baker

The discussion was pretty straightforward. He told me he heard I’d be willing to join the White House staff. He had four different positions on the staff in mind and needed to juggle some things to figure out just which one would be the best fit.

So, he said, find a place to live in Washington, D.C.

This was late November 1980. I found a place to live, but a month later it still was not clear what position would be “best.” In December, he came to me and said the best position looked to be one reporting not to him but to Ed Meese who needed someone that could be counted on to fairly run the Office of Cabinet Affairs. He said it would be a great fit and we’d be working closely together.

Asked what I thought, as a UCLA political science graduate all of 29 years old, it sounded pretty good!

A few days later, in a meeting even more brief, Ed Meese, whom I knew well, asked if I would accept the position. I did. He got up to leave and said, let’s fly back to California in a couple days and we’ll discuss just what it means.

What it came to mean was full engagement for the next eight years in the White House, first as secretary to the cabinet and then as chief of staff to Vice President Bush.

Throughout the entire time, interaction with Jim Baker was a daily, sometimes hourly reality.

This first-hand view allows me to share that the quality of the book by Peter Baker and Susan Glasser about Jim Baker is remarkably accurate over the period of time we worked together. And, the willingness of not only Jim Baker but those who know him so well to let down the shield that often hides public figures, provides plenty of new and valuable light on the developments Jim Baker affected and the times that impacted his life.

It has been said that political power in Washington is like a bank account and you are either making deposits to build the account or taking out withdrawals to deal with challenges. There is no doubt that Jim Baker was a master at gaining power. There is no doubt that he focused on getting things done without always being burdened by philosophical debate.

What I saw, often delivered with remarkable cunning, was an individual determined to serve Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush the best way he knew how. Not even they always agreed with him. But, unlike many, he gathered strong people and cultivated a wide range of leaders not for his personal aggrandizement but to fulfill a mission.

The book just released is a remarkable and worthy study of a time and an individual that seem to have come together at a propitious moment in our nation’s history. His beginnings could not have predicted his impact in Washington. And, events could not have found a more able protagonist in the shaping of two presidencies and our nation’s role in the world.

Craig Fuller served four years in the White House as assistant to President Reagan for Cabinet Affairs, followed by four years as chief of staff to Vice President George H.W. Bush. Having been engaged in five presidential campaigns and run public affairs firms and associations in Washington, D.C., he now resides on the Eastern Shore.

There was a morning during a meeting of President Ronald Reagan’s cabinet when a senior White House assistant for political affairs asked to be recognized. When his turn came to speak about the policy question before the President, the aide began to explain the political consequences of making a decision on the subject. President Reagan let him speak his mind and then politely thanked him before saying, “Well, I think we’ll just figure out what the right thing to do is and let the politics take care of itself.”

When it comes to the awesome responsibility of nominating and confirming the next United States Supreme Court Justice, that notion speaks volumes.

My view, politically correct or otherwise, is that we elect a President for a four-year term. We don’t suggest to that individual that we really only want them to make important decisions for 3 ½ years of the term. Thus, the President has an obligation to consider candidates and to nominate a qualified individual for the Supreme Court when there is a vacancy. Politics, elections, pandemics really should not deter a President in doing what is right.

Then, members of the United States Senate should do, however they may individually determine it, what’s right. Each Senator has the right to judge if the qualifications of the nominee are sufficient to confirm the nominee. Their ultimate vote in favor or in opposition of a nominee should be based on qualifications. Of course, the reason behind a vote is up to the individual Senator.

The right thing to do is to allow the process to go forward.

But, the politics are, in my view, not what many may believe.

Should President Trump nominate an individual and see that person confirmed by the Senate before the election, he may actually cause himself and Senate Republicans in close races political harm.

Here’s why…

The process of nominating and confirming a new justice to the Supreme Court is not likely to change the views of voters already firmly decided for whom they will vote.

However, there are among Republican voters a number who hesitate about reelecting Donald Trump, yet they fear a shift in the balance of the Supreme Court during a Biden administration. Providing Trump with one final appointment to the Supreme Court would reduce the anxiety among these voters should they determine to crossover and vote for a change in the White House.

Conversely, should the President and the Senate place one more conservative justice on the Supreme Court, Democratic voters, not already firmly committed, would certainly be more likely to engage in the election process to vote for a President who would select justices more in line with their thinking in the future.

And, there is one additional reason for a moderate voter to favor at least a nomination. While it is possible a Trump victory would cause him to pull back a nomination to the Supreme Court who is not yet confirmed, it is unlikely. And, a Trump nomination coming after the election where no constraint of an election is a factor would not likely yield the same type of nominee.

I think President Obama was right to place an individual before the Senate as a nominee to the Supreme Court nine months before an election. I believe the same is true for President Trump even this close to the election. What the 100 members of the United States Senate decide to do and when they decide to do it is anyone’s guess.

In all of this there is one very important reminder, elections matter. In fact, three of the central actors in the drama that will play out in the weeks ahead are up for reelection: President Trump; Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell; and, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham. Let’s hope they figure out what is the right thing to do and then they can let the politics take care of itself.

One more thing…VOTE! It is the single best way to express yourself on this and so many other issues.

Craig Fuller served four years in the White House as assistant to President Reagan for Cabinet Affairs, followed by four years as chief of staff to Vice President George H.W. Bush. Having been engaged in five presidential campaigns and run public affairs firms and associations in Washington, D.C., he now resides on the Eastern Shore.

Editor’s note: Listen to this topic discussed by Al From and Craig Fuller during From & Fuller on Thursday in the Spy

Local news organizations have handed us a series of muckraking stories involving the Maryland Environmental Service, its former director, the state legislature and the governor. Seems pretty exciting. Also, might be all wrong.

Stories would have us believe that an individual – someone I have known for a long while –received a payment as he left one high-level position in State Government for the Maryland Governor’s office. The Governor and his staff seemed shocked…never heard of it…never approved it. Then we learn that the Board of the entity granting the post-employment payment did so because they thought the Governor approved of it.

Some story, right?

Well, consider this…the Maryland Environmental Service Act from the 1990s set up a “corporate” “instrumentality” of the state in order “to assist with the preservation, improvement, and management of the quality of air, land, water, and natural resources, and to promote the health and welfare of the citizens of the State…”

In every sense, about three decades ago, the State of Maryland decided to contract out to a corporation established by the state a broad range of environmental services. The Act specifically states: “The Service (MES) has all powers necessary for carrying out the purposes of this subtitle, including the following rights and powers set forth in this section…to have perpetual existence as a corporation.”

Anyone can find a very lengthy description of this in the Maryland Code, Natural Resources 3-102 through 3-130.

The Act separates the Maryland Environmental Service from state personnel systems and calls for it to establish its own. The Act even specifies methods by which people in state government will move into the new entity. The Act grants full authority to MES to set its budget, asking it to send a copy to the state Budget Office for information. The MES is to design its own strategic plan. Additionally, MES was granted authority to borrow money through bonds for projects making it clear these and other financial obligations were the responsibility of MES.

Indeed, the State of Maryland wisely decided that a more private sector approach to the large scale environmental services needed throughout the region would be better than allowing the functions to be part of a state agency.

Turns out, when Governor Hogan appointed Roy McGrath as the director of MES, the new director took his role, responsibility and independence seriously. During his tenure, the functions contracted for by the State of Maryland were performed and then MES successfully won contracts from other jurisdictions who chose to “contract out” for MES services.

Growth was fairly dramatic and the capabilities of MES expanded to better address the needs of entities throughout the region, including the State of Maryland.

Had Maryland decide to contract with a private corporation serving the region and then had the head of the organization been selected to go into the Governor’s office, few would have chosen to examine how the company compensated an outgoing leader.

Somehow, the current state officials who do not to understand the Maryland Environmental Service Act want to treat MES like the state agency it was specifically designed not to be by the Act.

Why then, the drama.

Well, most boards today would reward a very successful leader with a post-employment package. And, most corporate entities would not release the terms of such a package. For some reason, MES elected to do so. However, in doing so, they have allowed for comparisons with other organizations employing over 1,000 people with hundreds of millions of dollars in revenues. Such a comparison could fairly suggest the director of MES is underpaid in the marketplace not overpaid.

Then there is the question of the Governor’s role. Honestly, he doesn’t have one beyond the power to appoint certain people. MES exists as independent from his authority. The MES board sets and determines compensation matters. If the Governor has a view, he is certainly entitled to it, of course.

Lastly we come to the intent of the outgoing director. I have not discussed my commentary with him; however, based upon the facts, he would be just in exploring a payment recognizing his success as the head of a multimillion dollar enterprise that has successfully pursued its mission during his tenure. And, knowing that the decision by the MES board to grant a post-employment payment had or would be made, the incoming chief of staff would be faulted for not advising the Governor of the fact.

Our saga could end here but for the fact some key decision makers elected to ignore their authorities and those of the Governor.

Reportedly, MES board members sought to know if the Governor “approved” of the payment before they made a decision.

Asked to confirm the Governor’s approval, the former MES director and current Chief of Staff indicated the Governor was aware and that this action was “anticipated.”

So, the MES board sought something that should not have been given (i.e. the Governor’s approval of a post-employment package) and when told he was aware mistakenly took that for approval.

As for the Governor, there have been three phases: first, no comment; second, there was no approval or knowledge prior to the MES Board’s action; and, three, I knew nothing.

Well, the Governor could be excused for not knowing the timing of the Board’s action, but text messages recovered seem to suggest “knowing nothing” is not a good place to hang one’s hat.

What has been missed in the breathless reporting of this story is the very sound reason for setting up the Maryland Environmental Service as the state legislature did in the 1990s. Also missed is that the structure demands much of the top leader of the organization to balance environmental challenges with financial challenges and considerable public needs. To find someone who actually flourishes in such an environment is without a doubt exactly what the sponsors of the Maryland Environmental Service Act must have hoped for with the Act’s passage.

So, the Summer Sizzler is more a Shakespearean tragedy where a high price is being paid by the one individual who did the most to advance the mission of the Maryland Environmental Service.

I surely will be asked why I took the time to look into this. Yes, in no small part because Roy McGrath is my friend. But, also because if we allow people who engage in important work on behalf of citizens to bear the brunt of criticism and judgements from those who elect not to understand the facts, then we will have a difficult time recruiting people with a record of experience and good ethical judgement to these roles.

What we need is less bureaucratic agency think and more executive leadership. In this battle, executive leadership is not winning.

Craig Fuller served four years in the White House as assistant to President Reagan for Cabinet Affairs, followed by four years as chief of staff to Vice President George H.W. Bush. Having been engaged in five presidential campaigns and run public affairs firms and associations in Washington, D.C., he now resides on the Eastern Shore.

You can learn about trends by spending time at smaller local and regional airports like the Easton Airport. While they lack, or are spared from, the arrivals and departures of commercial airlines, air traffic at some of these airports seems to be increasing. Recently a passenger who is also a longtime pilot explained one of the reasons and possibly a new equation about air travel.

At the outset, he suggested what most know, flying in private aircraft today is not inexpensive. However, by observing who is flying it is clear that men and women of all ages and various income groups are piloting private planes and flying in private aircraft.

The advantages are pretty clear and our source suggested that those who fly aircraft have always enjoyed freedom and flexibility when traveling around the country. While the travel time in the air might be longer than a commercial airline option, the flying is often fun and the total time “door to door” can be about the same or even shorter for pilots and passengers than the scheduled airline alternatives.

Reports indicate that the general aviation and business aviation communities have done much to improve the safety record of flying. The technology companies supporting the aviation community produce extraordinary technology now found in the most basic aircraft. Indeed, today’s pilots suggest the array of avionics in private aircraft often exceeds what is in the commercial airliner.

Add to this, there are over 5,000 public use airports in the United States today and the airlines serve fewer than 500 (a number that’s declining).

Some may remember that about a dozen years ago, there were projections that we might suddenly see more air travel utilizing on demand aircraft, so called air taxis. What did occur was number of aircraft used for charter flights and corporate travel grew utilizing the network of small and regional airports across the country as well as the large metropolitan airfields.

However, the most interesting point made was that like so much around us today, COVID-19 may, when it comes to air travel, present a new equation when considering flying in something other than a scheduled commercial airliner.

It was pointed out that no longer is the cost of flying represented just by the ticket price. Today, it must include new risks and not the kind where metal objects are colliding.

All of us know that doing anything in close proximity to others gives thoughtful people pause with the ongoing COVID-19 battle. Surveys suggest people are wary of returning to commercial aircraft. And, if that is not enough, some airlines have publicly announced that they will be filling all the seats again – an announcement that might please some shareholders, but is hardly welcomed by their passengers.

A recent Business Insider magazine headline appeared after an airline announcement: “American Airlines will start selling middle seats again as airlines bet that customers won’t care about social distancing in flight.” To be fair, this announcement and article appeared last month.

However, the threat from hotspots has become a growing concern. Remember when things seemed out of control in Wuhan, China and countries started banning flights from China into their international airports? Well, consider these two facts:

Today, in the middle of July, the following was reported in the Washington Post:

“…Miami was declared the latest ‘epicenter of the epidemic,’ and a senior medical official compared it to Wuhan at the height of China’s struggles with the virus.

American Airlines lists 7 direct flights a day into our region from Miami and another 137 options to take flights with various connections to get into the area…all in one day.

The point raised was that we are now operating in ways thought to present high risks just a few months ago. Thus, in a very real sense, the “cost” of commercial air travel must take into consideration the personal risk associated with moving through more crowded terminals to an aircraft that may well be full.

So, suggested this one non-airline flying passenger, it only makes sense to look at alternatives to the airlines for at least for the next few months and leave the flying to two people sitting just ahead of you in a non-airline aircraft.

All of this prompted a bit of research.

There are numerous travel options today that provide people with safe, comfortable professionally flown aircraft that will actually meet you near where you live….Easton, for example.

A company called Linear Air offers a range of options from single engine piston aircraft to light jets. Another company, Wheels Up, offers a fleet of beautiful and comfortable King Air aircraft flying with multi engine turboprop efficiency as well as a wide range of small and large jets. And, if you want, you can share the cabin with just a few other people going between the same airports.

These and a multitude of other organizations provide space for several people and even pets, not to mention all sizes of bags. And, no one needs to go through busy terminals. The two-person crew take great care to ensure the aircraft are clean and sanitized between flights.

It’s clear that one key to the success of private flying is a strong local airport and we are fortunate to have one of the best run airports in the nation here in Easton. They are fully capable of sharing options for air travel. Take a look at their website for more information.

So, when people feel the need to fly for a family outing, a working meeting best done in person or need to transport members of a family or a group of colleagues, consider an approach that reduces a risk that just could present the greatest cost of all.

Craig Fuller served four years in the White House as assistant to President Reagan for Cabinet Affairs, followed by four years as chief of staff to Vice President George H.W. Bush. Having been engaged in five presidential campaigns and run public affairs firms and associations in Washington, D.C., he now resides on the Eastern Shore.

The local Fixed Base Operators (FBO) who operate out of Easton Airport are Trident Aircraft, Maryland Air and Easton Jet Service

The mask: to wear or not to wear?

People certainly have different reactions from here on the Eastern Shore of Maryland where most wear masks and comply with requests from retailers to enter stores with masks; differing from scenes of large public gatherings at beaches and other public places where a desire to return to normal for many means no mask.

Seemingly, the sense of an obligation to protect translates into a fairly broad range of behaviors. The mask offers self protection, but it also protects others against the possibility that any one individual might transmit the virus.

So, while I am comfortable with a small group of people who are symptom-free and healthy and might join them for dining or time in the afternoon, when out in the community, I wear a mask.

This obligation to protect will surely drive the way we approach life going forward. Airlines are taking steps to insure safe passage on their aircraft…safe now, not just from the nature of flight, but from the air in the cabin during the flight.

Entering a nearly empty location usually bustling for a haircut, I had my temperature taken. The practice not only protects the person tending to my hair, but the establishment has an obligation to protect me as well. The fact that I am fine doesn’t mean every other customer will be.

And, so it goes. For the many, there is a heightened sense around the need to protect ourselves and others. This obligation to protect is, I can only hope, becoming something of a core value as we work to find a new normal.

And, this was what I was thinking about when along came the tragedy of George Floyd.

For me, the outrage has much to do with the obligation to protect. A citizen in police custody deserves that and law enforcement has the obligation to deliver protection. Trained law enforcement officers work as a team to restrain people everyday. They work as a group because injury to themselves and a suspect is LESS likely than it would be in a one on one confrontation.

When the actions of one person are excessive, as the chief said above, others have an obligation to act. The situation could only prompt outrage. And, perhaps with pent up frustration, lack of employment and economic challenges a violent result was inevitable.

It is a sad outcome. And, now those being targeted for contempt are the very individuals pledged to protect us. And, from my experience, that is something the vast majority in law enforcement do. Yet, we have to realize that what might be our experience is not everyone’s experience. And, since we all deserve to be protected, we also have an obligation to better understand the disparities that exist today and leaders have the obligation to address the cause of disparities when it comes to their obligation to protect.

Craig Fuller served four years in the White House as assistant to President Reagan for Cabinet Affairs, followed by four years as chief of staff to Vice President George H.W. Bush. Having been engaged in five presidential campaigns and run public affairs firms and associations in Washington, D.C., he now resides on the Eastern Shore.