The Year That Was 2007

Yes, it's time for the 2007 Awards. Last year's post is available here, and the one from 2005 is available here.

Best Move of 2007: Peter Angelos hires Andy MacPhail
2006 Winner: Ravens trade for Steve McNair
2005 Winner: John Roberts Appointed as Chief Justice
I almost feel like putting a disclaimer on this particular topic, since realistically the jury is still out on this move. Not necessarily because the hire of MacPhail will magically become a poor choice; far from it. The success of this move is contingent on how much latitude Angelos will allow MacPhail to operate and run the team as he sees fit. So far, it looks like MacPhail does in fact have the latitude, at least if the trade of Miguel Tejada is any indication. But if Angelos decides to interfere, this choice is going to look silly in about six months.

Honorable Mention: Orioles trade Miguel Tejada; Hall of Fame voters shut out Mark McGwire; John McCain skips Iowa, focuses on New Hampshire

Worst Move of 2007: General Assembly, Leopold impose School Board "reforms"
2006 "Winner": Mel Martinez becomes General Chairman of the RNC
2005 "Winners": Harriet Miers appointed to Supreme Court, Rafael Palmeiro's testimony to Congress

I think I have done plenty to chronicle the absurdity of the "improvements" to the Anne Arundel County School Board selection process that will continue to diminish public input on who makes decisions regarding the education of our children. So click here to catch up on the all the gory and pathetic details.

Dishonorable Mention: Mike Collins ousted as AA GOP Chairman; Baltimore voters re-elect Sheila Dixon; The Mitchell Report; Bobby Petrino quits on Atlanta Falcons

Strangest Move of 2007: John Flynn keeps job as MD GOP Executive Director
2006 Winner: Don Dwyer's May and June
2005 Winner: Martin O'Malley thanks MD4BUSH

2007 was not a good year for the Maryland Republican Party. We are going broke. We are fighting with each other. We had a leadership coup in Anne Arundel County. And we have few credible candidates running for Congress. One of the places where we do have credible candidates we have party leaders openly cheerleading for a challenger to an incumbent. Coming off of 2006, this was about the worst thing that could possibly happen to help rebuild the party. And somehow, John Flynn has manged to keep his job despite several high-profile snafus and generally few people having very much confidence in his job performance. It is just mind-boggling to try and figure out why Flynn has not been replaced with somebody who might be able to get the job done and help right this ship.

Honorable Mention: Jim Gilmore and Tommy Thompson run for President; Ron Paul refuses to disassociate Presidential Campaign from Radical Elements; Atlanta Falcons keep Michael Vick under contract; Religious Right flocks around liberal Mike Huckabee; Steve Bisciotti gives Brian Billick vote of confidence before season ends.

Guy I Feel Bad For for 2007: Arthur Blank, Owner, Atlanta Falcons
2006 "Winner": Rick Neuheisel
2005 "Winner": Rick Neuheisel

Poor Arthur Blank. The fella made a lot of money as a co-founder of Home Depot, but his business success has not yet translated to the football field. But when you consider that in 2007 alone, Michael Vick got stupid about dougs, Head Coach Bobby Petrino chickened out and headed to Arkansas, and Bill Parcells played Blank like a fool before taking a job with the Dolphins, a lot of it was out of Blank's control. You would have to suspect that for Blank and the Falcons, things couldn't get a heck of a lot worse in 2008.

Honorable Mention: Leo Mazzone; Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA); Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT)

Best Run Campaign(Local Division): Fred Paone for Alderman (R-Annapolis)
2006 Winner: Nic Kipke for Delegate (R-31)
2005 Winner: Jeff Holtzinger for Mayor (R-Frederick)

Alderman-elect Paone was really the only viable option to win this award, but he did manage to maintain a Republican seat in a bad year for Republicans against tough challenges from the left and the far left.

Honorable Mention: None

Best Run Campaign(Statewide Division): Donna Edwards for Congress (D-4)
2006 Winner: Michael Steele for US Senate (R)

Obviously, I do not, have not, and will not ever agree with Donna Edwards on much politically. But her campaign has been masterfully run. She was able to catapult herself from an undermanned, overachieving campaign against Congressman Wynn in the 2006 Democratic Primary into running a serious, credible campaign this go around. The fact that she has been able to cultivate union and blogger support from around the state has been a testament to these efforts of coalition building and taking on the tough challengers. Obviously, I couldn't care less who wins this primary because neither one of the leading contenders will do good for Maryland or do good for America, but the Edwards campaign has really had it together.

Honorable Mention: Peter Franchot's seeming 2010 campaign for Governor(D)

Best Run Campaign(National Division): Bobby Jindal for Governor(R-LA)
2006 Winner: Barack Obama for President (D-IL)
2005 Winner: Paul Hackett for Congress (D-OH)

Speaking of campaigns that never stopped, Governor Jindal never stopped running for Governor after the 2003 Louisiana gubernatorial election, one that he probably lost only for reasons of his Indian ancestry. In 2007, there was really never a doubt that Jindal could lose. His constant campaigning, his performance as a member of Congress, and a reaction of Louisiana voters against the Democratic leadership that caused so much heartache and pain during the run up to and the aftermath of Katrina. Bobby Jindal gave the voters exactly what they needed; hope.
Honorable Mention: Mike Huckabee for President (R-AR); Paul Broun for Congress (R-GA); Barack Obama for President (D-IL)

Worst Run Campaign(Local Division): Kieffer Mitchell for Mayor (D-Baltimore)
2006 "Winner": Don Dwyer re-election campaign (R-31)
2005 "Winner": George Kelley for Mayor (R-Annapolis)

There were a lot of people, myself included, that never would have fathomed that Sheila Dixon could beat Kieffer Mitchell so handily. Mitchell had every opportunity to capitalize on Martin O'Malley's catastrophic failure as Mayor of Baltimore, and Dixon's complicity in his failures. And yet, Dixon won in a rout. Mitchell's campaign seemed to be one snafu after another. Problems with rent. Problems with fundraising. Problems with the candidate's family. If anything could have gone wrong with the Mitchell campaign, it did. What this does long term to Mitchell's political career remains in doubt. But how much have you heard from Lawrence Bell or Carl Stokes after their bumbling, failed campaigns for Mayor in 1999?

Dishonorable Mention: Michael Sarbanes for City Council President (D-Baltimore); Debbie Rose McKerrow for Alderwoman (D-Annapolis)

Worst Run Campaign(Statewide Division): Andy Harris for Congress (R-1)
2006 "Winner": Steven Abrams for Comptroller (R)

The Harris Campaign has been one of the most bizarre episodes I have seen in quite some time. From a technical perspective, they are doing almost everything right; getting key endorsements, rallying the base, raising money. It's just that from the strategic perspective, the campaign keeps fumbling over their own feet. It almost as if the gameplan has been: attack, attack, attack. And when somebody criticizes the Harris Campaign, criticize them for attacking. It's been odd because Harris has spent so little time trying to introduce himself to the voters, and so little time talking about what positive changes he would make as a Congressman because his campaign has spent too much time trying to throw Gilchrest and Pipkin under the bus. And it probably explains why Harris may be running third in this race. If this campaign had been run in a strategically sound manner, Pipkin would never have entered the race, and Harris would be on his way to a February 12th rout....

Dishonorable Mention: None

Worst Run Campaign(National Division): The Al Gore Draft Campaign (D-TN)
2006 "Winner": Sen. George Allen's re-election campaign (R-VA)
2005 "Winner": Jerry Kilgore for Governor (R-VA)

His supporters kept trying all year to goad the Goracle into the Presidential race. They tried to astroturf a groundswell of support for the radical environmental movement (why else would NBC pull their Green Week stunt?), and parlay that astroturfed support into a campaign for Gore. They tried to take Gore's unconscionable Nobel Peace Prize win and turn that into a movement. But it was no dice. Not, necessarily, because Gore doesn't want to be President. I think he really does want to be President still. I just think that Gore isn't stupid when it comes to throwing his hat into the ring; he gets ONE more chance and it is strategically sound for him to wait until he has a good shot. But that's where the Draft Gore folks failed; they desperately, desperately wanted 2008 to be the year for Gore.

Dishonorable Mention: Joe Biden for President (D-DE), Sen. Ted Stevens re-election campaign (R-AK)

Best International Development: The Surge in Iraq works
2006 Winner: Saddam Hussein Convicted and Executed
2005 Winner: Free Elections in Iraq

Violence is down. American casualties are down. Iraqi casualties are down. More provinces are being turned over to Iraqi civil authority. To be blunt, anybody who says that the Surge didn't work is relying too much on the mainstream, anti-war media for their information. Let's hope that these developments in Iraq continue to so our troops can come home as soon as possible....

Honorable Mention: Sarkozy elected President of France; Belgium does not split into two countries

Worst International Developments(TIE): Vladimir Putin consolidates power to outlast term/The Assassination of Benazir Bhutto
2006 "Winner": Russian President Vladimir Putin begins murdering critics
2005 "Winner": Vladimir Putin's Reforms in Russia

Yes, once again Time's Man of the Year for 2007 means bad news for the United States. I still cannot fathom how President Bush looked in this joker's eyes and saw anything but a Communist apparatchik with better PR skills. The fact that Putin ensures that the bad old days return ( arresting anti-government protesters like Garry Kasparov, shipping nuclear fuel to the Iranians) continues to be a problem for American foreign policy, and will likely continue to destabilize international affairs for many years to come. Of course, Putin can still teach his American counterparts something; the $40 billion fortune he has allegedly amassed as President makes the fortunes American pols make look like loose change...

Obviously, the recent assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto is still fresh in our minds having happened just a few days ago. But it is hard to argue that her death was one of the worst developments of the past year. Unfortunately, it is hard for me to say that I am surprised that this happened given the history of political violence in Pakistan and other recent threats and attempts on Bhutto's life. The ultimate problem for all of our interests is the fact that you have an extremely volatile domestic situation in a country that has nuclear weapons and does not always play nice with their neighbors. Destabilization is South Asia is bad for world peace and bad for the world's economy. 2008 will say a lot more about how bad this development is than we can know now...

Dishonorable Mention: Communist thugs still in charge in Cuba, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe; The Bali Global Warming Conference; John Howard ousted in Australia

Best News of 2007: Maryland blogosphere expands at rapid rate
Let's face it, one of the best things about 2007 is the fact that Maryland's blogosphere has really taken off. We now have a lot of things that we have on the internet, both left and right, that we didn't have at this time last year. We have the major group blog of the right (Red Maryland) we have the group blog of the left (Free State Politics). We have the bane of the Governor's existence (O'Malley Watch). We have podcasts. We have vlogcasts. All of this stuff is brand new for 2007 and something that I as a longtime Maryland blogger (2008 will be my fourth year in the blogoshpere) am glad to have played a major part of. And now, as we enter 2008, we are going to continue to grow the influence of the blogosphere through the forthcoming Great Debate. Put it this way; we are having a serious conversation in the Maryland blogosphere about the costs and benefits of privatizing aspects of state government; that's not something that has happened before.

Honorable Mention: General Assembly to look into special elections for legislative vacancies; Congress finally passes Alternative Minimum Tax extension

Worst News of 2007: O'Malley, General Assembly Democrats Screw Taxpayers 2006 "Winner": Democrats take Congress, Government House Do I really need to explain this one? Dishonorable Mention: General Assembly prepares more tax hikes for 2008; Crime rate continues to spiral out of control in Baltimore

Fred's Closing Argument in Iowa

This is fantastic....

The Ignorance of Vinny DeMarco

As the cigarette tax gets ready to double on Tuesday, Vinny DeMarco proves that in actuality, he doesn't have a clue:

"That's part of finishing the job - increasing the tax on all tobacco products," said Vincent DeMarco, president of the Maryland Citizens' Health Initiative. "The tax on noncigarette tobacco products would have been a good source of funding for tobacco-prevention programs."

DeMarco said the cigarette tax increase, however, should be praised. "It's great, and they've accomplished a lot," he said of the General Assembly. "Combined with the smoke-free workplace law, those two together are really going to save a lot of people from tobacco addiction. A lot of people are going to be encouraged to quit by the tax."

If you hear about DeMarco from the media and from the left, he's some sort of saint. I've ran into him before and he's just a sleazy lobbyist type. But I never thought he was ignorant and clueless until I read the bolded statement above.

DeMarco's comments about the smoke-free workplace are complete nonsense, as if being in a environment that allowed smoking caused people to become addicted to smoking. It doesn't event sound logical when you say it out loud. There are a variety of reasons people get addicted to tobacco, but they are all involve somebody making the really bad judgment call to start using tobacco products. Being around an environment where others are using tobacco does not make the cigarette jump into your mouth and light itself.

And DeMarco's assertion that people are going to be encouraged to quit by raising the sales tax does not take into account the medical condition we call "addiction." People who are addicted to cigarettes are not necessarily going to take into account the cost-benefit analysis when decided to buy cigarettes, any more than a drug addict is going to weight the cost of jail time against the need for a hit when they are buying heroin on the street corner. Some people are addicted to smokes. That's just the way it is.

DeMarco's comments show a shocking level of naïveté on issues of smoking and addiction from somebody who is an "expert" on health care. The cigarette tax will do nothing to save lives from those who are already addicted to smoking, and is just another way Democrats go out of they way to stick it to the poor.

Things that bug me about the Emerald Bowl

• It's a football game....at a baseball park. It's not like there isn't a famous football stadium in the city of San Francisco or anything...
  
  
• There is a dancing nut tube on the sideline. Seriously.
  
  
• Oregon State's uniforms....dear god.
  
  
• Of all Oregon State alumni they choose to introduce the lineups they pick.....Derek Anderson. Gee, thanks.
  

Of course, the Terps just took a 7-0 lead, so all of these things don't feel so bad right now...

Another Reason I Don't Heart Huckabee

Because you just get the feeling the Mike Huckabee is just the another hypocrite:

Mike Huckabee last year accepted $52,000 in speaking fees from a bio-tech giant that wants to research human embryonic stem cells, a non-profit working to expand access to the morning after pill and a group pushing to study whether tightening gun control laws will reduce violence.

Huckabee opposes embryonic stem cell research, emergency contraception and stricter gun laws – all of which rank high on the list of deal-breakers for many of the religious conservatives whose support he's ridden to the top of the Republican presidential field.

Now a Huckabee spokesman does bring up a fair point:

Huckabee "isn't afraid to speak to people who don't agree with his message or personal philosophy," said his spokeswoman Kirsten Fedewa.

But this is not just speaking to people who are on the other side; I mean, I do that all the time. Huckabee took their money. Which is ultimately his business. But I have a hard, hard time taking him seriously when he takes that much cash from organizations whose ideas he says he is intrinsically opposed to, while at the same time basing his evangelical appeal on his opposition to those issues. It really leads more credence to the fact that Huckabee is the leading liberal in the race for President, but shielding his liberalism in the clothing of Evangelicalism.

Realistically, I don't care who Huckabee takes money from in this regard; he is getting a fee for providing a service. But I'm not running for President on an allegedly Evangelical platform, either....

Capital checks the facts

Kudos to Liam Farrell and the Capital staff for digging into the actual facts of the Special Session document forging scandal (which, remember, you read about here first):

Discrepancies in the records of House and Senate proceedings from November's special session open a window into why the House's chief clerk has become a key player in a lawsuit to overturn $1.3 billion in tax increases.

An examination by The Capital has uncovered documents containing conflicting information about when the Senate decided to take a six-day versus a four-day break over the Veterans Day weekend. And a lawyer representing the plaintiffs in the lawsuit wants to find out whether any of the documents were forged in order to avoid a constitutional problem....

This story has the potential to get a lot uglier before there is any resolution to it, particularly if the courts continue to think that the Legislative Branch should be immune from testifying on whether or not its officers violated Constitutional requirements.

Do we really need to answer this question?

The Sun asks a really stupid question :

Do people have the "right" to make unhealthful or risky choices that society as a whole ends up paying for?

Yeah. It's called the freedom of choice. Have you heard of it? Just like people have the "right" to not buy a newspaper that is declining in quality and taking an ever-further leftist bent...

The Harris Campaign has a truthiness problem

“America is a free country and anyone can run for office. We are glad the only state senator not to endorse Andy finally realizes that Gilchrest should no longer be representing the first congressional district. However, Pipkin and Gilchrest are two tax-and-spend peas in a liberal pod. Andy Harris is the only person in this race who shares the conservative values of the first congressional district.”
- Harris Campaign statement regarding E.J. Pipkin's entrance into the race

So if the Harris folks were telling the truth, why did this happen?

The campaign of State Sen. E.J. Pipkin announced today the endorsement of Senate Minority Leader David R. Brinkley. Pipkin is challenging incumbent Rep. Wayne Gilchrest in the Republican primary in Maryland’s 1st Congressional District.

“Sen. Brinkley is a very-well respected man and an outstanding Republican,” Andi Morony, Pipkin’s press secretary, said in an interview with PolitickerMD.com.

Morony referred to Brinkley’s said the endorsement would “absolutely” help the campaign.

Brinkley, speaking with PolitickerMD.com, said that Pipkin was the “best candidate to keep the (congressional) seat on the Republican side.”

The Harris campaign clearly seems to have a problem with telling the truth, and I have no idea why they would have try to get away with such a major fib on such a minor issue like an endorsement. But it certainly does draw further into question whether or not Andy Harris has the traits we want from a member of Congress....

Sad, Sad, Sad

I'm so glad that Senate Democrats are acting like adults:

The U.S. Senate was called to order for 11 seconds on Wednesday as the last political scuffle of the year between the White House and the Democratic-led Congress played out.

Nearly all the senators left the Capitol for the Christmas holiday last week, but Democrats are keeping the Senate in session to block President Bush from making any recess appointments -- a constitutional mechanism that allows the president, during congressional recesses, to fill top government posts for up to one year without Senate confirmation.

Sen. Jim Webb, D-Virginia, opened and then immediately gaveled the Senate session to a close. He spent 57 seconds in the chamber.

If a Republican Senate had pulled a stunt like this, CNN, the New York Times et. al. would be calling it the end of the republic, with the Senate obstructing the Executive Branch's power. Instead, CNN plays it off to be Bush's fault and that the Democrats are merely executing checks and balances.

This is a sad commentary that government money was actually set aside to fund the operation of the Capital for these kind of shenanigans. Of course, if I were a member of the Senate minority leadership, I'd have somebody there in the chamber, if only to allow plenty of time to put certain statements on the record...

No end in sight for transit system violence

Will the violence on Baltimore area transit systems ever end?

In the latest of a series of violent incidents on Maryland Transit Administration property, a 14-year-old boy was shot and wounded on board a bus in West Baltimore this morning, according to city police.

Agent Donny Moses, a department spokesman, said the incident occurred about 12:45 a.m. on the No. 15 bus in the 1100 block of Poplar Grove St. He said the youth got into an argument with another male, who stepped off the bus at a stop, then leaned back in and fired a shot, hitting the boy in the leg.

In the latest of a series of violent incidents on Maryland Transit Administration property, a 14-year-old boy was shot and wounded on board a bus in West Baltimore this morning, according to city police.

Agent Donny Moses, a department spokesman, said the incident occurred about 12:45 a.m. on the No. 15 bus in the 1100 block of Poplar Grove St. He said the youth got into an argument with another male, who stepped off the bus at a stop, then leaned back in and fired a shot, hitting the boy in the leg.

This is just the latest in a series of violent incidents on Maryland Transit Administration operated systems. Problem is that, at least with last week's unveiling, the MTA has been asleep at the switch for months on the issue of safety on public transit:

Bus operators are being encouraged to call police and stop the vehicle at the first sign of disruptive behavior as part of a plan to curb violence on public transit, the Maryland Transit Administration announced yesterday.

Responding to a series of assaults recently on its buses in Baltimore, the MTA also said it would step up patrols by its police force and forge a closer working relationship with the Baltimore Police Department and the city school system.

Among other steps, the MTA plans to speed notification of city officers when an incident occurs on a bus or other transit facilities in the city. Under this change, city police would receive word of 911 calls involving MTA facilities at the same time as the transit agency's police force so the closest unit could respond.

"Whoever gets there first," said MTA Police Chief David C. Franklin. "It's not about egos. It's about making the system safe."

At a news conference at the Mondawmin Mall Transit Center, MTA Administrator Paul J. Wiedefeld described what he called a "comprehensive approach to disruptive behavior," called Operation: Safe Transport.

"We want to reassure citizens we have taken strong measures to protect public transit users," he said.

Of course, I have anything but confidence in the MTA to fix these problems. The fact of the matter is that public transit overseen by the MTA has never been safe, and few measures seem to ever be taken to make the system safer other than going beyond lip service. And lip service sounds exactly like what the MTA is proposing now, because a lot of these things make me think, "Wait, they didn't do this before?" Are the people over at the MTA really so clueless that they didn't think to step up its patrols until after several acts of violence on its system? Does anybody have a clue over there?

What's completely disheartening about the MTA is the fact that they seem to be oblivious to the issue of rider safety (much like they are with competent timetables) while at the same time asking for billions of dollars in new construction and improvements to expand MARC rail, and also to build new transit options in Baltimore City. However, the MTA clearly can't get it's act together to male their current system safe. So why should anybody expect the need for a multi-billion dollar expansion when people will likely avoid the system since the system can't provide them with a safe environment? And it's not just the issue of crime, but the issue of existing infrastructure that adds to this problem.

Clearly, I believe that privatization is what needs to happen here in order for the mass transit to get it's act together here in Maryland. However, since the likelihood of that happening in the immediate future is slim, I think that it is time that the General Assembly cut all new spending directed at the MTA until the MTA gets its house in order. Until public transit in Baltimore is relatively safe, we should not spend one penny more in state money to expand a system that cannot promise its riders a safe environment.

Sun back to Mixed Messages

From this morning's op-ed page:

The higher tax would raise about $15 million annually. That's money badly needed to bolster the state's now-minimal tobacco control efforts. The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends Maryland spend at least $46.8 million annually to discourage smoking and help users quit, but after recent budget cuts, the state's current program amounts to less than $18 million.

The point of a high tax on cigarettes is not merely to balance the state budget; it's to discourage people from buying them at all. Tobacco use is the single most preventable cause of death and disease in this country. A tax policy that fails to discourage all types of tobacco use demonstrates a disregard for public health.

The Sun, as usual, continues to want to have it both ways. They want to raise tobacco taxes to raise revenue, while at the same time discouraging people from buying tobacco products. Considering that Sun editors already seem to have spent the extra $15 million in taxes they are proposing on these little cigars, can they seriously believe that this is serious policymaking? Do they really believe that the law of diminishing returns constitutes sound fiscal management?

And I repeat something else I have asked before: if the Sun and others believe tobacco to be so dangerous, why do they not call for tobacco products to be outlawed? Is that any more of a "disregard for public health" than raising the taxes on cigarettes (a tax clearly aimed at the lower and middle classes, by the way)...

Here's a Happy Yuletide Topic

I know that none of the participants here are Christian, but still this does not exactly scream "Peace on Earth" (H/T Instapundit):

If a nuclear war between Israel and Iran were to break out 16-20 million Iranians would lose their lives - as opposed to 200,000-800,000 Israelis, according to a report recently published by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), which is headed by Anthony H. Cordesman, formerly an analyst for the US Department of Defense. The document, which is largely theoretical due to the lack of verified knowledge in some areas - specifically in terms of Israel's nuclear capability - paints various scenarios and attempts to predict the strategies of regional powers, as well as the US.

The report assesses that a nuclear war would last approximately three weeks and ultimately end with the annihilation of Iran, due to Israel's alleged possession of weapons with a far larger yield. Israel, according to the assessment, would have a larger chance of survival. The report does not attempt to predict how many deaths would eventually be caused by possible nuclear fallout.

Even if Iran gained the means and knowledge to create nuclear weapons, according to the report it would still be limited to 100 kiloton weapons, which can cause a far smaller radius of destruction than the 1 megaton bombs Israel allegedly possesses.

What's ultimately disturbing to me about this scenario actually goes beyond the horrific casualty rates. It's the fact that ration of losing about 80 Iranian civilians for every Israeli citizen killed probably would not be a deterrent effect for the Iranian regime, much in the same way that I doubt a nuclear North Korea would be deterred from the slaughter of its population in using nuclear weapons on South Korea or Japan.

The only thing going for the good guys in keeping the Iranians in check right now are the Russians, and I'm not exactly pinning my hopes on Team Putin to do the right thing these days....

Merry Christmas!

The Difference is...I'll Respond

So Isaac Smith, who of refused to accept my challenge to a debate, challenged me to cut the budget:

But as you surely know, it's one thing to talk in generalities, and quite another to get down to specifics. So what, Brian, would you cut? Here's the FY2008 budget; have at it. And of course, it's not just enough to propose budget cuts, but you have to demonstrate that these cuts will not impair the ability of the state to carry out its duties in education, in health care, in public safety, etc. You may not think the state has such duties, and that perhaps is the difference between you and me.

Of course, I have the size to actually respond to such a challenge. So read it and weep. And I actually went further than just cutting the budget by reallocating some of the money to where it was actually useful, and by privatizing certain state assets. So what you see here is a net savings of over $3.6 billion. And yes, public secondary education, public safety, and health care are not impacted at all.

I know in fact that the FSP people (who have called me delusional incidentally) will cry and scream that a lot of these things that I am cutting or privatizing are part of the role of government. Except government either should not be doing it in the first place, or certainly is not doing it well right now....

John Leopold...always on the prowl

This apparently is John Leopold's idea of campaigning. John gave this mug to Jimmy Braswell at the Double T diner this morning. John apparently started ignoring Jimmy's brother when he found out he was a Florida resident, and John gave this mug to Jimmy....which Jimmy has bequeathed the mug to me tonight.

What...the...hell?

American 67, Maryland 59

Seriously, American just beat Maryland...at Comcast Center, giving the Terps two straight non-conference home losses (losing to Ohio last time out). Losing to Patriot League and MAC teams is not a way to build your resume for the tournament.

Greivis Vasquez cannot be forced to be a one man band like he was today if the Terps expect to dance come March. Looks like a long year for Maryland this season...

Classy and Respectful

Fred Thompson has released an actually meaningful video here as we approach Chirstmas.

Certainly better than the stuff the Huckabee, Giuliani, and ESPECIALLY Clinton campaigns are trying to pull right now...

Plenty of Reasons Why

There is probably a good reason why the Free State Politics crowd stopped talking about global warming when Maryland's conservative blogosphere started talking extensively about it this week. The facts just aren't on their side, and this post at RedState from California Yankee goes a long way towards consolidating numerous links, studies, and reports detailing the total lack of consensus on the issue, including a recent report from the Senate's EPW Committee report noting the hundreds of scientists who are skeptical of the alleged "consensus."

This is just endemic of the problem on the left once again, much as it was with my debate throwdown. The majority of liberals like to talk smack and bloviate about generalities, but try to get them in a discussion about facts they get scared and run to momma. It's a sad statement on political discourse when you can't even get your opposition to stand up for what they believe in, but it's becoming painfully obvious that is what the modern urban liberals have become...

Maxwell still doesn't get it

School Superintendent Kevin Maxwell still doesn't understand that you can't just spend your way to better schools:

Claiming he did everything possible to pare down school spending, Superintendent Kevin M. Maxwell proposed another budget hike for county schools last night.

It's an increase smaller than the one he proposed last year, which led to months of squabbling between county and school officials, and ended up not being fully funded.

"We have scrimped. We have saved," Dr. Maxwell told the county Board of Education in his operating and capital budget presentation. "We have looked at every program and position - every single one - and made some painful decisions that will impact our students."

In a budget presentation punctuated with recognitions and applause for groups of students and schools staff, the superintendent asked for $99.9 million more in his operating budget than he received from the state and county last year. The fiscal 2008 budget was about an 8 percent increase from the previous year.

If this year's spending plan is fully funded, it will bring the total schools operating budget to $968.8 million.

Yes, we have nearly Billion-Dollar Babies in our public schools according to Maxwell's proposed budget, which is available online here and I'll be reviewing that in the near future to see where Maxwell continues to insist on wasting money.

Two things make Maxwell's yearly beg-a-thon disheartening to myself and many other Anne Arundel County residents.

First, Maxwell refuses to reconsider the course of actions before spending any money. Every year, Maxwell requests gigantic spending increases without either proving the demonstrable need for such increases, or whether or not the programs he wishes to continue funding are being effective. We get higher and higher spending requests every year without any consideration as to if what our schools are doing is actually working to educate our students better. I would also be willing to bet that the high administrative overhead also remains in this year's budget as well, much as it did last year's.

Second, this once again reinforces the need for an elected School Board in Anne Arundel County. John Leopold likes to complain about the Superintendent and this Board's lack of fiscal reality, yet he continues to wish that the population has no input on the School Board selection process. Leopold's beloved School Board appointment plan that he helped shepherd through the General Assembly is going to make an existing problem worse, as the majority of new members appointed by Governor O'Malley will share O'Malley's "politics first, unions second, education last" philosophy of school board administration. And we already have that problem when you consider some of the knuckleheaded things Eugene Peterson says:

Board member Eugene Peterson called the superintendent's plan "bare-bones."

"We must honor our contracts," he said. "If we don't, we'll lose all credibility and our competitive edge, and we can't do that. Good education costs money."

Our school system selection process lost credibility when the public had it's right to participate taken away by a Governor and a County Executive who want to remove parents and taxpayers from having influence on who sits on our board. But furthermore, having credibility and a competitive edge when it comes to public schools has nothing to do with money and everything to do with curriculum and methods. If this oft-repeated adage about buying our way to better schools were true, why do politicians and muckity-mucks in the District of Columbia ( tops in per pupil spending) always send their kids to private schools?

These issues regarding spending, spending priorities, curriculum issues, and teaching methods all come back down to who selects the school board. With the current O'Malley/Leopold system in place, we know that future members of the School Board will place educational achievement at the lowest level of priority, choosing to protect the teacher's union and protecting liberal teaching methods and political causes first and foremost. Because O'Malley and Leopold have insisted that parents, teachers, and taxpayers should not have the right to vote for a School Board of their own choosing, this kind of nonsense will continue to be all to common in the future.

We always come back to economics, don't we?

The left still doesn't get it. Eric Luedtke (who as you know, refuses to debate me on the issue of which party is better for working families and the middle class) still doesn't comprehend that the unhappiness with the sales tax on computer services is part of a larger problem:

Momentum seems to be building for the Assembly to revisit the haphazard expansion of the sales tax to computer services and no other services during the special session. No one seems to be particularly happy with that outcome. Put simply, there was no fair standard applied, and computer services was picked largely because it fit a hole in the package.

So what are the options? 1. Eliminate the computer services sales tax and add nothing else, which leaves another hole in the budget. 2. Drop computer services but apply the sales tax to other industries (there are dozens of services not currently taxed, even beyond those discussed during the special session). But then you have the same problem of explaining why one or more industries are taxed while others aren't. Or 3. Apply a smaller (1-2%) sales tax to a broad range of service industries.

And for the billionth time, Luedtke again misses the most obvious answer; eliminate the entire sales tax hike, and cut state spending. Luedtke seems to think that the most important thing to fix in regards to the computer services tax is to just fix that particular portion of tax.

What he fails to realize is that the thing that is most important to the economy, and most important to Marylanders is trying to take proactive steps to make Maryland more livable and more affordable to working families. The only way to do that is to cut state spending and eliminate the draconian tax increases that Maryland Democrats subjected to the middle and working classes. Only then can Maryland's economy be allowed to less encumbered in this difficult economy, and only than can Maryland's families be able to better reap the fruits of their labor. Only then can the chains constraining our economic growth be removed.

The General Assembly needs to go back to Annapolis and put Maryland's working families first, and the only way they can do that is to roll back the unfair taxes that Maryland's taxpayers will soon be subjected to....

Do the Math

You don't say:

Despite the tax increases and spending cuts approved in last month's special legislative session, legislative analysts see another possible budget shortfall looming by fiscal year 2010.

The projected deficit is $237 million. It is projected to grow by another $26 million the following year.

And on top of the historically massive tax increases, O'Malley and the General Assembly added $500 million in new spending.

So...is it safe to say that Governor O'Malley has officially spent us into a deficit, or should we wait for Administration and General Assembly inaction to set in before we make the proclamation?

"Progress" on Environment anything but

Good job team:

President Bush has signed a law requiring automakers to increase fuel efficiency by 40 percent. It also requires wider ethanol use.

Or not:

Because of rising demand for ethanol, American farmers are growing more corn than at any time since World War II. And sea life in the Gulf of Mexico is paying the price.

The nation's corn crop is fertilized with millions of pounds of nitrogen-based fertilizer. And when that nitrogen runs off fields in Corn Belt states, it makes its way to the Mississippi River and eventually pours into the Gulf, where it contributes to a growing "dead zone" — a 7,900-square-mile patch so depleted of oxygen that fish, crabs and shrimp suffocate.

The dead zone was discovered in 1985 and has grown fairly steadily since then, forcing fishermen to venture farther and farther out to sea to find their catch. For decades, fertilizer has been considered the prime cause of the lifeless spot.

With demand for corn booming, some researchers fear the dead zone will expand rapidly, with devastating consequences.

"We might be coming close to a tipping point," said Matt Rota, director of the water resources program for the New Orleans-based Gulf Restoration Network, an environmental group. "The ecosystem might change or collapse as opposed to being just impacted."

And this ties in with the story I noted back in September where the demand for ethanol is killing rain forests in tropical climes.

Once again, it seems like political convenience took precedence over proven science. Nobody can possibly tell me that it is better for us to be growing more and more corn for ethanol use if it means creating a massive dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico. Sorry, that's "fixing" one problem (I'll get to that in a second) and creating one that is just as bad, and possibly even worse, in it's place.

And let's get back to the point of ethanol. Because guess what? There is no consensus that widespread use of ethanol (or other organic fuels) as a replacement for fossil fuels is a positive for the environment:

Energy outputs from ethanol produced using corn, switchgrass, and wood biomass were each less than the respective fossil energy inputs. The same was true for producing biodiesel using soybeans and sunflower, however, the energy cost for producing soybean biodiesel was only slightly negative compared with ethanol production. Findings in terms of energy outputs compared with the energy inputs were:

• Ethanol production using corn grain required 29% more fossil energy than the ethanol fuel produced.
• Ethanol production using switchgrass required 50% more fossil energy than the ethanol fuel produced.
  
• Ethanol production using wood biomass required 57% more fossil energy than the ethanol fuel produced.
  
• Biodiesel production using soybean required 27% more fossil energy than the biodiesel fuel produced(Note, the energy yield from soy oil per hectare is far lower than the ethanol yield from corn).
• Biodiesel production using sunflower required 118% more fossil energy than the biodiesel fuel produced.

Of course, the study that I copied that from is from the notoriously anti-science , in the pocket of big business folks from.....the University of California-Berkeley. And Professor Tad Patzek, one of the authors of the aforementioned paper, is a major skeptic of biofuels to say the least (though in the interest of full disclosure, his bio notes that he worked for Shell back in the day).

Once again, Congress and the administration have teamed up to take "action" that does not necessarily accomplish any of the goals with they purportedly have aimed to achieve. By trying to increase ethanol production, they may have unwittingly caused the expansion and promulgation of a large environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, and may be contributing to the increase, not decrease, of fossil fuel output due to the energy used to create biofuels.

We need to work on ways to create new alternative fuels whose use and production methods help us clean, not pollute, the environment. The rush of Washington to "do something" to fix the problems is merely meddling in areas that the politicians seem not to understand. By doing the wrong thing, this legislation merely proves that in all likelihood it will be the free market, not Washington, that will come through with the big breakthroughs that will continue to create a cleaner planet. As usual, Washington gives us a cure that could be worse than the disease...

Hysteria, meet reality

This is less than surprising (H/T Instapundit):

The Kyoto treaty was agreed upon in late 1997 and countries started signing and ratifying it in 1998. A list of countries and their carbon dioxide emissions due to consumption of fossil fuels is available from the U.S. government. If we look at that data and compare 2004 (latest year for which data is available) to 1997 (last year before the Kyoto treaty was signed), we find the following.

• Emissions worldwide increased 18.0%.
• Emissions from countries that signed the treaty increased 21.1%.
• Emissions from non-signers increased 10.0%.
• Emissions from the U.S. increased 6.6%.

In fact, emissions from the U.S. grew slower than those of over 75% of the countries that signed Kyoto. Below are the growth rates of carbon dioxide emissions, from 1997 to 2004, for a few selected countries, all Kyoto signers. (Remember, the comparative number for the U.S. is 6.6%.)

• Maldives, 252%.
• Sudan, 142%.
• China, 55%.
• Luxembourg, 43%
• Iran, 39%.
• Iceland, 29%.
• Norway, 24%.
• Russia, 16%.
• Italy, 16%.
• Finland, 15%.
• Mexico, 11%.
• Japan, 11%.
• Canada, 8.8%.

Which ties in nicely with this editorial from Governor Pete du Pont in today's Wall Street Journal:

In light of all this criticism, what is the status of global emissions over the past few decades? Compared with other countries, how has America done? We generate about 25% of the world's global warming emissions, which is not surprising since we are about 27% of the global economy.

From 1990 to 1995, America's emissions increased 3.9% compared with 3.4% for other developed nations.

From 1995 to 2000, the emissions increased to 11.3%, compared with other developed nations' decline of 1.4%.

From 2000 to 2005, our increase was 0.6% compared with other nations' 2.7%.

So we are making progress. Comparing us with other nations over the 1990-2005, period we are doing better than Canada, Greece, Ireland, New Zealand, Portugal, Spain and Turkey, and not as well as Australia, France, Germany, Britain and the Scandinavian nations.

There is no question we must do the research to find ways to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and that is going forward. As President Bush pointed out in last year's State of the Union address: "Since 2001 we have spent nearly $10 billion to develop cleaner, cheaper and more reliable alternative energy sources." If the Congress fully funds the President's 2008 budget it will total $15 billion.

Governor du Pont also postulates that the real reason for the insistence of developing nations to get the U.S. to adhere to Kyoto and Bali is to slow the American economy to the levels of these developing nations. And when you consider that the liberals don't blink an eye when China, home to 16 of the world's most polluted cities, keeps building coal-fired electric plants to keep with their electric demand, that point seems rather strong.

What the fringe environmental alarmists fail to see is all of the progress that we have made in the United States. I have seen pictures of the 1960's and 1970's, all of the haze in the air. All of the pollution in the waterways. The Cuyahoga catching fire. Can people honestly look around at the air, at anti-pollution measures, at Green Space initiatives, and say that our air quality and our environment in these United States are worse now than it was thirty or forty years ago?

I am a conservationist, in the sense that it is not good politics or good policy for us to be trashing the natural resources that we have been blessed enough to receive here in this neck of the galaxy. But there is not a panacea or a magic wand that will be able to fix pollution without doing serious damage to the American economy. When you consider that it is currently countries that have lousy economies where a large chunk of the pollution is coming from, how is shrinking the American economy going to be able to save the environment when folks who are forced out of their jobs due to inflation and the hyperinflating cost of doing business? You think folks struggling to make ends meet are going to care at that point?

How do they fix this?

So the right and the left both agree that the policy to ban 17-year olds who will be 18 before November 4th from voting in the February 12th primary election is pretty stupid.

So how exactly do they fix this? The deadline to register to vote was back in November. OK, that's easy enough I suppose, you open up registration to those voters who fall within that window of time.

OK....what if one of those current 17-year olds wanted to run for convention delegate? Anybody think of that? Anybody figure out how these folks, who would suddenly be eligible to run for convention delegate after the filing deadline, would be allowed the opportunity to represent their party? And what about counties that allow 18-year olds to run for Board of Education? How will the rights that these voters have had taken away from them be restored?

The fact of the matter is that this change of policy was a major, major screw-up and flies in the face of encouraging our youngest voters to participate in the political process. They not only need to fix it, but also figure out how they can and if they can allow those potential candidates who were disenfranchised from this ruling the opportunity to get their names on the ballot. If the change was wrong, the Board of Elections must take steps to make sure that these disenfranchised voters have their rights restored.

EDIT: Yes the deadline really is January 22, I was thinking of the deadline to change your party affiliation back in November. But that does not address the issue of candidates...

Foxes, Henhouses, and Boondoggles

The same crew of Democrats who forced a half-assed electric deregulation policy down Maryland's throat now want to....force a half-assed re-regulation policy down Maryland's throat:

The soaring costs of electricity will not decrease soon unless the government takes action, according to the state's power regulators.

That is because deregulation - a process that allowed power plants to sell electricity according to market rates in order to lower costs - has failed Maryland, according to a report from the Public Service Commission.

Now, it is up to Gov. Martin O'Malley, the General Assembly, the Maryland Energy Administration, the PSC, and Maryland's power regulators to craft a workable power future without creating another disaster for consumers.

"After almost seven full years, Maryland ratepayers face among the highest capacity and locational marginal prices in all of (the region), and the prospect of draconian brown-outs in the next five years," said the recently released report, which maps out future courses of action. "By these measures, Maryland is not better off than it was before deregulation."

Mr. O'Malley and the energy administration will prepare a plan in time for the legislative session that begins in January and include "some similarities" to the PSC recommendations, said Rick Abbruzzese, the governor's press secretary.

Now as somebody who believes in the free markets, the problem with the concept that Maryland's markets were ever deregulated in the first place is a fallacy. The General Assembly kept caps in place on prices and never allowed the market to be fully regulated.

The problem is that through re-regulation, the O'Malley crowd may in fact be creating the type of end of the world disaster that they allegedly are trying to avoid. Let's face it, the kind of reregulation that the Democrats would wish to force through the General Assembly would probably severely inhibit the ability of power generating companies to cover their cost of doing business in Maryland. That would leave Maryland electric customers with fewer choices and in all likelihood electric rates that go beyond even the current cost of electricity in the rate of the 72% rate hikes.

Except one of the proposed regulations tries to go where California went:

Rather, the PSC proposed flexing its long-dormant muscles by forcing utilities such as BGE to sign long-term power purchase contracts from newly constructed power plants, locking in prices for customers for several years.

Which sounds very neat and panglossian, except that while the power price for customers may be locked in, the price for power on the wholesale electric market may not be. Which means that when BGE's power consumption exceeds their generating capacity, they will be potentially forced to buy power at ridiculously high rates without the capability of recouping their costs. The puts us on a path to a California style energy crisis, energy shortages, and rolling blackouts.

There is no easy solution to this, as the General Assembly really botched things up in the first place when they "deregulated" electricity in 1999. But the O'Malley/PSC plan that is currently in the works seems to be designed to put Marylanders in the same place California electric customers were in 2000 and 2001. As usual, O'Malley and company are backing plans that put the consumer and the working classes at the highest risk of absorbing higher costs and in this case, a potentially third-world situation as it relates to the availability of electric power.

I will now light myself on fire

The headline says it all: Ravens hit rock bottom.

Yuck....

No, it's still not an excuse

The Sun takes John Leopold's latest ethical problem and morphs it into yet another call for public financing of campaigns:

That's why high on the agenda for state legislators when they reconvene in January is a proposal to create a system of public financing of political campaigns. Senators, delegates and their challengers would be freed from the ethical uncertainties posed by taking money from individuals with high-stakes decisions pending before the state.

It's a system that has worked well in Arizona and Maine. Candidates qualify by raising enough seed money from enough contributors. They can then qualify for public funds - the amount depends on several variables, including whether their race is contested and whether it's a House or Senate seat. The estimated $7 million annual price tag for the program would be financed by funds the state collects each year from unclaimed accounts.

The House approved the proposal in 2006, but the bill fell just one vote short in the Senate last year. That should change, particularly if two suburban Baltimore senators, Edward J. Kasemeyer and Bobby A. Zirkin, will recall the commitment to reform they both preached as candidates in 2006, and endorse the measure. The program's cost isn't cheap, but lessening the often-harmful influence of money in Annapolis would be a bargain at twice the price.

And as I have mentioned multiple times in the past, the Sun still doesn't understand that they are proposing an expensive boondoggle that will accomplish nothing. When you are dealing with people as dishonest as John Leopold and Tommy Bromwell, public financing isn't going to make them angels, nor is it really going to even the playing field. I noted almost two years ago:

What I do not understand is why we need to fund elections from the public treasury. $7.5 million seems like it could be much better spent on hiring new teachers for struggling schools than turning politicians and consultants loose with the money. Besides, how many times have you seen a legislative candidate win despite being tremendously outspent by an opponent, winning solely on grassroots support and shoe leather? It happens every year, will certainly happen again this year, and in every year from here into the future. These Democratic Delegates seem to be addressing a concern that nobody has. It is a pointless reform proposal that accomplishes nothing but feel-good press snippets.

And it still holds true to this day. The fact of the matter is that anybody who thinks that by spending millions of dollars that could be better spent on other things (or, you know, rebated to the taxpayers) is going to get them clean elections needs to have their intelligence questioned.

The Wacky World of Delegate Selection

This is just a random though, but the same Debbie Belcher that proposed this nonsense be added to our state party bylaws is also a pledged delegate in the 1st District for the noticeably pro-tax, pro-amnesty, pro-big government Mike Huckabee, who pretty much stands on the other side of everything that Debbie's silly amendment proposed.

Discuss....

Who's he fooling?

Well, former Governor Parris Glendening really tried to pull a fast one regarding his endorsement of Governor Bill Richardson:

“I have known Bill for a number of years,” Glendening said. “I honestly believe that he is the most qualified candidate.”

And it goes on like that. And all easy for him to say from the talking points he was undoubtedly given since Raymond Glendening is on Richardson's payroll as Deputy Field Director.

Given the pristine nature of Maryland politics, I'm positive that there would be no quid pro quo, right?

Is Iowa a defining moment?

Peggy Noonan makes a very interesting point in today's Wall Street Journal:

The Republican race looks--at the moment--to be determined primarily by one thing, the question of religious faith. In my lifetime faith has been a significant issue in presidential politics, but not the sole determinative one. Is that changing? If it is, it is not progress....

....Christian conservatives have been rising, most recently, for 30 years in national politics, since they helped elect Jimmy Carter. They care about the religious faith of their leaders, and their interest is legitimate. Faith is a shaping force. Lincoln got grilled on it. But there is a sense in Iowa now that faith has been heightened as a determining factor in how to vote, that such things as executive ability, professional history, temperament, character, political philosophy and professed stands are secondary, tertiary.

But they are not, and cannot be. They are central. Things seem to be getting out of kilter, with the emphasis shifting too far.

I won't dispute that fact that faith and morals are central part to the human character. But we cannot allow ourselves or our party to be trapped in the idea that where someone goes to church is the be all and end all factor to determine qualification for public office. And nothing signified that more than Mike Huckabee's appalling attacks on Mitt Romney for his faith. As if Huckabee is the be all and end all moral authority to decide whose version of Christianity constitutes a cult and whose does not. Frankly, that's the kind of stupid, idiotic reasoning that makes me question Huckabee's judgment and character, and leaves me with the feeling that Mike Huckabee does not have the temperament or the intelligence to be the President of the United States.

Noonan goes on to note:

I wonder if our old friend Ronald Reagan could rise in this party, this environment. Not a regular churchgoer, said he experienced God riding his horse at the ranch, divorced, relaxed about the faiths of his friends and aides, or about its absence. He was a believing Christian, but he spent his adulthood in relativist Hollywood, and had a father who belonged to what some saw, and even see, as the Catholic cult. I'm just not sure he'd be pure enough to make it in this party. I'm not sure he'd be considered good enough.

And she's right. A lot of the current crop of active Republicans put religious faith ahead of conservative principles. Nobody can questions Ronald Reagan's conservative principles. But could a modern-day Reagan survive the questions about his faith? Are we seeing that overreaction playing out with the current state of Senator Fred Thompson's campaign?

Again, do faith and morals have a place in political campaigns? Yes, but only to a certain extent. Because how a candidate exercises their religion and their morals undoubtedly seeps into their actions, experiences, and issues stances on the campaign trail. And through that prism is the only way that voters should be exercising a choice at the ballot box that has anything to do with religious faith.

I mean, clearly even in Maryland there are zealots and wackjobs who are Republicans who try to determine everything on faith alone, their rhetoric notwithstanding. But any voter who puts the pew where a candidate sits on Sunday at a higher priority than where the candidate stand on the issues the other six days is doing a disservice to themselves, their state, their nation, their party and, yes, their faith.

So long, farewell, auf wiedersehen good bye

And Good Riddance:

Two years after he first suggested that he'd benefit from a change of scenery, Orioles shortstop Miguel Tejada finally got his wish as he was traded to the Houston Astros today in president of baseball operations Andy MacPhail's boldest move to date.

In return for the four-time All-Star, the Orioles will get outfielder Luke Scott, pitchers Matt Albers, Troy Patton and Dennis Sarfate, and third baseman Michael Costanzo.

And the best news of all:

The Astros will assume the $26 million left on Tejada's contract.

This is fantastic. Of course, I said trade him two years ago when he started fussing about wanting out. His value was certainly higher then.

Kujan is happy, and notes that if Bedard and Mora also get traded that it means that we'll get a great haul of prospects to build for the future. If MacPhail can trade Melvin Mora for anything useful, we should have a parade given the amount of money Mora still has on his contract as his usefulness continues to decline...

Lights lights. and more lights

Yup.....it's a tree.

Brian takes Manhattan......

Yeah.....me in Manhattan. Go figure.

The Brian Griffiths Minute: 12-11-2007

School Board tells O'Malley to pack sand

Karma always comes back to get ya:

State Schools Superintendent Nancy S. Grasmick was appointed to a new four-year term today by the State Board of Education, a move that could prompt the General Assembly to consider changing the laws that govern how Maryland's education czar is chosen.

Board President Dunbar Brooks announced the board's decision after a closed session that lasted about three hours. He declined to say how the board voted or why it chose to retain Grasmick, and he said board members were aware that the action might lead to legislation.

"We recognize that that's a possibility," said Brooks, who added that the board discussed "the pros and cons and risk" of making a decision about Grasmick's future.

Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller, who had urged the board to delay a vote until Gov. Martin O'Malley had the opportunity to appoint three new members, called the action "a terrible mistake" and "a direct slap in the face of the governor."

O'Malley tried to run roughshod over the State School Board much like he has tried to run Maryland, by dictating instead of attempting to achieve consensus and work with people. By trying to bully the School Board, O'Malley forced the School Board to take decisive action to maintain its independence as the system is current set up in statute. For his bullying efforts, O'Malley got it shoved right back in his face. Maybe this will teach him some humility....but I doubt it.

(And that's not to say O'Malley doesn't have a point he is trying to make about the selection of the State Superintendent. Because if the Superintendent of Schools is a member of the Governor's cabinet, why are they not appointed by the Governor?)

Nothing's Shocking

Our ethically challenged Anne Arundel County Executive John Leopold is at it again :

Anne Arundel County Executive John R. Leopold's campaign reaped an estimated $100,000 at a fundraiser hosted by a wealthy supporter four days before the passage of a county bill that granted the supporter a break on a private 18-hole golf course he is building on property he owns in Harwood.

A Leopold administration official testified in support of the bill just before the County Council's unanimous vote Dec. 3 to waive a requirement that Albert Lord, chairman of student loan magnet Sallie Mae, build a mile-long road to his proposed $15 million clubhouse. The bill's approval saved him hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Mind you, this is once again the candidate who campaign on clean government and not being bought off by special interests due to his extensive inheritance and trust fund.

But it gets better:

Lord attended a fundraiser for Leopold in September at the Baltimore Marriott Waterfront, where the county executive raised at least $100,000. Each of the 25 to 30 participants - mostly developers - was asked to contribute $4,000.

Which of course, gives me a chuckle only because Leopold told anybody who would listen last year that he wasn't in the pocket of developers and accused his opponents of being bought off. Of course, we clearly see that he may not be (fundraising is part of the game) but as usual Leopold thinks he is above the game and above the fray when it comes to ethical questions like these. Of course, Leopold's incessant whining and defense of his fundraising vis-a-vis his previous statements regarding fundraising make his self-created predicament even more laughable. He is trying to martyr himself on the issue of campaign finances; the same issue he wanted to nail Phil Bissett, Dave Boschert, and George Johnson to a cross for just last year.

John Leopold's problem is not that he is raising money from developers. It's the fact that he's a liar who was elected on a number of false pretenses. But we Republicans here in Anne Arundel County know that John Leopold drifts in whichever direction most directly benefits John Leopold. Once again, this fundraising fiasco is merely further proof that John Leopold's hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Government Operating Outside its Scope....Again

Can somebody explain to me what the hell a Sailing Hall of Fame has to do with the Maryland Stadium Authority? That seems to be the entire problem in building a new Sailing Hall of Fame in Annapolis is that the State seems to be in the middle of it, where it naturally does not belong:

State involvement through the Stadium Authority is completely out of line, but not out of recent practices for the authority. The Stadium Authority was originally created to build Camden Yards and then build what eventually turned into M&T Bank Stadium. Of course the scope wound up going much farther than that, though I guess if you squint a university Commons Building kinda looks like a Stadium.

Furthermore, does anybody really think that downtown Annapolis needs a Sailing Hall of Fame smack in the middle of it? It seems to me that this would be the kind of urban renewal project that so disturbs a historic area that it would be the kind of thing that Democrats would hate to see in place. I mean, I certainly don't want the view of City Dock disturbed by the construction of some monstrous, unnecessary building. But of course, Annapolis Mayor Ellen Moyer loves the concept, even if there is likely no discernible economic benefit to the city from its construction. There is certainly no benefit to state taxpayers who seem like they are going to get stuck with part of the bill.

The only way to fix this is through two solutions. The short term solution is to pull state funding for the construction of this Hall of Fame complex and allow it to continue only with the use of private money. Second, the General Assembly needs to legislatively remove the ability of the Maryland Stadium Authority to build new projects, thus restricting them to managing the projects currently under their purview until the facilities can be privatized.

For more info on the Sailing Hall of Fame and it's relationship to our Capital City, my Red Maryland colleague Brian Gill has an excellent post on the matter.