2007 MGA SS
On this page I detail the 2007 Special Session voting record of the 188 members of the Maryland General Assembly from my point of view. While I generally agree with the Republicans on the General Assembly, this Special Session placed me with some strange bedfellows because of my belief in individual rights. You’ll find Delegates here and Senators here.
How this works
To begin here’s a legend of what each of the letters and numbers mean on the actual grid. Keep in mind that a “perfect” score would be 100.
Y or N in bold means that I agreed with the particular vote. Conversely if the letter’s not bold I disagreed. For the House of Delegates each correct vote out of the 16 I selected is worth 6.25 points, Senators receive 7.69 points for correctly voting on each of the 13 selected votes.
NV means that the Delegate or Senator did not cast a vote but was present to do so. Because I believe that one should vote when they have the opportunity and not be ducking the vote for political reasons, I deduct points for not voting. House members who shirk their responsibility are docked 3.85 points while Senators lose 3.57 from their score.
A designates a Delegate or Senator being absent. While I’d love to see perfect attendance, people get sick or have situations come up where absence is unavoidable. Because of that, I only docked House of Delegates absentees 1.92 points and Senators 1.79 points.
For the House of Delegates only, a star (*) after the vote signifies that the Delegate changed his or her vote. I treat this in two ways: if a Delegate changed his or her vote to agree with me, they receive half-credit (or 3.85 points). If they flip the opposite way after being correct, I hammer them with an extra deduction – in this case the deduction is a severe 11.54 points.
You’ll also notice that now scores for the term become cumulative – that is to say, these scores are now based on the total number of votes I’ve recorded from Delegates and Senators in 2007. The totals are 36 for Delegates and 39 for Senators. This also means that one absence or missed votes won’t affect the overall record as greatly as it does in a single session.
The bills in question
HB1/SB1 – Budget Reconciliation Act
Why I’d vote no: There’s a shell game of moving money around, but no real cuts. It also threw more money at education without any sort of accountability, via mandate. HB1/SB1 served as sort of an introduction to the budget-busting bills to be introduced later on. To truly reconcile the budget, many of the mandates for appropriations need to be eliminated; and while the bill does call for future mandated appropriations and projected budget impact to be clearly spelled out, that portion of the bill could have stood on its own.
Disposition: HB1 passed the House of Delegates 100-33 (Vote #104), the Senate 32-13 (Vote #133) and was approved by Governor O’Malley on November 19, 2007.
O’Donnell Amendment (House of Delegates): Among other things, it called for Governor O’Malley to cut the FY2009 budget by $550 million.
Why I’d vote yes: Because it’s your money and not the state’s. In fiscally lean times, the government needs to cut back too. As it turns out, this idea of this amendment did make it into the final bill as the “intent” of the General Assembly, along with many other provisions.
Disposition: Failed 38-98 (Vote #41).
Shank Amendment (House of Delegates): Increased the mandate for cutting positions in Executive Branch agencies and the amount of savings sought.
Why I’d vote yes: Many of these positions are empty anyway, a practice which creates a “slush fund” of sorts to raid for later on in a fiscal year. The final HB1 did call for 500 positions to be reduced.
Disposition: Failed 38-100 (Vote #42).
Harris Amendment (Senate): Mandated funds for compliance with the federal REAL ID Act of 2005.
Why I’d vote no: This is one of the few times I go against the party line, but in weighing the impact of the REAL ID Act on civil liberties against the national security aspect, I chose liberty over security. There’s a compelling argument on each side, but my fear is that a future President’s government can use the information shared by certain mandates of the REAL ID Act to harass political opponents.
Disposition: Failed 13-31 (Vote #131).
HB2/SB2 – Tax Reform and Transportation Investment Act of 2007
Why I’d vote no: Because it increased tax rates on both individuals and corporate entities when the alternative was on the table to cut the budget, or even simply reduce the rate of growth. It was also the vehicle in which the dreaded “tech tax” was incorporated before its repeal in the 2008 session.
Disposition: SB2 passed the House of Delegates 78-56 (Vote #100), passed the Senate 24-20 (Vote #139), and approved by Governor O’Malley on November 19, 2007.
McConkey Amendment (House of Delegates – HB2): Eliminated the income tax rate increases, among other actions.
Why I’d vote yes: The first paragraph was enough – there was no need to increase taxes.
Disposition: Failed 40-93 (Vote #16).
Colburn Amendment (Senate – SB2): Attempted to eliminate Eastern Shore counties from any sales tax increase, as was originally written into the bill.
Why I’d vote yes: Merchants on the Eastern Shore already face a disadvantage against neighboring Delaware because the First State has no sales tax. If you drive north along U.S. 13 from Salisbury into Delaware, the first thing you notice is the row of furniture stores who can sell items cheaper than their Maryland competition because they need not add sales tax to the price.
Disposition: Failed 16-31 (Vote #58).
Frosh Amendment (Senate – SB2): Changed residency requirements for taxation purposes from six months a year to three months a year.
Why I’d vote no: Three months isn’t sufficient time to establish residency. Just as an example, one group this amendment could catch are Shorebirds players who live out of state, since the minor league season runs about five months.
Disposition: Passed 24-23 (Vote #65) but the 3-month provision was eliminated later in the process. Current law remains unchanged.
Greenip Amendment (Senate – SB2): Automatically would increase the personal exemptions and standard deduction based on cost-of-living increases.
Why I’d vote yes: Any items that tend to lower the tax burden should be automatic while items increasing it should be subject to approval.
Disposition: Failed 17-29 (Vote #59).
Mooney Amendment (Senate – SB2): Attempted to delete the “tech tax” from the bill, among other items.
Why I’d vote yes: There was no need to pick on a viable industry, and Mooney was proven right in the end when the tax was eventually repealed.
Disposition: Failed 21-26 (Vote #48).
Pipkin Amendment (Senate – SB2): Dealt with the Transportation Trust Fund.
Why I’d vote no: A change to one line of the law: “The State and the Authority shall MAY NOT finance ISSUE ANY DEBT OR EXPEND ANY FUNDS FROM ANY SOURCE FOR the Intercounty Connector…” Would you rather those folks sit in stifling traffic and waste gasoline? I went against the GOP on this one too.
Disposition: Failed 13-32 (Vote #60).
HB3/SB3 – Maryland Education Trust Fund – Video Lottery Terminals
Why I’d vote no: I’m not against slots in general, but the General Assembly had multiple opportunities to pass legislation earlier this decade and chose not to. Nor do I think there needs to be an arbitrary limit on the number of terminals or where the money goes.
Disposition: SB3 passed the House of Delegates 71-44 (Vote #88), passed the Senate 25-19 (Vote #124), and was approved by Governor O’Malley on November 19, 2007. However, adoption depends on the next bill, HB4.
Morhaim Amendment (House of Delegates – HB3): Added the provision that employees of gaming facilities would have to be paid at least the “living wage” adopted by the state earlier in 2007.
Why I’d vote no: A “living wage” is an artificial wage that doesn’t necessarily correspond with the value of an employee’s services to the company. Not all casino tasks are worth that sort of wage, and it may discourage prospective license buyers from applying.
Disposition: Passed 84-39 (Vote #82); however the Senate version of the bill did not keep that language.
Simmons Amendment (HB3 – House of Delegates): Prohibited “key employees” involved with the operation of video lottery terminals from making political contributions.
Why I’d vote no: While the intent of the bill is honorable, if you feel as I do that making political contributions is a form of free speech, it follows that one does not give up their First Amendment rights when they decide to work for a casino or gaming company. I had some definitely interesting bedfellows in this vote, whether for the reason I cite or not.
Disposition: Failed 61-63 (Vote #79).
Brochin Amendment (SB3 – Senate): Similar to the Morhaim Amendment above.
Disposition: Passed 33-13 (Vote #36) but language was stricken from final bill.
Pipkin Amendment (SB3 – Senate): This appears to be the GOP slots alternative that was pushed during Governor Ehrlich’s term in office.
Why I’d vote yes: This is still a little arbitrary but the wording is less site-specific.
Disposition: Failed 9-36 (Vote #38).
HB4/SB4 – Video Lottery Terminals – Authorization and Limitations
Why I’d vote no: The idea of a republic is for those who are elected to enact laws, not punt their responsibility on to the people. Amending the Maryland Constitution to allow specific numbers of slot machines in specific locations means any change that becomes necessary would be made more difficult to enact. Once again I stress we had several opportunities to enact this legislation without amending the state’s Constitution.
Disposition: HB4 passed House of Delegates 86-52 (Vote #74), passed the Senate 31-12 (Vote #106) and was approved by Governor O’Malley on November 19, 2007, subject to passage of a referendum on November 4, 2008. (Again, you can bet I’m voting no and I encourage others to do the same.)
HB5/SB5 – Transportation and State Investment Act
Why I’d vote no: With increases in the tobacco and excise taxes, it’s a pretty safe bet that this bill wouldn’t raise the revenue that was predicted – particularly when it comes to the tobacco tax - but the state would surely spend the money it assumed was coming.
Disposition: HB5 passed the House of Delegates 81-52 (Vote #103), passed the Senate 25-20 (Vote #129), and was approved by Governor O’Malley November 19, 2007.
Haddaway Amendment (HB5 – House of Delegates): Attempted to strip the increase in hotel room and transient lodging tax rates from the bill.
Why I’d vote yes: While it’s tempting to make out-of-state visitors pay a portion of our budget, the reality is that much of the additional money would be paid by state residents, especially those who wish to spend a couple nights in Ocean City.
Disposition: Failed 49-87 (Vote #25).
Miller Amendment (HB5 – House of Delegates): Eliminated changes to taxation on vendors.
Why I’d vote yes: Because the amount of credit to vendors that was allowed would otherwise be reduced.
Disposition: Failed 40-93 (Vote #26).
HB6/SB6 – Working Families and Small Business Health Care Coverage Act
Why I’d vote no: Notwithstanding my point that health care is NOT a right, in a period where the state’s long-term structural deficit is being addressed with a number of tax hikes, why should there be another mandated fund established? This bill puts more of those who are actually working in a position to begin depending on yet another government handout.
Disposition: SB6 passed the House of Delegates 105-27 (Vote #105), passed the Senate 30-14 (Vote #135), and was approved by Governor O’Malley on November 19, 2007.
Miller Amendment (SB6 – House of Delegates): Required companies who accept this provision from the state to not employ illegal aliens.
Why I’d vote yes: One less incentive the state would provide, although Maryland provides more than enough enticement to illegals with their lax regulations on obtaining driver’s licenses.
Disposition: Failed 42-83 (Vote #91).
HB23 – Chesapeake Bay 2010 Trust Fund
Why I’d vote no: This was another attempt to secure a permanent mandated allocation out of the state budget. Also, as originally intended, the bill would have established another dream proposal of radical environmentalists, an impervious surface fee. (The idea came up again in 2008.)
Disposition: Passed the House of Delegates 103-30 (Vote #58), no action in Senate.
Now what you’ve all been waiting for – Awards and Dubious Distinctions
I’ll start with the dubious distinctions, or what I call the Reasons To Adopt Recall. These legislators were the worst at taxing, spending, and generally taking away what little freedom we still have to do with our money and property as we wish. In the House of Delegates this group all had a zero or negative rating; in the Senate they rated less than 10. It’s my belief that each and every one of these folks needs to be thrown out in 2010, and I don’t care what the voter registration numbers in their district are!
What’s really sad is the sheer number of legislators on this list. There’s so many that, in order to save space I’ll just do last names. You’ll see why they deserve scorn after reading the voting records.
Delegates: Branch, Bronrott, Cane, V. Claggett, Conway, Feldman, Gutierrez, Healey, Howard, Hucker, Lee, Manno, Montgomery, Nathan-Pulliam, Ramirez, Rosenberg, Valderrama, Vallario.
Senators: Conway, Currie, Exum, Garagiola, Gladden, Kramer, Madaleno, McFadden, Miller, Peters, Pinsky, Pugh, Robey, Rosapepe.
Together this hall of scorn comprises 12.8% of the House of Delegates and a sickening 29.8% of the Senate.
And then we have the RINO Huntee, the legislator who’s best at selling out to the Democrats and voting with them as they raise taxes and increase spending – all to suck up and maybe get a few crumbs for his or her district. In 2007, the person with that target on his or her back was:
Delegate D. Page Elmore, District 38A. There’s actually four Democrats who are more favorable to conservative issues than Delegate Elmore. One is honored with the first award I’ll give out.
Turning to awards, next up is what I call the Top (Blue) Dog Award, given to the Democrat who best reaches across the aisle and votes with those of us who believe in limiting government while maximizing freedom – unfortunately, most of the time here in Maryland that vote is in vain. Nevertheless, my Top (Blue) Dogs for 2007 are:
Delegates Kevin Kelly (District 1B) and John F. Wood, Jr. (District 29A), who tied with the exact same rating.
I also have a group who I’ve dubbed the Legislative All-Stars. In most cases they score over 90% but also include at least the top scorer in a body who doesn’t make that threshold. They are the cream of the Maryland crop and those of us who desire a more sensible, limited state government would do well to have one like each of these men and women in every General Assembly seat. These honorees are:
Delegate Anthony J. O’Donnell (District 29C), and Senators Janet Greenip (District 33) and Alexander X. Mooney (District 3).
Finally, the winner of the coveted monoblogue award for the 2007 Legislator of the Year.
This man managed to achieve a perfect rating for the 2007 regular session and only was wrong twice in the Special Session, both times on decisions I could see the other side of easily. Obviously he’d be a fantastic addition to Congress, and hopefully his replacement would be just as stalwart against Maryland’s being overrun by socialist, wealth redistributing policies. With the highest rating of all 190 who served in the General Assembly in 2007, the monoblogue award goes to - State Senator Andrew P. Harris (District 7). Outstanding work, Andy!
Please note that the opinions expressed on monoblogue are not necessarily those of the Wicomico County Republican Party Central Committee, of which I'm a member. (But they probably should be.)
News from the loony left:
