Missing the Point

No Al Gore apologists seem to get the point these days.

Daffodil Lane meekly attempts to defend Al Gore's energy consumption by recycling Keith Olbermann's talking points and trying to change the topic to that Gore's energy costs more because they are using green power. Oh, and it's all OK because Gore buys "carbon credits,"; we'll get to those later.

As we noted, the original report does not deal with the cost of Gore's energy, by that Gore uses 20 times as many kilowatt-hours of electricity as the average consumer. Something Gore, as of yet, has not denied. And Bill Hobbs notes:

As the news media swarmed around the story of Gore's gargantuan energy consumption yesterday, Gore's people touted his purchase of "carbon offsets" as evidence that he lives a "carbon-neutral" lifestyle, but the truth is Gore's home uses electricity that is, for the most part, derived from the burning of carbon fuels. His house gets its electricity from Nashville Electric Service, which gets its from the Tennessee Valley Authority, which produces most of its power from coal-burning power plants. Which means most of the power being consumed at the Gore mansion comes from carbon-emitting power sources.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, check out this complete stupidity. TaxProf Blog notes this from the New York Post:

HOLLYWOOD'S wealthy liberals can now avoid any guilt they might feel for consuming so much non-renewable fossil fuel in their private jets, their SUVs, and their multiple air-conditioned mansions. This year's Oscar goodie bag contained gift certificates representing 100,000 pounds of greenhouse gas reductions from TerraPass, which describes itself as a "carbon offset retailer." The 100,000 pounds "are enough to balance out an average year in the life of an Academy Award presenter," a press release from TerraPass asserts.

Yes...free carbon credits. The Hollywood crowd now even gets their indulgences for free, while lecturing the rest of us about the need to be carbon neutral. The Virginian compares them to sumptuary laws that regulated the social hierarchy.

Then there are Dianne Feinstein and Arnold Schwarzenegger, from the LA Times:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein offers plenty of tips on how California households can combat global warming, such as carpooling and running only a full dishwasher.

But one bit of information Feinstein declines to share is the number of times that she flew last year on her husband's Gulfstream jet, which burns much more fuel per passenger-mile than commercial airliners.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger also has asked constituents to do their part to conserve energy — including cutting summertime power consumption — even though he takes to the skies on leased executive jets.

Aides say there is nothing contradictory between the pro-green pronouncements and the flying habits of the Democratic senator and Republican governor.

Some environmentalists aren't so sure.

"There appears to be a discrepancy between calling on people to make personal reductions and using a private jet that exacerbates the problem," Clean Air Watch President Frank O'Donnell said.

Flying on a Gulfstream rather than an airliner is like driving a sport utility vehicle instead of riding a bus, O'Donnell and others say.

In a lot of these cases, the moral of the story is "Do as I say, not as I do." Sadly, their apologists cannot see the forests for the trees and really understand what is going on here.

That's Not in There

People have a right not to be bothered.
- State Senate Minority Whip Allan Kittleman

This is from today's Sun and in reference to the anti-robocall bill we have discussed in the past. And this ties into the "GOP Brand" discussion Greg Kline has in his controversial latest Conservative Refuge podcast. How is the "GOP Brand" of limited government positively portrayed when a major State Senate leader wants to create new rights and provide a new level of government control over something as sacrosanct as political speech? And what is a right not to be bothered? I'd like to not be bothered with new levels of regulation. Does that mean the General Assembly has no right to levy new taxes or pass new laws?

Thankfully, I think that common sense is going to prevail. Most legislators (I think) realize that tinkering with the First Amendment does nothing to further or nation along. Even if their opposition to this bill is pragmatic self-interest, it still helps all of us along that some people really believe that the First Amendment means what it says.

No Thanks

Board Member and former House of Delegates candidate Konrad Wayson has decided not to seek a second term on the Board. The announcement comes two days before the deadline to file as a candidate for the at-large seat with the School Board Nominating Convention.

I would love to serve on the Board of Education, and as I have noted here I sought appointment to an at-large seat in 2003. But I am not going to seek this nomination, much as I have skipped the process for an at-large seat in 2004, and for the District 31 seat in 2005. I do not see a purpose in taking the time and energy to try and convince a convention that is not receptive to my ideas and values that they should select me; particularly now with the presence of a Democratic Governor.

I wonder how many other worthy candidates for the Board of Education pass on the opportunity to seek these seats due to the byzantine selection process, or because they understand that their ideas will not jive with the people making the selection. How many of them would run for a seat if they were able to take their case directly to the voters, instead of to a convention or commission?

Meteorologists are Scientists you know

Mark Alexander wrote about the politics and science of global warming, and from that I'd like to director your attention to this article from September 2005 in Discover Magazine. Some people want to kvetch about the scientific consensus in support of global warming. So I present you with this:

You don't believe global warming is causing climate change?

G: No. If it is, it is causing such a small part that it is negligible. I'm not disputing that there has been global warming. There was a lot of global warming in the 1930s and '40s, and then there was a slight global cooling from the middle '40s to the early '70s. And there has been warming since the middle '70s, especially in the last 10 years. But this is natural, due to ocean circulation changes and other factors. It is not human induced.

That must be a controversial position among hurricane researchers.

G: Nearly all of my colleagues who have been around 40 or 50 years are skeptical as hell about this whole global-warming thing. But no one asks us. If you don't know anything about how the atmosphere functions, you will of course say, "Look, greenhouse gases are going up, the globe is warming, they must be related." Well, just because there are two associations, changing with the same sign, doesn't mean that one is causing the other.

The guy answering the questions is somebody you might have heard of; noted hurricane scientist Dr. William Gray from Colorado State University.

Deconstruction by Bureaucracy

City Journal has a long piece about the ever-expanding bureaucracy and what it is doing to English society, particularly in its police and education establishments. Really too much to summarize, so read the whole thing.

Mixed Messages

All of the following quotes come from today's Capital editorial on the proposal rental car tax:

The measure would give the county permission to levy a tax on rental cars, and county officials take care to describe it as a "precautionary measure" - something to have in reserve if revenues flag.

But the record suggests that once something like this goes into the county's toolbox, it will be used, sooner or later. And most would bet on sooner.

Would such a tax make a difference to most residents? The measure includes exemptions designed to make sure any such levy escapes the attention of the voters. The tax would affect only short-term rentals, and would not include vehicles rented by residents awaiting repairs on their own cars.

The targets, in short, are the hundreds of thousands of short-term visitors who come through BWI each year. If the additional charge for a rental vehicle is kept within reason, most of these people won't notice it - although you can question the fairness of taxing them for county services they're not sticking around long enough to use.

Not surprisingly, the state officials running BWI loathe the idea of the county taxing the airport. They also don't want to see anything that puts them at a competitive disadvantage with the other airports in the Washington, D.C., area.

The measure would give the county permission to levy a tax on rental cars, and county officials take care to describe it as a "precautionary measure" - something to have in reserve if revenues flag.

But the record suggests that once something like this goes into the county's toolbox, it will be used, sooner or later. And most would bet on sooner.

Would such a tax make a difference to most residents? The measure includes exemptions designed to make sure any such levy escapes the attention of the voters. The tax would affect only short-term rentals, and would not include vehicles rented by residents awaiting repairs on their own cars.

The targets, in short, are the hundreds of thousands of short-term visitors who come through BWI each year. If the additional charge for a rental vehicle is kept within reason, most of these people won't notice it - although you can question the fairness of taxing them for county services they're not sticking around long enough to use...

...Not surprisingly, the state officials running BWI loathe the idea of the county taxing the airport. They also don't want to see anything that puts them at a competitive disadvantage with the other airports in the Washington, D.C., area.

We don't like tax increases, but this one would be less painful than nearly any other the county could impose. It's not a bad idea, provided it really is a last resort - and provided that county officials never forget that their first obligation, when facing a revenue shortfall, is cutting the budget, not imposing new taxes.

So, if I follow. The General Assembly should pass the tax...but the County Council should not enforce it...though the Capital thinks they will use it....though they are opposed to new taxes...though they doubt that this tax will do any damage....but it's still a good idea...though they should cut the budget first.

Confused?

One Brief Fit of Praise

Look, Al Gore, his movie, and his acolytes deserve all of the criticism that they get. However, I would like to say that the Virgin Earth Challenge is a good idea. Why? Because it is an attempt at a private sector solution to climate change, instead of the government-led solution that is usually the starting point for global warming true believers.

I can pretty much give a pass to any movement (that is legal, of course) that wants to encourage people to change their habits or use new technologies through private sector prizes and grants. Why not? It worked for transatlantic flight and space flight. It's when people want to parlay unscientific data intro strict government regulation that it's time to throw the brakes on...

Piling On

I'd be remiss if I didn't mention (via RedState and Instapundit):

Last night, Al Gore’s global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy.

Gore’s mansion, located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES).

In his documentary, the former Vice President calls on Americans to conserve energy by reducing electricity consumption at home.

The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average.

Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh—guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. As a result of his energy consumption, Gore’s average monthly electric bill topped $1,359.

Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore’s energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006.

Of course, apparently that makes Bill Frist more of the conservationist...

The Preachers of Hollywood and Vine

During Sunday's Oscar Telecast, usually four hours of left-wing self-congratulation, the entire evening became a love-in for former Vice-President Al Gore and the Global Warming movement. It was so bad that CNN noted that Gore basically received $5 million in free advertising during the event. Hollywood blogger Nikke Finke has more.

In what ways was it bad?:

• Ellen DeGeneres made a joke in the monologue about people having actually voted for Al Gore, despite him not winning.
• The Goracle joins intellectual heavyweight Leonardo DeCaprio on stage to talk about how the Oscars went green this year led by the " non-partisan" Natural Resources Defense Council (see what sacrifices the rich with leerjets want you to make!). Oh: and we are all going to die (or something) if we don't take action right now. Ironically, Libertas notes:
  

  Leo and Gore. Between them these two environmentalists' combined living space could house all those Haitian Boat People Clinton turned back.
  

• Gore apparently made a movie which the Cuban Government loves that won Best Fictional Drama Best Documentary for some reason. His producer noted that he was "moved to act by this man." He and the Goracle then got their prom picture together.
• On the way up to accept the award, the Movie Voice Guy ( Don LaFontaine) said, and I quote as best I can:
  

  The movie was scheduled to be filmed in New Orleans the day before Hurricane Katrina hit, a prime example of the effects of global warming.

  (Never mind that Katrina was the epitome of Democratic failure, incompetence, and corruption)
  
  
• Then, some other guy comes up and wins an award and thanks Al Gore apparently for existing.
  

The entire night a celebration of a has-been politician and his "documentary" which has been savagely torn apart nine ways to Sunday.

Now, here comes the real question: how would Hollywood celebrate a movie about creationism?

I don't ask this question in jest. Creationism is, by all accounts, a theory. A theory that has little in scientific basis; in fact, most scientists support alternative theories (i.e. evolution) and have a substantially greater scientific basis to support the alternative theories. Creationism is accepted by millions of people as fact. They accept it on faith alone.

That's what many of the Hollywood elite do with current theories on global warming. They accept what they have been told on faith alone, notwithstanding the fact that no scientific consensus exists on the matter. Does anybody seriously think that Leonardo read any of the literature on climate change before coming to the conclusion that the Goracle must save us all? I highly doubt it, if only due to the culture of Hollywood that accepts left-leaning talking points as the truth, regardless of their veracity.

Hollywood's global warming alarmists adopt the global warming orthodoxy on a leap of faith. Ironically, these same people savagely criticize those who are religious for taking the same leap of faith on their beliefs.

Now I am skeptical about man-made global warming. And I am skeptical about creationism. But the contrast of the acceptability of believing in global warming on faith is striking when compared to the modern day acceptability of creationism.

Those who are on television, like DeCaprio. preaching about the need to conserve and the need to fight global warming remind me a lot of the televangelist Jim Bakker . Both preach to the true believers, both preaching gospels as they see fit. Both living lives of hypocrisy; Bakker for his sex scandals and financial improprieties, DeCaprio for his large houses and gas-guzzling modes of transportation.

That makes the global warming crowd in Hollywood nothing more than Preachers proselytizing to their flock. They are the Preachers of Hollywood and Vine...

This is Cool

The Weather Channel website is now has a beta version of a cool interactive radar/satellite map on their website that is much more useful than their old, static map...

Tournament Ready

Maryland 89, North Carolina 87.

I think that my naysaying about the Terps' tourney hopes just last month is not a real concern at the moment...

Reality Check

The path towards the rental care tax took another turn yesterday when Councilmembers have put up new resistance. Councilmen Dillon and Reilly want to look at the tax only as a last resort. On the other side of the spectrum, Councilman Benoit wants to pass the tax only if revenues are earmarked for the education budget. And Delegate Beidle takes the Maxwell line and says the piggyback tax should be raised first.

But the real gem of this Sun article is near the bottom:

Leopold said he would impose the tax only if all efforts to find savings were exhausted and necessary services could not be maintained without added revenue. He has already imposed a hiring freeze of 200 positions and cut about $1.5 million through internal restructuring.

"I am loath to talk about any tax increase of any kind," Leopold said. "It's my responsibility as the fiscal leader of this county to do all that I can to prepare the county for the looming financial challenges on the horizon. I think it would be irresponsible not to."

Asked if he is considering other taxes, Leopold said: "I will cross that bridge when I get to it."

Which is code for "I'm going to raise taxes, I just don't know how much and which taxes, but it's coming so be ready."

So much for Leopold's promise not to raise taxes, an issue that we deal with and take Leopold to task for on the new Conservative Refuge Podcast that will be posted soon...

Butting Heads on the Board Budget

Here are a selection of quotes from today's Sun article regarding the recently passed Board of Education budget:

"The 17 percent school board budget [increase] is not acceptable ... I will reduce that budget,"
- County Executive John Leopold

"One of the things that no one seems to want to talk about is that we have been underfunded for years. We need an infusion of cash. That's my position,"
- Superintendent Kevin Maxwell

"What you're basically saying is ... . 'We've looked at everything and everything is appropriate,' and I find that hard to believe,"
- Board of Education Member Michael Leahy

"It raises false hopes," he said. "To forward a budget like this in its entirety seeking all this money for new positions ... it makes people think they're going to get all this money. At the end of the day, it's unrealistic. We know it's going to get cut, and hopes will be dashed when these positions don't materialize."
- Board of Education Member Victor Bernson

The budget process is not going to be a pretty one. Particularly when you consider all of the other issues related to taxes that have been popping up recently.

As it were, Maxwell does have a list of priorities, from top to bottom. The things at the top will likely survive the budget cuts. The things at the bottom will be first to go. What's at the top: guidance counselors, pupil personnel workers, and security officers. What's at the bottom? Maintenance, technology, and funding for charter schools.

Read into his priorities list what you will...

Lacking Due Diligence

Yesterday the Anne Arundel County Board of Education rubber stamped Superintendent Kevin Maxwell's spending plan, including his proposed 19% budget increase everybody wants to raise taxes to pay for.

This is the most unsurprising development:

But school board member Victor Bernson called the $153 million operating budget increase "grossly extravagant." He voted against the plan, along with Michael Leahy.

"I believe the message this board is sending to the good citizens of Anne Arundel County is that we can spend, spend, spend our way out of our present challenges," Mr. Bernson said. "I could not disagree more."

And he's right. It is unsurprising that Vic Bernson and Mike Leahy are the only votes of reason on the Board when it comes to spending proposals, because they are the only ones who have been discussing the issue in realistic terms. The other Board members have adopted the attitude that when it comes to spending, the Superintendent gets whatever her wants.

I wonder if the same attitude would be in play if Eric Smith were still the Superintendent. Board members were much, much more willing to challenge him.

Nevertheless, the Board has now basically passed the buck onto the County Executive and the County Council when it comes to matters of the budget. It is astounding to think that the majority of the Board took the Superintendent's budget as it was and rubber stamped its approval. It is amazing to think that the other members could not find one single solitary item to adjust, much less cut.

The real irony about passing the buck on to elected leaders is that one of the arguments against electing the Board of Education is that by electing its members, the Board is being made political. Of course, that makes the naive assumption that the Board now is not already political. Board Members and the Superintendent both made public pronouncements about taxes in recent months, as we have documented. That is clearly a political action for the political arena. Two sitting Board members unsuccessfully ran for the House of Delegates as Democrats in 2006. And now, the entire Board (save for Messrs. Bernson and Leahy) have passed the buck for the budget onto the politicians, bringing the entire school budget under the klieg lights of the County Council.

Maybe, just maybe, if the Board members had been elected as opposed to appointed, they would have taken the time to review the budget, discussed the budget, and proposed a few changes to the budget. That's not saying that elected members would not have supported the budget; they might have. But I do think that an accountable, elected school board would have performed the due diligence in the budget process that was sorely lacking here in 2007...

Here We Go

Are we going to go into overtime this year in order to ramrod a tax increase through the General Assembly?

Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley is considering bowing to pressure and calling a special session of the General Assembly to address the state's budget deficit, and administration officials say nothing is off the table -- including legalizing slots or raising taxes.

The possibility of a special session marks a change for the freshman governor, a Democrat who had said he would not consider legalizing slots or raising taxes in his first year in office.

A source with knowledge of discussions between Mr. O'Malley and Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. said a special session will focus on legalizing slots and is likely to occur in June.

Mr. Miller, Prince George's Democrat, hinted last week that a special session may be necessary next year to increase taxes and legalize slots. Asked about the possibility of a special session this year, Mr. Miller said yesterday that he expects a request for legislators to reconvene after the close of the current session in April.

"I think it might come from the governor," Mr. Miller said.

Good grief. It costs $45,000 a day for every day that the General Assembly is in a Special Session. That's money used for all facets of the Assembly, including additional salaries and per diem for legislators and staff.

If the Administration and the legislative leadership want to pass a slots bill or a tax increase, why is the work on this not being done now? We're only halfway through the legislative session. There is plenty of time to try and pass either of those bills. There is absolutely no need to call a special session when this is an easily avoidable situation if the General Assembly were to perform their due diligence and cut from the Administration's proposed spending plan.

Post plays catchup

The Washington Post today finally realized that the school board process is an issue in our county. The article includes this gem of a quote from John Leopold:

"Why should the people doing all the hard work of the nominating committee participate when their results are just thrown out of the window by political decisions made behind the scenes?"

Of course, what Leopold fails to note is the fact that under his scheme, the nominating committee is going to be made up of participants nominated by political decisions made behind the scenes. That kind of insider baseball is what truly breeds cynicism.

The Hits Keep Coming

At least Anne Arundel taxpayers keep feeling the burn. Now, John Leopold is proposing a tax increase :

The Anne Arundel County executive is proposing a new tax on cars rented in the county - including at Baltimore-Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport - that would raise "several million dollars" a year to counterbalance the county's gloomy budget outlook.

County Executive John R. Leopold, who offered the estimate of potential revenue, said he plans to present a letter this morning to the leaders of Anne Arundel's legislative delegation seeking permission from the General Assembly to impose the tax. The letter also is signed by the four Republicans and three Democrats on the County Council.

"It is an option I need to have," said Leopold, a Republican, who ran on a no-new-taxes plank in the fall elections. He said that such a tax would be directed toward tourists and have a "very minor peripheral impact" on county residents.

Leopold and others stressed that he would consider imposing such a tax if all efforts to find efficiencies were exhausted and necessary services could not be maintained without additional revenue.

And Democratic state officials are not happy about this:

The proposal drew harsh criticism from state and airport officials who said they think the county has overstepped its bounds.

"Anne Arundel County needs to be very careful not to kill the goose that laid the golden egg," Maryland Transportation Secretary John Porcari said. "Other counties would give an eye and the tooth to have the airport."

Tim Campbell, executive director of the Maryland Aviation Administration, which oversees BWI, viewed the idea as another way to tax the airport.

"It's something we would not favor, frankly," he said. "The rental car facilities provide a great financial support of airport operations. We just don't think it's appropriate for the county to tax the airport."

On top of it, it is not necessarily going to impact only tourists. It is also going to impact regular county taxpayers who need to rent vehicles for whatever reason As the Capital notes:

Phil Hall, manager of an Enterprise Rental Car branch in Annapolis, said 70 percent of his business comes from insurance rentals after car accidents, so a tax aimed at tourists wouldn't affect his customers dramatically.

"The taxes on rental cars are already high in the state of Maryland," Mr. Hall said. "That alone just takes customers by surprise."

Maybe they need a truck to move furniture. Maybe they want to rent an SUV for a weekend drive to Ocean City. Maybe they're like me and have had to rent a car because their regular vehicle is undergoing repairs. There are a multitude of reasons why people rent cars. It sure is easy to point at the airport and use that as an excuse to pass some sort of tax and claim that it won't impact county residents. But such an argument is highly disingenuous. Sure, the proposed legislation exempts insurance rentals for now, but does anybody really believe that it's going to stay that way forever?

Yes, the same anti-tax John Leopold from the 2006 campaign is now proposing a tax increase of considerable magnitude.

When is this going to end?

Coming Soon to a taxpayer funded budget near you...

The Carbon Neutral Campus (H/T Instapundit and Bill Hobbs):

We, the undersigned presidents and chancellors of colleges and universities, are deeply concerned about the unprecedented scale and speed of global warming and its potential for large-scale, adverse health, social, economic and ecological effects. We recognize the scientific consensus that global warming is real and is largely being caused by humans. We further recognize the need to reduce the global emission of greenhouse gases by 80% by mid-century at the latest, in order to avert the worst impacts of global warming and to reestablish the more stable climatic conditions that have made human progress over the last 10,000 years possible.

These people are responsible for educating our next generation. So naturally, they dismiss science out of hand and make ground pronouncements of things they don't understand just to score political points.

Incidentally, I can assure you that the last thing a college campus needs are more reporting requirements, more bureaucracy, and especially more committees. This protocol calls for all three. We could probably be more carbon neutral by eliminating all of that hot air...

Luckily, no Maryland schools have signed up for this as of yet. But I have a feeling that some private or public school in our state is going to sign up for this, taking millions of taxpayer dollars with it.

Incidentally, take a look at their proposed solutions, which probably says more than any grand statement of purpose could.

The John Leopold Show

All John Leopold, all the time in the Capital this week:

Bonus Money : The Capital had this story on Sunday, where Leopold handed out thousands in bonuses to Owens appointees dispatched during the transition. The fact that he only gave the money to some employees, most of which made good money and are now making good money elsewhere, is suspect. Today's Capital noted this in their editorial:

While we expect new leaders to assemble their own team, we don't expect them to send off the old guard with bonus checks. So it troubles us that seven holdovers from the Janet Owens administration got as much as $12,000 each when they were replaced by Mr. Leopold.

The $62,000 itself doesn't bother us much - that's a paltry sum in a $1 billion budget. But this makes no sense, in principle. There is nothing in the law that requires a county executive to authorize anything more than a pension and a payment for unused vacation time. There's no expectation of anything else...

...The decision is out of character for the frugal Mr. Leopold, whose early spending reductions are no larger than this $62,000. We doubt this is part of a pattern, but the county executive has to be careful to send a consistent message.

That makes a couple of assumptions, the first of which is that John Leopold is consistent. If anything is consistent, it's that's he's only out for himself.

7.9 cents a day: Leopold has also proposed a tax credit for senior homeowners at the whopping sum of $29 per year. Not a month, but a year. The article notes that under the proposed program roughly 2,800 homeowners would qualify; that means that the cost to the county is a whopping $81,200.

This was a major campaign platform of Leopold's both during the primary and general election campaigns. It is insulting to think that Leopold ran on a platform to provide tax relief for senior citizens, but the the total cost amount of the tax credit is aggregately less than the salary of the County Executive. Why can't Leopold propose a plan that saves the same homeowners $29 a month instead? That plan would cost the county only $974,400 a year and can easily be absorbed by the County budget.

lllegal Builders: Here is a good news/bad news scenario. Leopold is going to crack down on illegal home building in the county. Which is good. Home sites and construction needs to be properly permitted. However, at no point have I seen from Leopold a proposal to fix the permitting system. Half of the reason that homes get built without the proper permits is because the permitting system is damaged and needs to be reevaluated form the ground up. Leopold seems more concerned with punishing violators than he does with fixing the cause of the problem in the first place.

There is systemic consistency here in that the Leopold administration has several key features:

• Breaking campaign promises (the security detail, tax cuts for seniors);
• Failing to fix the problem (Leopold's school board bill, enforcement of building permits without a corresponding evaluation of the permitting process); and,
  
• General support of Big Government (smoking ban proposal, Climate protocols, etc).
  

Once again, why have a Democrat as County Executive when you can have John Leopold instead?

Stealth Taxation

This has gone under the radar, but in the House of Delegates there is an HB399, introduced by Delegates Hixson and McIntosh, that would give county charter governments the statutory authority to set a tax rater higher than the tax cap and collect more revenues than allowed under the County Charter.

Delegate Hixson, incidentally, is Chair of the Ways and Means Committee. Delegate McIntosh is Chair of the Environmental Matters Committee and likely the next Speaker of the House. And their scheme is perfectly constitutional because it is the state that has the authority to authorize the counties to have charter government.

What will Democratic leadership think up next?

An Escalating Superpower

Threatened missile attacks? Foreign policy squabbles? The US in the middle of it?

Yes, the US is in the middle of a foreign policy imbroglio that we did not start, over the plan to place missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic:

Nikolai Solovtsov, the commander of Russia's Strategic Missile Forces, said on February 19 that Russia may withdraw from a 1987 treaty with the United States limiting short- and medium-range missiles in Europe if the U.S. plan goes ahead.

Solovtsov also warned that hosting the U.S. shield could make the Czech Republic and Poland targets of a Russian missile strike.

"If there is a political decision [made by Russia] to withdraw from [the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty] that was signed between the United States and Russia, the Strategic Missile Forces will be capable of carrying out this task [targeting sites in the Czech Republic and Poland]," Solovtsov said.

This was one of the toughest comments yet by Russian officials on the issue since President Vladimir Putin warned of a "new Cold War" in a speech in Munich two weeks ago.

Yes, the Russians are opposed to us conducting military operations with our allies.

Putin continues:

Russia's president has said he doesn't trust U.S. claims that the system would be designed to guard the U.S. East Coast and Europe against missiles launched from "rogue nations" in the Middle East.

Which is a curious statement, given the fact that the system would only impact the Russians if the Russians were planning on attacking the U.S. or its allies in Western Europe. Which tells me that Russian foreign and military policy is reverting back to those pre-Glasnost and Perestroika days. That in and of itself is a good reason to support expanded missile defense capabilities.

I'm sure glad that President Bush feels looked into his soul and felt OK. That makes me feel better...

I Don't Think so

The United Nations has enough trouble trying to keep track of their money and their peacekeepers out of trouble. So I don't think that I really want them in charge of defending the planet from asteroids.

Defending the planet from asteroids is a good idea. Letting the U.N. anywhere near it, not so much...

I was right

I was right after all, and it still has no point

I was right on my second chance pick of Nancy Stocksdale as this week's legislator of the week, throwing off the alphabetical ordered Audra Miller spoke of in Friday's Gazette. But I again ask anybody who is listening; does this have a point?

Only vaguely more useful is the cleverly titled Free State Republican newsletter, which provides some (but not much) useful information. What's really irritating is the fact that instead of providing the file in a PDF format that makes it easily printable and savable, it's uploaded in a really annoying JPG format spread out over several links. Time to jump into the 21st century on that one...

When "Consensus" is Wrong

Some people refuse to believe that any environmental science lacks consensus. Well, tell that to some British scientists about organic farming (H/T: Instapundit):

Organic food may be no better for the environment than conventional produce and in some cases is contributing more to global warming than intensive agriculture, according to a government report.

The first comprehensive study of the environmental impact of food production found there was "insufficient evidence" to say organic produce has fewer ecological side-effects than other farming methods....

David Miliband, the Environment Secretary, drew a furious response from growers last month when he suggested organic food was a "lifestyle choice" with no conclusive evidence it was nutritionally superior.

Sir David King, the Government's chief scientist, also told The Independent he agreed that organic food was no safer than chemically-treated food.

The report for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs found "many" organic products had lower ecological impacts than conventional methods using fertilisers and pesticides. But academics at the Manchester Business School (MBS), who conducted the study, said that was counterbalanced by other organic foods - such as milk, tomatoes and chicken - which are significantly less energy efficient and can be more polluting than intensively-farmed equivalents.

Ken Green, professor of environmental management at MBS, who co-wrote the report, said: "You cannot say that all organic food is better for the environment than all food grown conventionally. If you look carefully at the amount of energy required to produce these foods you get a complicated picture. In some cases, the carbon footprint for organics is larger."

The irony of this is the fact that many people specifically eat organic foods because they think they are healthier or are doing their part to help the environment. But as usual science may tell us a different story. You can't be like some people and stick your head in the sand and only refuse to believe what you want to believe. Even something as mainstream as recycling has its detractors who say it may hurt the environment.

If people want to buy organic foods and conduct organic farming because it makes them feel better, go right ahead. But the people who claim that organic farming is a panacea may have another thing coming...

Capital to Voters: Drop Dead

The Capital today joined the chorus of liberal voices endorsing John Leopold's school board plan:

County Executive John Leopold is pushing a compromise that almost succeeded last year, when it passed the House of Delegates 132-5 but was rejected by the county's Senate delegation, 3-2.

This year the legislation - introduced by state Sen. John Astle - seems to have an even stronger chance, and is backed by the county's chamber of commerce and its teachers association.

The bill would eliminate the glaring flaw in the current procedure: the fact that the governor doesn't have to pick any of the candidates painstakingly vetted by the nominating conventions.

Actually the glaring flaw seems to be the fact that the voters get zero input in the matter. Moving on...

The system would allow input from county voters - who would decide whether board members get second terms - without making the board seats fully elective offices forever closed to anyone who doesn't want to campaign. This county has had some excellent school board members who did not have a political bone in their bodies.

Which may be part of the problem. Some of these board members are so insulated from the public that they cannot relate to your average voter. That's probably why some of the demand that we be taxed to the hilt.

Elected school boards are the rule nationally, although many of them have some sort of taxing authority. The main powers of government - the ones that should stay in the hands of elected officials - are deciding how to gather money from the taxpayers and how to spend it. Setting up a dependent group of elected officials with no final authority over taxes or budgeting - a group that would always defer on these crucial matters to the county executive and the County Council - would really accomplish little, even if it gives voters the impression that they have gained more control over the schools.

This is the red herring that opponents of elected school boards always throw out there; that somehow an elected board is unaccountable if they do not have taxation authority. And that's bogus. The fact of the matter is that decisions from curriculum, to redistricting, to personnel policies are for more important than taxation authority. And the voters will hold them accountable, as voters have in Carroll County, Montgomery County, and rest of the 19 counties in Maryland that have elected school boards.

A referendum on an elected board would be preferable to the status quo - but the proposal from Mr. Leopold and Mr. Astle is quicker, more practical and easier to pass. We're hoping that this year the football finally gets kicked.

And that pretty much says it all. The Capital's editors want a quick solution. Not the right solution, but a quick solution.

I remain flabbergasted that the media, Democrats, and liberal leaders such as John Leopold refuse to support a fully elected school board and full voter participation in the school board process...

So it really has no point

From The Gazette:

What’s Rich Colburn’s mug doing on the home page of the state GOP’s web site? He’s the party’s legislator of the week, a new feature.

So what has the Middle Shore senator done to earn such accolades? Well, nothing.

Party spokeswoman Audra Miller said each GOP lawmaker will have their turn on the site, which links directly to their state biography. Legislative leaders in both chambers were featured in the opening weeks of the session, and the party is now highlighting all 52 of its legislators in alphabetical order — all the way down to Rick Weldon, whose profile will round out the year.

‘‘It’s important for people to know when they visit our site not only who we [the party] are, but to introduce them, if they don’t know, to who our legislators are and the work that they do,” Miller said.

Good grief. That sounds like some sort of weird liberal egalitarianism where we have to make sure everybody gets their turn.

Good Bill, Bad Bill

The Capital took note today of the dueling School Board bills that have been introduced in the General Assembly this year. But it can be broken down simply; there is a Good Bill, and there is a Bad Bill.

The Good Bill is SB28/HB395 bill that we have discussed previously, put forth by Senators Simonaire and Greenip, and Delegates McConkey, Costa, Dwyer, and George. This bill will create a legitimately elected Board of Education in Anne Arundel County. And they should be commended for introducing a bill that provides a legitimate election process.

The Bad Bill is HB1114/SB324, put forth by the Delegation Chairs at the request of John Leopold. This will, as have all of the other bills supported by Leopold over the years, codify the existing process that has so much wrong with it in the first place. This, incidentally, is nearly exclusively supported by Democratic legislators.

The Leopold bill is supported by the Chamber of Commerce and the Teacher's Union. "This is a consensus compromise...It's the first time both groups have been singing from the same sheet of music," he says. And I bet they do. Because Leopold wants to hand out one seat on the nominating commission to each group. The Leopold/Democrat plan would hand out seats on the commission in the following manner:

• 5 appointed by the Governor, one each from Legislative Districts 21, 30, 31, 32 and 33.
• 1 appointed by the County Executive
• 1 from the Teacher's Union
• 1 from the Annapolis/Anne Arundel Chamber of Commerce
• 1 from the Anne Arundel County Council of PTAs
• 1 from the Anne Arundel Community College of Board of Trustees
• 1 from the Association of Educational Leaders
  

And then the appointees will have to face a yes/no vote during the General Election. If they lose the vote, the Commission will have to appoint somebody else. Leopold wants to give special interests the keys to the kingdom.

And once again, as I have stated before, this is actually less representative than the current process. Leave it to Leopold and the Democrats to want and try to make the process worse than it already is. The appointment process is still controlled by the same interests currently controlling the process. And once again, despite Leopold's protestations and the Speaker trying to mislead voters into thinking that the process is similar to electing Circuit Court judges, people don't actually get to vote in a real election.

No wonder Leopold had to get into bed with Democratic interest groups and Democratic legislative leaders to get it introduced...

This is why HB28/SB395 is the strongest bill to help schools, children, and taxpayers in Anne Arundel County. Only this bill will give parents, teachers, and taxpayers alike the opportunity to decide who is going to be responsible for education in our county. And it provides for real, fair, competitive elections; not the farce that HB1114/SB324 want to call competitive elections. HB1113/SB324 is nothing more than codifying the status quo.

The delegation hearing on both bills is on Friday. I urge you to call your legislators and tell them that your support a truly elected school board, not one that empowers an appointed commission of special interests...

It's Baaaaaccckkkkk

Like a bad house guest that nobody wants around and won't go away, John Leopold's Board of Education bill looks like it is making a comeback this year under Mary Ann Love's stewardship. According to the bill synopsis for Thursday, HB1114 (which is not yet posted) will be introduced, and if the synopsis is any indication, it looks to be identical to last year's HB24, Leopold's bill. As I said last January:

I have said time, and time, and time again about how bad of an idea this sort of change is. What's worse is that the bill now clearly delineates who will, and who will not be represented on the Commission. Seats on the commission are reserved for the Teachers Association, the Chamber of Commerce, the County PTA, the Citizens Advisory Committee, the Anne Arundel Community College Board of Trustees, and the Association of Education Leaders. Other than one seat, where are the parents? Where are the taxpayers? Who is looking out for them?

This bill does nothing other than take a status quo that does not adequately represent the community, and repackages it as something that has less representation, less accountability, and less influence from the community at large. What still galls me is the fact that Delegates Love, Leopold, Dwyer and Busch have the chutzpah to call this an "elected" school board. What an insult to the intelligence of the county voter. I cannot understand why the delegates will not submit a bill that would let the voters of Anne Arundel County elect their school board. The only reason that I can deduce is that these Delegates Love, Leopold, Dwyer and Busch believe that big government should make the decision for us. In lieu of an elected board, we get a charade.

Let's hope that once again that this nannystate version of school board selection reform doesn't see the light of day...

The Joke is on the Voters

Usually, national Democratic politicians are funny without trying to be. Up in Minnesota, they just get to be the joke:

Comedian, author and liberal talk-show host Al Franken declared his candidacy Wednesday for the Minnesota U.S. Senate seat held by Republican Norm Coleman, ensuring that the 2008 race will be more entertaining than usual and more closely followed by the national media.

He's got a video message(transcript here), where at least he is serious. Of course, Franken says:

Your government should have your back. That should be our mission in Washington, the one FDR gave us during another challenging time: freedom from fear.

The problem is, usually it's the government that I'm worried about.

I should not mock the Minnesota Democrats too much. Our side nominated an actor as President and that turned out OK for us. But if they go down this road, I doubt Minnesotans will be so lucky...

30 Lines

HB448 in the House of Delegates adds 30 new classifications of items that would be newly eligible to be covered under the Maryland State Sales tax. Greg Kline does an outstanding job commenting about this proposed legislation in the newest edition of the Conservative Refuge Podcast. HB1022 is a similar bill.

I'm just surprised nobody has introduced a bill to raise the sales tax...yet.

Baltimore's Litmus Test

Laura Vozzella's column today in the Sun has a nugget regarding the vacancy on the Baltimore City Council's 6th District, due to the elevation of Stephanie Rawlings Blake to President of the City Council:

Litmus tests aren't just for Supreme Court nominees anymore. At a hearing tonight, City Council Vice President Bobby Curran said he'll ask all 11 candidates seeking the vacant 6th District seat their positions on the proposed Baltimore smoking ban. Curran, one of 10 people on the council committee that will recommend someone to the full council, said he won't support anyone who doesn't back the ban. "Why do you want to get into public service if you're not going to serve the public?

That's right; the Governor's brother-in-law wants to create a litmus test for candidates who want to fill this seat on the City Council. But how arrogant is it that Curran believes that only people who pass his litmus test are going to serve the public? Is not somebody who supports business who want to allow smoking in their establishment also supporting the public?

Curran's arrogance is incredible, though not surprising in the Democratically dominated City of Baltimore...

A Cheer for David Brinkley

Democratic Legislators in Annapolis are gunning to urge Congress to oppose the President's surge plan in Iraq.

Senate Minoriy Leader David Brinkley was the voice of reason:

"You've got state legislators without any idea of military intelligence offering their opposition...It's fine to do that when you're safe and secure in Annapolis, but we leave the foreign and military policy up to the federal government, and that's where it ought to stay."

I don't trust the General Assembly with what's already on their plate...

Primary Problems

I have a proposal that the General Assembly should consider. The Maryland Presidential primary should be moved up to next week. Then, Maryland can take it's rightful place among the first Presidential primaries, and have a key hand in determining our next President.

I say all of that in jest, of course. There is no logical reason as to why Maryland should move up it's Presidential primary. Nor is there a real good reason that California wants to move their primary to February 5th. Florida is talking about January 29th. Illinois and New York want to move their primaries up to at least February 5th in order to help their favorite sons (and daughter) in the nominating process. Alabama is moving to a Saturday primary. And still, none of them will come before the New Hampshire primary, where the Secretary of State will proclaim the Primary at least seven days before any other primary election by state law.

What is all of this coming to? And what's the hurry?

The front-loading of Presidential primary elections is going to do one thing for certain; it is going to ensure that candidates who enter the race with less cash and a lower profile maintain less cash and a lower profile than their competitors. Realistically, only the three or four frontrunners in every party would be able to legitimately participate in the process. Only certain candidates (Romeny, McCain, Giuliani, Gingrich, Gore, Clinton, Obama, Edwards) would be able to compete in 2008 under this kinda of setup.

But that does not mean that the electoral picture would clear itself out by Valentine's Day either. In past years, Iowa and New Hampshire have cleared out the candidates who can't make the cut, allowing only the top two or three candidates to have the momentum to make it to Super Tuesday. If you are talking about simultaneous primaries in many key states with lots of convention delegates, you could see six states split among four or five candidates.

And what if, for example, one of the lower tier candidates wins a major race? What would happen on the Republican side, for example, if Duncan Hunter won the California primary? Combine that with a scenario where no candidate enters the convention with enough delegates to win the nomination, and you have a relatively minor candidate controlling the outcome of the convention. That's not electing a nominee through a primary process; that's vote trading in smoke-filled rooms, just like the bad old days everybody says they want to avoid.

It would be better for everybody if primaries were spread across a great amount of time, not compacted into a a twenty state, ten day sprint. That gives the people more time to learn about the candidates, and allows candidates to compete who do not necessarily have the profile, the money, or the connections to be an instant contender the second they announce. Sure, every so often that sticks you with Jimmy Carter, but it is a better, fairer way to go about the process, and it ensures that people in more states will have a say in the nominee selection process than most of the current frontloaded proposals currently being floated.

R.I.P. Congressman Norwood

Congressman Charlie Norwood(R-GA) has passed away due to cancer today. He recently returned home to Georgia to be with loved ones in his final days. While we remember him and his service to his country, take a look at what this pompous jerk had to say about it before the Congressman's passing:

Georgia Republican Congressman Charlie Norwood will be coming back to Augusta, GA "to let God do what He may", according to the ailing Dentist. The Congressman has refused treatment in Georgetown to come home to a 24-hour hospice care. Oddly he may actually make a case for Dr. Kevorkian style euthanasia in his waning days. Governor Perdue will have to call a special election after Norwood's evidently eventual extinction....We certainly wish the best for Congressman Norwood, but if he is refusing treatment, the least he could while still alive is to resign the seat with dignity intact. Death is a tremendously difficult subject to write about, and it proves an old adage one step further: Republicans want to control how you are born, how you live and how you die, and now it seems control your life after they die.

This poor excuse for a human being is the Chairman of the Oconne County, Georgia Democratic Party.

Changeup!

Amazingly, my prediction of Nancy Stocksdale from last week was incorrect. Instead, it was Senator Rich Colburn. I'll stick with Delegate Stocksdale for next week...

But I still ask: does this have a point?

Backwards from the Start

It is not a good idea when you lose a pitcher like Kris Benson before Spring Training even starts. Particularly so when he is the veteran leader of a young pitching staff, and good for about 190 innings per year when he is healthy.

Orioles brass panicked after hearing the news. Within hours, the club had signed Steve Trachsel to a deal paying him at least $3 million this season. Whether that was a good knee-jerk decision is up in the air. True Trachsel's numbers show a pitcher who has averaged around 200 innings per year in a stretch from 1996-2004. But he's also a pitcher who has only thrown 201 2/3 innings the last two seasons, as well as a pitcher who last year had a 4.97 ERA and the highest WHIP ratio of his career, all pitching for a Mets playoff team (in the National League). He's also 36, joining Jaret Wright as the "graybeards" of the starting rotation.

This is not a good start for the 2007 season. Particularly since management decided to focus on the bullpen (as we previously noted) rather than address the starting pitching. A fivesome of Erik Bedard, Wright, Daniel Cabrera, Adam Loewen, and some combination of Trachsel, Hayden Penn, Garrett Olson, and Jeremy Guthrie. But I bet they wish the Rodrigo Lopez trade had not of happened right about now...

You Don't Say...

"I am very much a 19th-century man caught in the 21st century."
- John Leopold

Wow

This is the Democratic majority (H/T streiff at RedState):

Security Plans and the Budget Debate

The Sun noted the following in today's edition. And there are some interesting contrasts here:

Anne Arundel County school board members approved $2.7 million for stiffer school security, despite their own concerns about how the money fits into a sweeping $39 million security plan. It is a plan they have been told about for two years, but still have not seen.

At a meeting Wednesday, the board approved $1.2 million - on top of $1.5 million given last summer - for improvements such as cameras at schools, fencing and expanded security at athletic events.

But school board members said the approval for extra funds put them in an awkward situation of not knowing how their spending this year gels with $39 million of security weaknesses highlighted in a 2005 consultant's report.

"You keep talking about this $39 million security plan ... .we have all asked for it over and over again ... .we have yet to see it," school board member Ned Carey said briskly at the school system's security head, Edward Piper.

Piper declined to be interviewed .

Later, Carey said, "The board deserves to see something if we're going to be asked to spend $39 million on something. We have a responsibility to taxpayers that we show we're using money efficiently...."

...Carey said he understands that some school security information can be kept private, but said the school board should still be given an outline of what the district proposes to do to improve school safety.

"Do they want cameras? Do they want fencing? Is all the security technology going to be integrated? We need to know these things," Carey said. "You can't do security piecemeal. We have to see the larger plan."

There is an interesting disconnect between what the Board members do and do not know about the security plan. The Board has been asked to spend $39 million on a plan that nobody seems to know too much about...even the head of the security system.

What does this have to do with the recent budget debate? Everything. Because the majority of the same school board, as we have noted repeatedly, has signed up to support Kevin Maxwell's proposed $131 million budget increase, as well as his idea for an increase in the income tax, without seeming to know too much of the specifics of how the money is going to be used. Ned Carey noted that the Board owes it to the taxpayers to show that they are using money efficiently. But at no point has anybody on the Board (outside of Vic Bernson and Mike Leahy) suggested that such efficient use of money be show as part of the Maxwell budget plan.

Furthermore, I am deeply troubled that there is no overall plan for the use of these security dollars. It leads one to ask not what the plan is, but if there is a plan at all. Is the plan at the moment really to have this pot of $39 million available to spend on an as need basis. There seems to be a plan out there somewhere in the ether, at the very least the idea of cameras in all of the schools (never mind the Orwellian connotations that entails).

Finally, it makes me question the planning ability of the bureaucracy down on Riva Road. Are the problems with planning in the Security a microcosm of planning problems across the school system? Are there other departments, perhaps directly related to educational programs, that are also run so haphazardly?

Every time we turn around, there is another reason to be concerned about Maxwell's proposed budget increase, and the cry for additional tax revenues. At this point, I wonder if Maxwell and the rest of his bureaucracy actually have a plan they can defend that could even remotely justify such an audacious spending request.