February 2014 – Page 3

Easy pickins

You wouldn’t necessarily think of him as the farmer’s candidate, but Charles Lollar has at least paid a little bit of attention to how environmental factors affect one of Maryland’s top industries. Recall that he spoke at length about the Hudson case in one of his initial campaign stops, and it may not necessarily surprise you that he’s now making hay out of what’s he dubbing the “chicken tax.”

The “Chicken Tax” is another “Rain Tax” moment in Maryland history. Farmers in Maryland should be outraged. Agriculture is the number one economic industry in Maryland. It accounts for $2.3 billion in gross receipts to the economy annually and generates approximately 46,000 jobs. More than half of these jobs are on the Eastern Shore. Why are legislators willing to risk all that?

We need a balanced approach to solving environmental issues in Maryland. Keeping the Bay clean is a regional problem that involves more than controlling agricultural run off from Maryland farms. Sediment from adjacent states, like Pennsylvania, contribute to the pollution. Leadership in Annapolis needs to craft a regional solution to this problem that requires all states that pollute the Bay to “pay their fair share” to keep it clean. We must not allow legislators in Annapolis to “hurt Maryland first” by bankrupting hard-working farmers with a “Chicken Tax” and putting the future of Maryland’s number one economic industry at risk.

Given Lollar’s propensity for shrill populism, I took the liberty of reading the bill in question, Senate Bill 725. (The same bill is in the House of Delegates as House Bill 905, a common Maryland practice.) The Senate bill’s lead sponsor is Richard Madaleno, a Montgomery County senator whose experience with chicken is probably that of seeing it at Whole Foods. (He seems the vegetarian type.)

Basically the bill as proposed, called the Poultry Fair Share Act (PFSA), tries to “achieve” two things: raise money from poultry processors like Perdue, Mountaire, Tyson, etc. at five cents per bird and establish a bankroll to “fund cover crop activities on agricultural lands upon which chicken manure has been applied as fertilizer.” The secondary purpose of the bill is to increase the share of money going into an existing state fund to reimburse owners of failing septic systems who have to replace them with a system with enhanced nitrogen removal – currently that fund shares its proceeds with the cover crop program on a 60/40 basis, with the cover crops getting the 40% share.

Needless to say the local producers are feeling a little put upon, as would anyone subject to a bill arbitrarily deeming that it pay a “fair share.” Madaleno is probably upset because his county has to pay the aforementioned “rain tax” but no Eastern Shore county yet has to (although certain muncipalities in the region already collect such a tax.) Prominently featured on the webpage of the Delmarva Poultry Industry homepage is a series of questions about the PFSA.

So my question is simple, and it applies to any candidate, including Lollar. How many of you will put your money where your mouth is and go testify against the Senate bill when it comes to a hearing on Tuesday, February 25th at 1 p.m.? Certainly these candidates are willing to put themselves out for gun rights and stand against taxation in general, but who is going to face down the environmental lobby in this state and politely (or better yet, impolitely) tell them to do the anatomically impossible and go f–k themselves?

Writing a press release is one thing, but we need activists. Personally I’m tired of seeing the agricultural industry in Maryland – no, wait, the entire rural slice of the state in general, whether it be farmer, resident, or small business – be the featured whipping boy for groups which would just as soon see the non-urban portions of the state revert to their once-wild condition. Yes, that means you, Waterkeepers Alliance, Food and Water Watch, and even certain members of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. I’ve only been here a decade, but I spent my teenage years in a rural area and I think we all got along just fine without you because – as they often note – farmers are the original environmentalists. We might not have liked it a whole lot when the wind blew the perfume of the pig farm down the road our way, but it was a small inconvenience for the rural living my parents desired.

I happen to think we can have it all – a great quality of life, economic growth and the jobs it creates, and water quality suitable for the recreational and aquacultural purposes we demand from Chesapeake Bay – without these environmentalists coming in and mucking up the works with overregulation and harsh taxation. Hopefully we can count on all four GOP gubernatorial candidates to stick up for the farmer in this fight.

Propping up a Republican

I suppose these fall under the category of shrewd political decisions, even though I’m not really on board with them for various reasons.

But a couple days back gubernatorial candidate Larry Hogan announced he would use the public financing system in the GOP primary. In exchange for limiting spending during the primary, all a candidate has to do is raise about $260,000 in “seed money” and the state will match individual contributions of $250 or less.

Basically what this has done is box the other GOP contenders into using public financing to keep up, as I’ll explain.

In the GOP primary, it’s doubtful that anyone would spend $2.6 million, particularly when none of the candidates raised more than $250,000 last year and most received much less. Obviously Larry knows this, since he waited to announce and finalize his plans until safely after the January 8 deadline to report 2013 contributions and expenditures. Since Change Maryland’s tentacles extended into the other three campaigns, surely Larry had an inkling how the money was coming in for them. On the other hand, Change Maryland isn’t an entity required to report in the same manner.

So by taking public financing, Hogan essentially doubles his money – maybe not quite, since some will donate over $250. (It might be a great idea for those who really wish to back him to put $250 in the kitty now and save the remaining $3,750 allowed until after the primary.) But in order to match that advantage otherwise, the others in the race will have to follow suit – Ron George has already had this discussion. It might be tougher now in a four-way race.

This is a different approach than Hogan used in his abortive 2010 gubernatorial run, where most of the money he collected and spent was his own. Over the 4 1/2 months Hogan campaigned in 2009-10, he only collected $16,458 in total donations but lent his campaign $325,000 from personal finds. Obviously he’s hoping that the Change Maryland network will be somewhat more successful in netting him the necessary matching funds to maximize the state’s contribution. As part of that effort, Hogan will be hosting a fundraiser with his old boss. More ammunition to those who believe a Hogan candidacy will be Ehrlich’s long-lost second term?

Larry is also using the successful business summit event he did for Change Maryland last year as a fundraising event for his gubernatorial campaign this year. Wonder if everyone who attended last year will be interested in backing the Hogan campaign as an attendee this year?

All in all, I find it most interesting that Larry Hogan is using a technique also adopted by the farthest-left Democrat in the race and endorsed by her political ilk – most of the recent bills attempting to expand public election financing were sponsored exclusively by Democrats. It’s not something most would regard as a conservative cause, and one has to ask: is public financing of campaigns a direction in which we want to change Maryland?

A few years ago Republicans (correctly) fought against early voting because of its potential for fraud, yet later were advised to embrace it by Bob Ehrlich. Is Larry Hogan doing the same with public campaign financing?

Crunching some numbers

In terms of determining just how massive the potential ticking time bombs of state debt and dependence on federal government subsidy are, there are few groups as useful as State Budget Solutions. The advocacy group recently released two studies to which those who run for office in Maryland should be paying particular attention.

First of all, SBS annually calculates the total amount of state debt each state labors under as it tries to get the financial house in order. While Maryland’s debt is nowhere near as unmanageable as that of other states like California – which is nearly $800 billion in the long-term hole – their $94.2 billion unfunded liability is nothing to sneeze at. Of that $94 billion, SBS determined that $68.3 billion was unfunded public pension liabilities, $16.5 billion was outstanding bond debt, and $9.4 billion in what they call OPEB liabilities, described as “mainly retiree health care.” Considering our latest budget proposal for FY2015 is just a shade under $40 billion, the debt we are carrying could theoretically take our entire state budget for the next 29 months or so.

SBS slices and dices up these numbers for every state, and in comparison to some others Maryland doesn’t look that bad – while their overall debt is 14th in the country, it’s only 20th per capita. We rank just ahead of Virginia on the overall debt, but Virginia’s per capita debt is just 41st. On the other hand, while Delaware’s overall debt is 43rd by virtue of its small size, their per capita debt ranks ahead of Maryland as Delaware is 17th.

The second study comes at a time when federal influence in state budgets is at an all-time high. The good people at SBS determined that the average state received 31.6% of its budget in the form of transfers from Uncle Sam. Surprisingly, Maryland is just a little below that mean as they only get 30.25% of their money directly from Washington, D.C. Obviously this doesn’t tell the whole story because so many of Maryland’s workers are employed by the federal government so they get the transfer from a middleman who might be a lowly clerical employee or a high-ranking Cabinet officer – as long as they reside in Maryland, the state derives some of its revenue indirectly from the federal government that way.

All this is made more interesting by the fact that Virginia received the third-lowest share from the federal government, with just 23.53% of state funds being federally-supplied. Delaware was also very low in the rankings, getting only 24.46% from the federal government. (The highest was Mississippi at 45.35%, lowest Alaska at 19.98%.)

But imagine the nation trimming its sails to Alaska’s level: we would save about $51 billion annually.

Of course, the idea of block-granting various functions to the states using federal money has strong appeal to conservatives who believe the states could best determine how to spend their money. All that is true, but I never cared for the idea of government as pass-through conduit. To me it would be better just to have the state do all the work.

I’m hoping the four gubernatorial candidates on our side are familiar with this group’s work because they could all stand to benefit from the insight.

A call to defensive action

A snowstorm two weeks ago delayed a planned work session of the Wicomico County Council to discuss the merits of joining the Clean Chesapeake Coalition. In my original piece I brought up the potential of the entire Radical Green crew showing up at the meeting to tell us we need to toe the state’s line that the rain tax is the only way to proceed.

As it turns out, the delay brings us around to an evening meeting, beginning at 6 p.m. tomorrow night, February 4. And as the Wicomico Society of Patriots points out, other items will be on the docket as well:

You may recall that the CCC is challenging the way the state is implementing Bay cleanup efforts. They emphasize putting scarce revenue resources where they will have the most benefit to the Bay. They also question the economic sense of putting billions of taxpayer dollars into one-size-fits-all, top down, solutions that not only will have severe and documented economic impacts on our region, but they emphasize that the State’s regulatory overreach will further erode our property rights and along with it our property values.

It is strongly rumored that key members of the environmental community will be there to oppose this commitment by the county to support the work of the CCC. It is vital that you be there to make your concerns known, whether you actually speak or by virtue of your mere presence.

Also, please plan to be there for the regular council legislative session. The council will hear testimony on the $3.47 million budget shortfall, which was apparently due to overly optimistic revenue estimates by Mr. Andy Mackle’s office, and how to deal with it. Also, there will be discussion and a vote on whether to grant raises to the offices of county sheriff, county administrator, and county council.

To put things in perspective, the annual raises put together will probably not equal the $25,000 the Clean Chesapeake Coalition asks for. And I can already picture Radical Green’s argument that the budget deficit surely precludes spending the money. Honestly, I don’t mind the raises for the County Council; in fact, I would argue they should make the wage an amount more commensurate to that of a full-time worker, at least for one term. (We can reserve the declining salary idea I had for the General Assembly for a second term, since I think $40,000 a year may attract a better field of local candidates to County Council.)

Having said that, though, I think that if there’s a chance that spending $25,000 gives us a chance of being off the hook for $1 billion or so – depending on whose estimate you believe – in the long run, we should take it. Otherwise, we’re being asked to annually spend an amount of money (page 27 here) which is not that far away from the county’s total budget of around $120 million. Instead, the CCC has a rational plan to deal with the problem at its source first and see how much progress is made by that step. Granted, I would like to know that cost estimate but it’s likely to be far less than the state’s proposals.

Moreover, I think this environmental sword of Damocles hangs over our local business community and contributes to the employment shortfall which has led to the loss of revenue. Let’s face it: at the present time Wicomico County doesn’t have a lot going for it in terms of a business-friendly tax policy or infrastructure to move goods from point A to point, and B we’re hemorrhaging jobs because of these disadvantages. Obviously a great deal can be done with a change in state leadership, but local officials need to do their part as well and supporting the work of the CCC seems to be an effective step in the right direction.

So, since I cannot make it Tuesday night due to a previous commitment, consider this my open letter to County Council supporting the Clean Chesapeake Coalition and its efforts.

An old friend tries again

Melody Scalley is running again for the Virginia House of Delegates. A longtime supporter and fan of this site is once again trying to parlay her talents and activism into a seat in the Virginia House of Delegates.

Thanks to what has become a cascading series of political openings, the 100th District House seat has been vacated by former Delegate Lynwood Lewis. Lewis squeaked by Republican Wayne Coleman by just 11 votes to fill the vacant 6th District Senate seat, an opening created when former Senator Ralph Northam, a fellow Democrat, ascended to the Lieutenant Governor’s position in the November election. For residents of Virginia’s Eastern Shore, this will be their third election in four months, as the 100th District encompasses the entirety of Virginia’s Eastern Shore, with a handful of precincts in the Norfolk area. Accomack County makes up 45% of the district’s voting population, with the other of the two Eastern Shore counties, Northampton, making up 18%.

In what’s known as a “firehouse primary,” Democrats selected their nominee yesterday. Willie Randall is a former Northampton County supervisor, and he will face either Scalley or Rob Bloxom, Jr. as both seek the GOP nod. Bloxom’s father, Robert Bloxom, Sr., represented the district for a quarter-century before Lewis became Delegate in 2004.

Scalley was the last Republican to vie for the seat in 2009. Lewis won the 2013 election over independent John Smith, Jr. with 71% of the vote, and was unopposed in 2011. In 2009, Scalley got 35% of the vote against Lewis, who had also been unopposed in 2005 and 2007.

Since her 2009 run, Scalley has remained politically active, both as host of a weekly local radio program and, more recently, as a regional coordinator for Heritage Action covering Virginia and North Carolina. Previously she worked as part of Americans for Prosperity and as Congressman Scott Rigell’s Eastern Shore campaign organizer.

She’s working up to the Republican version of the “firehouse primary” which will be held at Nandua High School in Onley on Saturday, February 8 at 2:30 p.m. Voters are encouraged to arrive early as registration begins at 1:30. In speaking with her last week, she encouraged supporters to do what she calls “virtual door knocking” by sharing her campaign’s Facebook page and make phone calls on her behalf. It’s a far more compressed schedule than a normal campaign, as the special election for the seat will occur on Tuesday, February 25.

Scalley is basing her campaign on “common sense, conservative values” and adds that:

We need someone who has a proven record of working for limited government and concern for the working people who earn the money — not the profligate spenders in state government who don’t seem to understand where money comes from.

On Saturday we will find out if Melody’s appeal is successful, or if people will vote for a familiar name. Unlike the Senate race, where control of the body hung in the balance thanks to two January special elections, the winner will join a House of Delegates solidly under GOP control as a common-sense counterweight to the liberal lunacy sure to come from the McAuliffe administration.

Disappearing dollars

Over the last few years, Delegates Susan Aumann and Kathy Szeliga have generally tag-teamed on announcements and updates for their respective districts, which makes sense because they’re representing adjacent areas of Baltimore County.

But recently they did a video which sort of represents the last seven years in Maryland.

No, it’s certainly not the most slickly produced video but I thought it got the point across relatively well – through a little here and a little there, the state is nickel-and-diming us into the poorhouse in the name of wealth redistribution. What, you thought it was government services?

But the wealth redistribution isn’t necessarily from rich to poor; instead it flows from politically incorrect to politically correct, non-connected to crony, and independent to dependent, with the sole aim on enriching the latter listed groups at the expense of former ones. Those at the bottom of the economic pile have to watch out as people fall into their group from above, because it seems like those standing at the top plateau are sawing off the ladder at a fairly low point and pulling it out of reach to the rest of us.

Government isn’t supposed to be like that. As a matter of rule people aren’t excited about paying taxes, but where they tend to object most is when the benefits seem dubious at best. The rain tax is a perfect example of this: we know property owners will pay it and supposedly it will help clean up Chesapeake Bay, but we have no clue how they’ll get from point A to point B.

That’s why this video seems to work.