Capitol Consulting & Public Relations

03/22/2026

NOW HIRING: Social Media Manager / Campaign Assistant (Remote)

Work directly on political campaigns supporting moderate to conservative candidates and issues.

We’re looking for someone who can:
✔ Manage & grow social media accounts daily
✔ Create content (use existing graphics + make your own with guidance)
✔ Build engagement and increase followers
✔ Assist campaigns by coordinating Zoom meetings with clients
✔ Take clear action notes and follow-ups from calls
✔ Use tools like Zoom, AI platforms, and digital media tools

If you can write well, think on your feet, and stay organized, this is a great entry-level opportunity.

💻 Remote | 💰 Monthly pay based on experience
➕ Spanish helpful | CA politics a plus

👉 Send resume + samples or links to:
📧 Brandon at [email protected]

02/09/2026

Thailand’s 2026 election result is being called “shocking.”
It wasn’t.
It was predictable — and the media missed why.
By Brandon Gesicki
This was a huge victory for the Bhumjaithai Party—but it should not have been that surprising.
What was surprising was how confidently much of the international press and left-leaning Thai media dismissed the possibility of it happening at all. In doing so, they once again confused aspiration with analysis and narrative with reality.
In the final days before Election 69, political analyst Ken Lohatepanon, writing “2026 Election: Closing Thoughts – An Ambiguous Election” for his Substack The Coffee Parliament | Thai Politics and Policy, noted that if opposition leads failed to sweep away local Bhumjaithai incumbents, Anutin would have a very good night.
That insight proved decisive.
I highlighted that same point at the time—and it bears repeating now—because it explains the result better than any post-election handwringing. The opposition did not sweep incumbents. Local machinery held. Regional support consolidated. And Anutin Charnvirakul did, in fact, have a very good night.
As unofficial results came in on February 8, caretaker Prime Minister Anutin declared victory, with Bhumjaithai projected to secure 194 seats in the 500-seat parliament, well ahead of the People’s Party’s 116. Opinion polls and international headlines had placed the reformists comfortably in front. Voters had other ideas.
This was not a fluke. It was a correction.
Results Over Noise
Anutin has governed—and campaigned—like a leader who understands that results matter more than noise.
While rivals and commentators focused on social-media momentum, international validation, and recycled assumptions from the 2023 election, Bhumjaithai focused on fundamentals: incumbency, ground organization, policy delivery, and voter trust beyond elite urban circles.
The party’s message was blunt but effective. Bhumjaithai argued that it was:
The only party Cambodia is afraid of, foregrounding national security and sovereignty
A party of technocratic professionals capable of actually transforming the economy
This was not messaging designed for headlines. It was messaging designed for ballots.
Even Anutin admitted surprise at the scale of the win, saying voters gave his party “more than what we expected.” But surprise at scale does not mean surprise at outcome. For anyone paying attention to coalition math, incumbency strength, and Thailand’s electoral geography, this result was always plausible.
Coalitions Decide Governments
This outcome also validates a broader point I made earlier in the campaign. On February 2, I wrote that leading in polls does not mean governing, because coalitions—not headlines—decide governments in Thailand.
(“Thailand’s Reformists May Lead the Polls, but Coalitions Decide Governments” – Capitol Consulting, Feb. 2, 2026)
That argument now looks less like contrarianism and more like realism.
Thailand’s political system rewards organization, alliances, and credibility across regions. It punishes movements that mistake momentum for mandate. The People’s Party ran a strong campaign, but elections are not frozen snapshots, and voter sentiment does not move in straight ideological lines.
An Election About Security and the Economy
If you translate Election 69 into American political terms, the comparison is clear: this was an election about national security and the economy.
Not vibes.
Not ideology.
Not online enthusiasm.
It was about who voters trust to govern under pressure—and who has delivered. On that test, Bhumjaithai won the mandate clearly.
After claiming victory, Anutin emphasized unity, saying the win belonged to “all Thais, no matter whether you voted for us or not.” People’s Party leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut appeared to concede, signaling readiness to serve in opposition if Anutin succeeds in forming a government.
The Media’s Blind Spot
The real lesson of Election 69 isn’t that Thailand “shifted unexpectedly.” It’s that much of the media continues to misread Thailand by underestimating conservative and centrist voters, dismissing incumbency, and treating governance as secondary to narrative.
This election was not unpredictable.
It was misinterpreted.
I currently have an op-ed with the Bangkok Post on Prime Minister Anutin written before Election Day. In light of these results, it deserves to run—with modest modification—because the election has borne out the core argument: competence, stability, and results still matter in Thai politics, no matter how unfashionable that conclusion may be in international commentary.
Thailand’s electorate spoke clearly.
The problem wasn’t the vote.
It was the reading of it.
Disclosure
All analysis, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this article are solely those of the author.
About the Author
Brandon Michael Gesicki is a veteran U.S. political consultant and government-affairs advisor with over two decades of experience advising political campaigns, corporations, and public-policy initiatives. Over the past five years, he has specialized in analyzing Southeast Asian political risk, Indo-Pacific strategy, and regional investment opportunities.
He is the founder of Capitol Consulting Communications & Government Relations and can be reached at:
👉 http://capitolconsultingcomm.com

25+ years of success influencing legislation, shaping public opinion, and managing high-impact political campaigns and PAC operations—with a proven record of advancing policy priorities, building powerful coalitions, and securing major wins at the local, state, federal, and international levels.

02/01/2026

California’s Mileage Tax: The Road to a Surveillance Tax

By Brandon Gesicki

California politicians have a talent for doing the impossible.

They’ve somehow taken the most beautiful state in America—rich in opportunity, innovation, and natural resources—and turned it into a place where the average resident feels punished for existing.

Now they want a new California Mileage Tax—charging you per mile you drive—like freedom is a subscription service.

This isn’t a rumor. It’s moving through the legislature and could soon become a major statewide fight heading into 2026.

A Tax on Life

Let’s call it what it is: a commuting tax. A work tax. A family tax. A survival tax.

Most Californians don’t drive for fun. They drive because they have to:

get to work

take kids to school

buy groceries

care for family

see a doctor

live where rent isn’t impossible

So what’s next—walking tax? breathing tax? “approved travel” zones? People joke… until Sacramento tries it.

What’s Happening: AB 1421 and the 2026 Mileage Tax Push

Lawmakers are moving forward with legislation like AB 1421, designed to extend studies and research into a permanent “road usage charge” system. Under the current timeline, findings are due by January 1, 2027.

Translation: they’re laying the groundwork now, so Californians wake up later to a policy already half-built and called “inevitable.”

Why Now? Because Gas Tax Revenue Is Dropping

Here’s the state’s argument: as more electric vehicles hit the road and gas cars become more fuel efficient, the state collects less gas tax revenue. So Sacramento wants a “new sustainable funding source” for infrastructure.

But to working Californians, this sounds like the same story we always hear:

“We didn’t plan ahead. Now you have to pay more.”

The Numbers Are the Point

Mileage-tax proposals discussed publicly often land around 6 to 9 cents per mile. That sounds small until it hits your wallet.

At 15,000 miles/year:

6¢/mile = $900/year

9¢/mile = $1,350/year

For a two-car household at 30,000 miles/year:

$1,800 to $2,700 every year

That’s on top of what you already pay for gas, registration, insurance, toll lanes, repairs, and maintenance.

For working families and retirees, that’s not a “fee.” That’s a budget breaker.

The Gas-Tax Equivalent Is Even Worse

If your car gets 25 mpg, a mileage tax translates roughly to:

6¢/mile = $1.50 per gallon

9¢/mile = $2.25 per gallon

That’s like adding $1.50–$2.25 per gallon in new taxation, layered over what you already pay at the pump.

And California’s track record is clear: taxes don’t “replace” other taxes here. They stack, then they grow.

This Hits Working People Hardest

This isn’t a tax on the rich. It’s a tax on:

tradesmen, nurses, warehouse workers, truck drivers

small business owners and caregivers

rural residents and long-distance commuters

retirees on fixed incomes

A consultant working from home won’t feel it. The single parent commuting 45 miles each way will.

It’s Also a Surveillance Problem

To tax miles, the state has to measure miles. Proposed tools include:

GPS trackers

phone apps

annual odometer checks

Even if they claim “we won’t track locations,” the infrastructure invites mission creep: higher rates at peak hours, charges by zone, penalties for “too much driving,” and other new “adjustments.”

A Freedom Issue

Our Founding Fathers fought a war for independence for far less taxation from their rulers than Californians tolerate today.

More and more residents feel trapped—paying more, getting less, and being told they have no choice.

Stop the Mileage Tax

Californians aren’t asking for perfection. We’re asking for sanity—and an end to policies that punish normal life.

No more “pilot programs.” No more tracking schemes. No more per-mile billing for the privilege of getting to work.

Stop the Mileage Tax.

About the Author

Brandon Michael Gesicki is a veteran U.S. political consultant and government-affairs advisor with more than two decades of experience advising political campaigns, corporations, and public-policy initiatives. He is also a part-time sports writer and past president of the California Republican Taxpayers Association.

He is the founder of Capitol Consulting Communications & Government Relations and can be reached at: http://capitolconsultingcomm.com

01/26/2026

Thailand’s Reformists May Lead the Polls — But Coalitions Decide Governments

International coverage is increasingly framing Thailand’s Feb. 8 election as a likely reformist breakthrough, with the People’s Party surging in polls.

But Thailand is not a majoritarian system — it’s a bargaining system. Polling momentum does not automatically translate into governing power. Coalitions do.

Thailand’s most useful data point so far is the Jan. 11 NIDA poll, which shows the People’s Party leading in support (~30%) as undecided voters sharply decline.

But NIDA’s seat modeling tells a more decisive story:

People’s Party: 120–130 seats
Bhumjaithai: 140–150 seats
Pheu Thai: 70–80 seats
Democrats: ~40 seats
Kla Tham: ~40 seats
Others: ~60 seats

This is not a landslide — it’s a fragmented parliament.

And in fragmented parliaments, Bhumjaithai’s constituency machine and local power networks (“baan yai”) may matter more than national vote share. A party that doesn’t win the most votes can still control coalition formation.

For investors, the takeaway is straightforward: the key risk isn’t who tops the polls — it’s whether Thailand produces a government that can secure 251 votes and execute policy without prolonged deadlock.

The real contest begins after election day.

Sources and Acknowledgements:
-Reporting and polling references in this article draw in part from:
-Reuters, Jan. 20, 2026: “Surging in polls, Thailand’s reformist opposition tests new election playbook.”
-Analysis and polling interpretation by Ken Lohatepanont, Ph.D. candidate at the University of Michigan and author of The Coffee Parliament, used for contextual understanding of Thai electoral dynamics.

All analysis, interpretations, and conclusions are the author’s own.

About the Author:
Brandon Michael Gesicki is a veteran U.S. political consultant and government-affairs advisor with over two decades of experience advising political campaigns, corporations, and public-policy initiatives. Over the past five years, he has specialized in analyzing Southeast Asian political risk, Indo-Pacific strategy, and investment opportunities.

He is the founder of Capitol Consulting Communications & Government Relations and can be reached at http://capitolconsultingcomm.com

01/25/2026

https://lastwordonsports.com/nfl/2026/01/22/safe-or-special-browns-coaching-search-points-toward-the-future/

The Cleveland Browns head coach search is seemingly down to four candidates. Should they go with one of the two safe options or special ones?

12/13/2025

Shedeur Sanders is the QB Browns "who they been looking for" ---Yes he is! Let's GO!
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1165235415203709/

12/09/2025

My article on Shedeur Sanders amazing breakout game vs the Titans. Maybe Shedeur Sanders should have been #1 overall but Browns should feel blessed they got him!

Despite Shedeur Sanders’ breakout 4-TD performance and Harold Fannin Jr.’s big day, the Browns fall to the Titans due to defensive breakdowns and miscues.

12/06/2025

Carmel Beach today! Large crowd shows up showing support for Pickleball and reminding Carmel Council that Pickleball is not a crime! It would seem "the outsider" Mayor has not figured out Carmel yet!

12/04/2025

It's Official — Carmel-by-the-Sea Council Is a National Embarrassment: Votes to Ban Pickleball Despite Overwhelming Community Opposition and Make It a Crime Punishable by $1,000 Fine!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, CA — December 3, 2025

In a stunning display of government overreach that has sparked outrage among residents, the Carmel City Council voted unanimously last night to ban pickleball at Forest Hill Park and make it a misdemeanor offense punishable by fines up to $1,000. The decision disregarded overwhelming public support and a compromise previously approved by the City's Beach and Parks Commission, effectively criminalizing a harmless, community-building sport enjoyed by seniors, families, and tourists for over 13 years.

The chamber was packed to capacity with one of the largest turnouts in recent memory. After nearly an hour of ceremonial proceedings, when Mayor Dale Byrne attempted to take a dinner break before hearing the item, the audience erupted in loud boos, forcing him to retreat and take only a brief five-minute pause instead.
The Mayor also limited public comment to one minute instead of the traditional three minutes, drawing further outrage from attendees.

During public comment, the divide was stark: roughly 90% of speakers supported pickleball while only about 10% opposed it. Yet the Council voted 100% in favor of the ban. Residents say the decision was driven by outsiders, political favoritism, and a tiny group of neighbors—not the community's actual needs.

Southern California transplant Mayor Dale Byrne has lived in Carmel only since 2017 and was elected in a three-way race winning by just 118 votes in November 2024. He positioned himself as a cultural authority over lifelong residents, many of whom noted this was not an issue before Byrne became Mayor. Attendees observed it seemed possible Byrne was siding with a personal friend—one of the handful of neighbors demanding the ban.
A fully vetted compromise unanimously approved by the Beach and Parks Commission had balanced hours, noise mitigation, and shared use, but Mayor Byrne rejected it outright.

"This wasn't a process — it was a setup," said Cara Franklin, organizer of the Pickleball Is Not a Crime Committee and a regular Forest Hill Park player. "Five complaining neighbors got exactly what they wanted, and the community was ignored."

Residents emphasized that surrounding cities including Monterey, Pacific Grove, Seaside, and Marina have all embraced pickleball with reasonable compromises, making Carmel the only city on the Peninsula to ban the sport outright. The City's own website had promoted the courts as pickleball courts, and the sport had been played peacefully for over 13 years.

It was also learned that local community leaders helped fix the tennis-pickleball courts 13 years ago and that it has been the senior pickleball players who have kept the courts maintained ever since.

The ordinance makes pickleball a misdemeanor with fines up to $1,000. Criminalizing a healthy, community-building activity—played by seniors, families, and tourists—is government extremism. No reasonable city uses police power to stop exercise. The City Council is considering using law enforcement to address pickleball "violations" in a low-crime town where police resources should not be wasted policing playgrounds. The ban is driven by five neighbors, not the community—a fact confirmed by the Mayor in an interview with KSBW TV. A tiny minority living next to the park is pushing the ban.
Public spaces belong to everyone, not just adjacent homeowners. Policy should reflect community needs, not the loudest complainers. If you live near a park, you should expect people, kids, movement, and sound. Parks are not meant to be silent courtyards curated for a few. Banning recreation undermines Carmel's identity as an active, welcoming coastal community.

The decision has already generated national mockery with headlines describing it as "wealthy California town bans pickleball over noise" and "peak rich-people politics." National headlines and viral meeting footage have made Carmel a punchline on social media. Residents warn the ban damages Carmel's image, sends the wrong message to visitors who are the town's economic lifeline, and reinforces perceptions that newcomers run the town.
"This makes Carmel a national embarrassment," said Brandon Michael Gesicki, a public affairs strategist and Carmel area resident. "It tells visitors we're hostile to recreation, families, and fun." The Council has damaged Carmel's reputation as a desired international place to visit.
Serious questions have been raised about the fairness of the process. The City held a special meeting for Forest Hill Park in September that pickleball players were never notified about. The Mayor made statements that allegedly misrepresented the process and contradicted the public record. Public input was minimized or dismissed.
"This looks like a predetermined outcome designed to give a few friends exactly what they demanded," Gesicki said.
Other cities solved pickleball noise with adjusted hours, modest sound barriers, court resurfacing or relocation, and better scheduling. Carmel skipped every reasonable solution and went straight to a ban. Meanwhile, Carmel faces urgent issues including housing shortages, worker gaps, aging infrastructure, library modernization needs, business corridor decline, and tourism resiliency problems. While the Council debates quiet balls and decibel tests, major development projects sit stalled, infrastructure needs remain unmet, housing pressures continue, business corridors need revitalization, and tourism management requires urgent planning.
"Instead of solving a single real problem, the Council spent months eliminating a harmless sport enjoyed by kids, seniors, and families. It's weak leadership — and it hurts Carmel," Gesicki said. Government should facilitate recreation, not eliminate it. When City Hall starts banning normal activities instead of managing them, it has lost perspective.
If pickleball is banned because it's "too loud," what's next? Barking dogs? Kids playing tag? Basketball? Banning one sport sets a precedent for banning others. How much in taxpayer dollars was spent on staff time, legal reviews, and hearings for this ban?

About Pickleball: Pickleball is the fastest-growing sport in the U.S., with nearly 20 million players in 2024 and 45.8% year-over-year growth from 2023. The sport's accessibility, ease of learning, and social nature have driven participation, with over 19% of U.S. adults having played in the last 12 months. There are now over 68,000 courts nationwide, with the number expanding rapidly.


CONTACT:
Brandon Michael Gesicki
[email protected]
Pickleball Is Not a Crime Committee
Cara Franklin, Organizer

Send a message to learn more

12/02/2025

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Carmel Residents Oppose City Plan to Criminalize Pickleball at Forest Hill Park: "Pickleball Is Not a Crime"

Coalition Decries Ordinance for Misdemeanor Charges and $1,000 Fines, Calls Council Vote "Government Overreach"

CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, CA, December 1, 2025— A coalition of Carmel and Monterey County residents is strongly opposing the City Council's ordinance to ban pickleball at Forest Hill Park by classifying it as a misdemeanor crime punishable by fines up to $1,000. The Council is scheduled to vote on the measure tomorrow, Tuesday, December 2, 2025.

The group, calling itself "Pickleball Is Not a Crime," says the City ignored common-sense compromise solutions used successfully in other California communities—including scheduled hours, quiet walls, court-management protocols, and neighbor mediation.

"This is a public park, not a private enclave," said coalition spokesperson Cara Franklin, lifelong Carmel and Monterey County resident. "Making pickleball a crime punishable by a $1,000 fine is outrageous. Carmel didn't even attempt a serious compromise. If my son and his friends play pickleball, they could be charged with a crime and fined up to $1,000 simply for exercising in a public park."

City Website Promotes Activity It Now Seeks to Criminalize
The coalition notes that Carmel's official Parks and Recreation website promotes pickleball as a featured activity at Forest Hill Park—making the proposal to criminalize it both contradictory and confusing. - see link: https://ci.carmel.ca.us/post/parks-1

Park hours and use times at Forest Hill Park are already reasonable and aligned with standard California park operations. If the City believed certain hours created noise conflicts, it could have easily implemented scheduled play times—a solution proven effective in cities statewide.
"A tiny minority should not dictate public policy for an entire community," Franklin continued. "This proposal punishes people for using a taxpayer-funded public park exactly as intended."

Former Resident Calls Ban "National Embarrassment"
Brandon Gesicki, a past Carmel resident and Carmel High graduate, said the proposal makes the city look extreme. "Pickleball is not a crime. Carmel is becoming a national punchline for government overreach. If they ban pickleball, what's next—ban Shakespeare in the Park?"

Coalition Urges Community to Attend December 2 Meeting
The coalition is encouraging residents, families, athletes, and visitors to attend the Tuesday, December 2 City Council meeting to voice opposition to the proposed ordinance.

About Pickleball: Pickleball is the fastest-growing sport in the U.S., with nearly 20 million players in 2024 and 45.8% year-over-year growth from 2023. The sport's accessibility, ease of learning, and social nature have driven participation, with over 19% of U.S. adults having played in the last 12 months. There are now over 68,000 courts nationwide, with the number expanding rapidly.

Media Contact: Brandon Gesicki
831-206-6460 / [email protected]
# # #

Parks Post April 16, 2018 The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea is home to parks offering lush green belts, walking paths, play structures, and sports courts. It has nine formally designated park, open space, and recreational areas.  Carmelita Park    This is a mini park located at Dolores Avenue and...

11/21/2025

BREAKING: Carmel-by-the-Sea declares war on- pickleball.
Real issues? Nah.
Let’s spend staff hours banning healthy recreation!
Any councilmember pushing this should be recalled for crimes against common sense.

A California town has banned pickleball in its public park after residents complained that the constant sound of paddles striking balls was too noisy.