Peter Franchot – Page 3

Odds and ends number 61

I actually meant to do this post over the weekend, but real life intervened. I’m hoping the expanded version of items which are really too short to merit a full post but worth a couple paragraphs is more chock full of interesting because of it.

There is one item on my agenda that’s time-sensitive, so I’m going to fold it into an overall brief update on Dan Bongino’s U.S. Senate campaign.

Tomorrow (October 18) the Bongino campaign is doing a unique moneybomb event:

During our “Now or Never” event, you will be able to make donations designated specifically to get Dan’s campaign advertisements on radio, television and the Internet. These ads are a crucial part of our get-out-the-vote efforts and you will have the unique opportunity to choose the media outlet on which you wish to see the ads run. (Emphasis in original.)

So if you donate you get to choose. (I vote for advertising on this website. Is that an option?)

Unlike some others in the race, Dan’s campaign has been the closest to the grassroots and certainly has worn through the shoe leather. Regardless of the perception about where Dan stands in the polls, I think the voters’ brief flirtation with Rob Sobhani is coming to a close as they find out there’s not a lot of substance behind the sizzle.

I didn’t note this at the time, but since the Benghazi massacre is still in the news it’s noteworthy that Dan is among the chorus who thinks heads should roll:

I take no comfort in this, but Secretary Clinton and Ambassador Rice must resign in light of the Benghazi tragedy. It was a tragic failure in leadership.

He went on to decry the “current administration’s position that politics takes priority over security for our men and women in the foreign service.” Given the fact that Hillary Clinton now insists on taking full responsibility, it indeed behooves her to resign her post.

I’ve also found out that Dan will be in the area twice over the next couple weeks. On Thursday, October 25 he will be the beneficiary of a fundraiser here in Salisbury at the local GOP headquarters, tentatively scheduled from 6:30 – 8:30 p.m., and on Tuesday, October 30 the PACE group at Salisbury University is hosting a U.S. Senate debate in their Great Hall at 3 p.m. That’s sort of an unusual time to have an event such as that, but it is what it is.

And apparently Dan has had his fill of complaints from Sobhani about Rob’s debate exclusion. This comes from Dan’s Facebook page:

Regarding the debates schedule, there is no effort to keep the candidate out of the debates. His campaign is fabricating stories in an attempt to distract from his confusing platform… Any forum he was not included in was due to the fact that he was not invited by the host.

I’ve spoken to the campaign about this issue and any assertion that Dan doesn’t want Rob Sobhani in the debates is completely false.

Speaking of debates, this is one which just might be crazy enough to actually work.

Created by the TEA Party Express group, this is the debate where the moderators are conservative. Of course, none of the nominees or incumbents will actually participate – but in this era of YouTube and 24-hour media coverage, video is a wonderful thing. Honestly, it’s simply going to serve as a reminder of where candidates have said they stand on key issues ignored in the other debates.

But I don’t think these guys are going to play it as comedy, like taking single words and catchphrases carefully spliced together like a shock jock might. Given some of the names already announced as participating in the event, it may come down to being just as informative as the real thing – and in many cases, Barack Obama actually will get to have his teleprompter.

This event will occur next Tuesday night, October 23, at 9 p.m.

Following up on a post I did a few days ago on Protect Marriage Maryland endorsements, the group has added Fourth District Congressional candidate Faith Loudon to its preferred candidates. No real surprise there, and if it chips a few percentage points off an otherwise monolithic black vote for Donna Edwards, so much the better. Hopefully they’ll also vote against Question 6 as well.

Meanwhile, those who support Question 7 may have stepped into some hot water with this ad.

Now LaVar Arrington can do as he pleases, but FedEx is none too happy about their logo being prominently featured as part of the spot. Spokeswoman Maury Donahue said her company will review the ad, but they have no involvement in the issue.

But it appears the Washington Redskins do have a role, according to a Capital Gazette article questioning a $450,000 payment to the team just days before the ad was taped. It also gave Maryland Comptroller Peter Franchot, a Democrat and Question 7 opponent, an opening to remark on the team’s involvement:

As a ‘Skins fan, the Comptroller respectfully encourages them to focus on the important tasks at hand, such as protecting RG III, shoring up their kicking game and making sorely-needed improvements to one of the league’s lowest-ranked defenses.

I’d be more interested in what the NFL has to say considering their stance on gambling, and that’s likely why they had to choose a player who’s no longer active. Much as Arrington hates losing, he may well end up on the short end of the score November 6.

Unlike Questions 4, 6, and 7, which have seen a healthy amount of media coverage, Question 5 on redistricting has been the red-headed stepchild of the quartet. But State Senator E. J. Pipkin is trying to change that a little bit:

It’s just a little bit longer than a 30-second ad, which makes me wonder how many will see this video. But this makes a lot of sense considering the Maryland Democrats who put this together definitely flunked the “compact and contiguous” requirement.

But let’s not flunk the idea of protecting the vote. Election Integrity Maryland is holding one final poll watcher training session:

Election Integrity Maryland is offering its last Poll Watcher Training session before the election, on Wednesday, October 24 – Thursday, October 25. This comprehensive, 1-1/2 hour course is taught via webinar from the comfort of your home computer from 7:30 – 8:15 each evening.

Registration is required. The cost is $15, which includes a spiral bound Training Guide mailed to each participant.

Signup is here. Now I prefer to work outside the polling place in an attempt to change hearts and minds, but you can provide a valuable service to your fellow citizens in this way as well.

We know that the other side is ready to go (h/t Don Stifler):

Somewhere in Baltimore City, this sign and the occupants of this dwelling are lurking. We can fight back.

I’ll definitely occupy my vote this year, and you can bet your bottom dollar it won’t be for that failure named Barack Obama.

Finally, another requirement the Democrats in charge of Annapolis seem to be flunking is honesty in economic reporting. Instead of giving us the real news – which has been generally bad – they’re resorting to obfuscation. Jim Pettit at Change Maryland sent this along to me last week:

Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley recently hosted an Annapolis summit for advocates of what is called a “Genuine Progress Indicator.” The national forum received scant media attention and the issue itself has largely been under the radar of most mainstream media outlets.

The impetus behind the Genuine Progress Indicator, or GPI movement, is to supplant traditional federal government statistics with new and arbitrary criteria that deducts what other government bureaucrats deem as environmental and social costs that accrue from prosperity.

(Read the rest here. They also have a helpful fact sheet.)

Maryland is one of two states which have enacted a form of this method of statistical legerdemain, as Vermont signed this into law earlier this year.

Obviously Larry Hogan and Change Maryland delight in being a thorn in Martin O’Malley’s side, but the real question is why this is even being considered in the first place. To me, it comes from the same line of thinking which believes rural development should be shelved in favor of promoting “greenways” and packing people into urban centers so they can “improve” our “quality of life.”

But regardless of every statistic which can be measured, there is no way government can insure happiness. To use a baseball analogy, even if a pitcher absolutely owns a hitter to the tune of the batter being 0-for-20 against him that’s no guarantee the next at-bat won’t produce a home run. The radical Left can disparage capitalism all they want, and I’ll admit it sometimes doesn’t work very well. But these mistakes can be easily rectified by the market, and there’s no need for government to intercede. GPI is just an excuse for a greater attempt to control outcomes, with the folly of believing in equality of outcome uppermost in their minds.

It all goes back to that old saw about lies, damned lies, and statistics. When it’s in someone’s vested interest to cook the books we all know what sort of trouble can ensue. But I don’t need numbers to see that people are hurting, and it’s not from capitalism but instead from the lack thereof.

Study: states drowning in debt, too

Sometimes things just fall into my lap and last night was one case. First was this study from State Budget Solutions which concluded:

Americans are sadly desensitized to the trillions of dollars in debt our states are facing. This report brings the debt closer to home by demonstrating that a newborn arrives already more than $13,000 in debt and that a family of four owes their state government $53,700,” said Bob Williams, President of State Budget Solutions. “It is the individuals and families who will ultimately bear this horrific financial burden if state governments do not get their budgets under control.”

The report is an extension of State Budget Solutions’ third annual State Debt Report, released in August showing that state governments face a crushing debt of more than $4.6 trillion. The analysis of debt per person looks at state debt per capita, per private sector employee, and the percentage of private sector gross state product (GSP). In each of the three categories, Hawaii, New Jersey, and Alaska are among states with the five largest debt figures. At the other end of the spectrum, Nebraska has the lowest total in each of the areas.

The largest per capita debt figure for all 50 states is Alaska, where each person’s share of their state’s debt stands at $31,141. New Jersey, Hawaii, Connecticut, and Illinois make up the top five states with the highest per capita share of the state debt.

Nebraska has the lowest total debt per capita at just $4,249 for each resident. Tennessee, Indiana, Florida, and Idaho round out the lowest five debt levels per capita.

Surprisingly – to me at least – Maryland was only 18th in per capita debt, coming in just a shade above the national average. But a recent vote by the state’s Capital Debt Affordability Committee might bump up Maryland’s ranking, according to fiscally conservative advocates Change Maryland. Larry Hogan, Chairman of Change Maryland, takes it from here:

“The O’Malley Administration proved to everyone that with more revenues, come more spending. In their view, a debt-induced spending binge will somehow create thousands of jobs, the estimates of which are pulled out of thin air. This spending will do nothing for struggling Marylanders looking for work, nor will it improve our state’s dismal record in job creation.”

Noting that Comptroller Peter Franchot was the lone dissenter in the Capital Debt Affordability Committee’s 4 to 1 vote, which raised debt spending to $1.1 billion, Hogan said the split within the Democratic Party’s governing machine shows the arrogance of the current Administration.

“When our top elected official in charge of state revenue collections sounds the alarm about out of control spending, and the snooze button is hit yet again, it shows the current regime just doesn’t get it,” Hogan added.

The most recent 2012 National Governor’s Association report on state budgets shows Maryland’s general fund spending has increased 15.5%, three times the national average, and the highest in the region between fiscal years 2011 and 2013.

Taxes and fees have been raised 24 times since 2007, removing an additional $2.4 billion annually from the state economy.

“We have a spend first, ask questions later approach to governing,” said Hogan. “Far from moving Maryland forward, O’Malley’s record tax hikes, record spending and more debt has thrown us into reverse and put our state in a ditch.”

It’s very interesting to note as well that the lone dissenting vote was Peter Franchot, our Democratic Comptroller who seems to be staking out the most fiscally conservative position (by far) among the leading contenders on the Democratic side for Governor in 2014. He could well be Larry Hogan’s opponent if Hogan chooses to run for and wins the GOP nomination. According to the Maryland Reporter website, the vote continued Franchot’s “long-running but losing battle against what he sees as overspending in the face of a sluggish economic growth.”

(By the way, included in that bonding is $104 million for a new library at Salisbury University. This was literally a last-minute addition to this year’s bond bill.)

But if you add the $4.6 trillion state indebtedness to the $16 trillion (and counting) our federal government finds itself short, we’re now staring at $20 trillion. For every person in the WORLD (not just America, but the whole globe) that’s about $3,000 just for us, not anyone else’s debt. In dozens of countries around the globe the annual income is less than that indebtedness.

Of course, those who argue for adding millions to our state debt couch the argument as one of job creation. But what about future generations? Money spent covering the debt of the past loses a step in the economy – it’s sort of like the old “broken window” theory in that you’re creating a task but not creating more wealth through it. Yes, some bondholder is receiving money but no other production ensues in the transaction. On the other hand, keeping that money in the private sector would have provided an opportunity for general improvement both at the time the bond was sold and when it was redeemed.

Maryland never seems to learn that lesson, though. Instead they just keep chasing their tail through extracting more of a share of our incomes and consumption in order to redistribute it to favored groups and constituencies which can provide them votes. We need to get away from that vicious cycle.

Update: Don’t miss the link from Marc Kilmer in the comments, either.

Who really gets the Maryland casino jobs?

One of the selling points proponents of Question 7 have tried to stress is job creation, claiming that 12,000 positions in the areas of constructing the new facility, working inside, and tourism in general would open up once the issue is passed.

But a serious question has been raised on the construction job aspect: who will get them? It’s a question posited on a mailer I obtained yesterday.

If you’ll notice in the first box on the back side (the second page of the .pdf file), there’s a question as to who can actually take these jobs. Quoting from the mailer:

Given that developers will operate under a ‘Project Labor Agreement’ that limits who can be employed during construction, most able-bodied Maryland workers will never even have a shot at getting a job there.

In other words, non-union contractors need not apply. Is it any wonder it was the building trades union who sent me a letter to convince me to support the measure passing the Special Session? (They dropped a lot of money on that effort, according to the Baltimore Sun.) The most cynical among us might do the math: more union jobs = more union dues = more money into Democrats’ coffers.

And then we have the promise of permanent jobs. Certainly there will be jobs to be had at a new facility, as it will host its share of service workers to maintain the video slots, run the table games, and serve food and drinks. Yet there’s a legitimate concern about jobs being lost in other nearby gaming venues such as Maryland Live! in Anne Arundel County. The opening of Maryland Live! has already prompted the management of the Hollywood Casino in Perryville to ask for the removal of 400 slots so their facility doesn’t look too empty and unused.

While the National Harbor facility may draw some business away from the Hollywood Casino in Charles Town, West Virginia and perhaps entice a few gamblers up from Virginia and out of Washington, D.C., the net effect on Maryland’s existing facilities is likely to be detrimental as the overall gaming participation growth is only predicted at 1 to 2 percent. Adding more Maryland facilities will shrink the pie for existing casinos more than it would add to the market, and as business declines elsewhere facilities like Maryland Live!, the Perryville Hollywood Casino, and Ocean Downs will have no choice but to shed jobs.

And let’s talk money. Oddly enough, arriving in my mailbox yesterday was another mailer which pointed out an obvious flaw covered in several other venues: money spent by gamblers in the hope of garnering a better education for our crumb-crunchers is really only replacing what’s already taken out of the general fund. So the net effect of Maryland’s education system may well be zero.

Yet the Diamondback piece also has some interesting quotes from Comptroller Peter Franchot, who chastises his fellow Democrats for hopping aboard the gambling train:

It’s a sad exercise to watch Democrats approve gambling, which everyone knows is a regressive tax. [Gaming] is a predatory industry.

It’s also likely to be another failed effort in a state which tried and failed to enact punitive taxes on millionaires, who simply laughed and moved to a state with lower taxes. Unfortunately, poor people – who are already stuck with underperforming schools which won’t see any true benefit from the money they’re wishing away – don’t readily have as many options aside from not gambling at all. And who’s going to pass up the allure of easy money?

If only they could get more benefit from the money being spent on passing or killing Question 7.

Initial impressions

Already there has been occasion for me to write about possible 2014 races, and I noticed via my Facebook feed that political blogger Richard Cross is putting up his thoughts about the Democratic nominee who would succeed Martin O’Malley. I told you we were getting to the silly season, and quite frankly there’s not much to learn about the 2012 race at this point since we know who the nominees will be and no one but junkies are paying a whole lot of attention anyway.

But we all have to have something to write about, so I wanted to bounce off Richard’s post with a couple thoughts in general.

We all have heard the saying that the 2012 election is the most important one in our lives, and to the extent that it represents a break in the direction our nation is heading, that’s true. Granted it’s not as clean of a break as many might prefer, but above all fears is the fear of the unknown. Sadly, much as I would have liked it, no radical conservative was going to win after the runaway liberalism we’ve experienced over the last three years. Pendulums rarely swing that quickly.

Having said that, however, it’s interesting to reflect on just how sharply the 2010 election served as a repudiation of the so-called “wave” election of 2008. And remember, 2006 was considered payback for the conservatism which had run its course over 12 years, since the Gingrich-led takeover of the House. I would argue that the 2006 theory is incorrect simply because there wasn’t all that much conservatism exhibited by the House after 1995, and even when we had a supposedly conservative President in George W. Bush it’s not like the era of big government came to an end by any means. Instead, we got more federal control over schools and a new permanent entitlement in return for a ten-year tax rate cut. At any rate, given the recessionary economy and the financial panic of the fall of 2008 people were probably more willing for – and less thoughtful about – a change of any sort than in any election over the last 80 years.

So the obvious question for 2012 is whether the push back will come at the expense of the Obama regime or the TEA Party-led Republican majority in Congress. Through my admittedly colored viewpoint I would suspect the former, and let’s say for the sake of argument that indeed occurs – on November 6 Barack Obama and Harry Reid are handed their walking papers as President and Senate Majority Leader, respectively.

And let’s further assume that under a Romney administration the economy comes roaring back to an extent where, even if federal jobs are cut, the growth in the private sector in and around Washington means that part of the state doesn’t suffer as much as many fear should a conservative takeover put a lot of useless pencil-pushers out of work.

Given those two assumptions, the question for 2014 would become the following: do Maryland Democrats get credit for the likely budgetary success which would come from prosperous times? While their tax hikes were made retroactive so certain wage-earners will be giving the state a larger chunk of their income next April, it’s quite possible that a Romney win in November may make the Christmas shopping season unlike any other in recent memory, as confident shoppers once again decide to splurge. (Martin O’Malley would be cursing his bad luck at not sweet-talking the General Assembly into a sales tax increase at that point.) With a grand Christmas the state would make up for any income tax losses created when they decided a “soak-the-rich” policy was the way to go, rather than prudent spending cuts.

Obviously the majority party in Maryland banks on short memories. Martin O’Malley, who raised taxes more than any governor in our state’s history, still won re-election in 2010 – a terrible year for Democrats elsewhere – because he could state the claim about Bob Ehrlich that he did it too because “a fee is a tax.” Voters had nearly three years to “get used to” the higher taxes so there was no real complaint by the time O’Malley’s re-election rolled around.

Similarly, the increased taxes passed over the last two years will be part of the cost of doing business by the middle of 2014, so if the economy really improves it would be a dead issue. In essence, Republicans then would have to nationalize a state election by comparing the muddled mess of Maryland government in 2014 to our federal government in 2012. Sure, things are prosperous now, they would say, but we can make them even better.

At this early stage, though, we don’t know what the future will hold. If I were to lay odds at the moment I would think the 2014 race for governor would pit Peter Franchot vs. David Craig – a pair of technocrats well-versed in the levers of government as Comptroller and Harford County Executive, respectively. It’s not likely a legislator would be successful in seeking the job since in the last fifty years, only Bob Ehrlich has been elected governor without some sort of executive experience. But all that can be changed if the conditions were right, and the horses who break out front early on rarely lead wire-to-wire.

The other key factor is where the O’Malley fatigue certain to occur will be expressed. Democrats will be hoping that it’s extinguished after the primary election, while the GOP would dearly love to see it carried out all the way through November and be so rampant that a GOP winner has broad coattails. Few would predict the GOP takes over the General Assembly, but getting a minority of 55 to 60 in the House and 20 or so in the Senate would be a milestone for the Maryland Republican Party. They could use that to help a GOP governor enact needed reforms.

But we have to remember we are 2 1/2 years away. It’s fun to handicap a state race, and those who run statewide – particularly as Republicans – need to make an early start, but don’t forget matters closer at hand.

The Maryland Republican Party as a career ladder?

You know, I think this was a reason some were concerned about Alex Mooney becoming chair.

But late on Tuesday the Maryland Republican Party Chair announced he was forming an exploratory committee for the Sixth District seat now held by Roscoe Bartlett, who is beginning to look more and more like a lame duck candidate – case in point, the strong suspicion that his (now former) chief of staff, Bud Otis, may be making a bid for the GOP nomination. Bear in mind there were already several candidates in the race for the Sixth District before all this intrigue began, making the statewide Senate race look cut-and-dried by comparison.

Continue reading “The Maryland Republican Party as a career ladder?”

35th Annual Tawes Crab and Clam Bake in pictures and text

As the old saying goes, there are two sides to (almost) every story, and the annual event in Crisfield provides plenty of comparisons.

Take the location for example – a marina filled with boats valued in the tens of thousands of dollars hard by low-income housing. Denizens of the immediate neighborhood look forward to the Clam Bake as it provides an opportunity to sell parking spots to people who don’t wish to walk as far to the event.

In short, they create their own economic development. But bringing 3,500 visitors to Crisfield is an economic boost to the area.

While the event has a reputation as a political stop, there is a business element there too. Some companies look to get or keep their name out in the area.

Others use it as a reward to their customers, hosting elaborate parties within the party.

But the crowd was noticeably smaller than last year’s. Yes, this is not an election year but even the number of businesses which took tent space seemed smaller. How often do you see this?

Maybe it’s something about Area 51? But this is a shot I took around 1:30 or so at the peak of the festivities.

Compare that crowd to this still shot from last year.

Even the mugs weren’t being snatched up as quickly.

As you’ll notice in the panoramic picture, there are two main areas where crowds gather. On one side are the smaller tents set up for businesses and groups. But many people sit in the pavilion and enjoy musical entertainment.

I can’t say I’m a fan of country or bluegrass, but a number of people sat under the pavilion to listen.

I know, I know – you readers are saying, “Michael, you have a political website. What’s the political dirt?” Well, there are two sides to that as well.

One guy who seems to straddle that line is Bruce Bereano, who annually has among the largest tents and his own “corner.” However, with a revised setup this year he was more in the middle.

In a nice touch, Bereano has honored a local leader for the last couple years.

If you don’t believe he works to both sides of the aisle, consider that the following two signs were close together on his tent.

Could this be the gubernatorial matchup for 2014? Peter Franchot could obviously be entrenched as Comptroller for as long as he wants to be but my feeling is he wants something more. Meanwhile, David Craig is term-limited as Harford County Executive but obviously has a run for something in mind three years hence. My guess would be that “something” is a long-term stay in Government House.

A matchup which will occur sooner is a statewide battle for the U.S. Senate seat held by Ben Cardin. Presumably he was a little busy today, but a number of volunteers were sporting his colors and registering voters as they stood in the food lines.

Arriving a little later was a man who’s aiming to be his Republican rival, Dan Bongino. Here he’s talking to Bill Harris of Cecil County.

I also spied Eric Wargotz there with his wife. But he wasn’t openly campaigning at this time.

Like Senator Cardin, Congressman Andy Harris was likely a little busy today but had volunteers and signs with a sharply pointed message about. Eventually a lot of folks were wearing yellow Harris shirts.

By gosh, I think Andy is right. But there was someone quite familiar to him there.

Allow me to pose a question. Why would you spend $200 on tickets and a half tank of gas to come down and eat crabs one can probably get just as readily in Queen Anne’s County? Perhaps it’s a case of best two out of three? For all his talk about time with the family I don’t think, given the power and prestige of a seat in Congress, he can let it go just to be a cheerleader for Ben Cardin.

And there were a few cheerleaders for our state’s junior Senator.

Yet the Democrats had a modest, unassuming presence compared to the GOP.

That’s not to say both parties weren’t represented, to be sure. Here’s two of our best freshman Delegates, Charles Otto and Justin Ready.

They weren’t the only freshmen Republicans there, as I saw Michael Hough, Kathy Szeliga, and of course my Delegate Mike McDermott at the event.

Meanwhile, Wicomico County Executive Rick Pollitt was reaching across the aisle, greeting old friends in the Somerset County Republican tent.

On the other hand, Norm Conway was holed up around the Democrats’ base.

Even the unaffiliated were there. Yes, last I checked Laura Mitchell of Salisbury City Council doesn’t state a party affiliation. I did catch up to her just outside the Democratic tent, though.

Nor was national politics forgotten. Kevin Waterman (who some may know for the Questing for Atlantis website) came supporting his choice for President, Gary Johnson.

Republican politics must run in that family – his mother Diana (who I cut off in the photo) is First Vice-Chair of the Maryland GOP.

Needless to say, the media was there as well. WBOC-TV was on location shooting footage, and I saw print reporters and fellow bloggers about, too.

But I’m curious if anyone else will report on this tidbit.

Notice the flag placed in the corner of the Democrats’ tent? It’s the Wicomico County flag.

Now I’m not convinced that the official imprimatur of our fair county should be in that tent – granted, Democrats have a plurality of voters here but Republicans hold more elected seats in county government. If it’s an endorsement of Democratic principles (such as they are) for our county, consider me as a conscientious objector.

So while the turnout was smaller than in years past, it was still a good event for the Crisfield community. And the rain, which I noticed on my drive back, stayed away.

Look for an interesting cast of characters for next year’s event, which should fall after the 2012 primary on July 18, 2012.

Murphy speaks out

It’s about four minutes of commentary, but former gubernatorial candidate Brian Murphy had the chance to discuss the recent election with Shari Elliker on WBAL Radio Friday.

There’s no doubt that Murphy paid as much attention to the election results as the rest of us did, and it’s not clear from the conversation that his campaign rhetoric about Bob Ehrlich being beatable wasn’t quite the “I told you so” in retrospect. Critics noted that Bob Ehrlich’s message was a little muddy in their postmortems.

But now is the time to look forward to what is and will be. Martin O’Malley has one more term to serve as governor, and it’s conceivable a number of state Democrats are playing the game of being coy about their 2014 plans while laying the groundwork for a run of their own for Government House. Anthony Brown, Peter Franchot, and Doug Gansler are naturally front and center in that conversation since they have ran and won statewide.

Meanwhile, the GOP side has its own contenders with Brian Murphy probably among them. (He was coy about this in his conversation with Elliker, but one has to believe he’s considering the prospect of seeking an open seat. We’ll see based on how much interaction he has with Republican and TEA Party groups in the coming months.)

But we can’t forget a couple other names.

The old guard establishment may well be represented by Larry Hogan, who began something of a placeholder run for Governor this year until Bob Ehrlich got in.

We also need to consider Charles Lollar, who was the beneficiary of a draft movement last year but was tripped up by residency requirements this time around based on when he first registered to vote in Maryland he was just a few months short of the five years required. Undaunted, he ran for Congress. Unless Democrats decide to push through a ten-year requirement to foil him again, he may well decide to run again IF he doesn’t win a Congressional seat first.

It’s going to be about message, though. With the strong probability of another set of tax increases or expansions for Maryland one has to wonder just how long it will be before the unaffiliated voters and thoughtful suburban Democrats realize that continually funneling more money to the state for fewer and poorer core services needs to come to a screeching halt and eventually be turned around. Given the slow pace of economic recovery, the prospect of a strong economy come 2014 can only be described as a crapshoot at best – people my age may recall that the Reagan recovery didn’t begin until his third year in office and if a Republican takes the White House in 2012 it may take that long to undo the Obama damage (even with a GOP House over his last two years.)

But I’m glad to see Brian Murphy hasn’t gone away. Maybe we should be hanging onto those yard signs.

A case of ‘told you so’

Last week the state of Maryland, on less than 24 hours’ notice, approved a contract to purchase around 1,000 slot machines for a casino presently under construction in Cecil County. The contract works out to over $46,000 per machine, a figure one industry analyst considered 4 times too high according to a Baltimore Sun article by Annie Linskey.

By participating in an “incredible windfall” for the industry (in the words of Comptroller Peter Franchot) the state has put itself in the business better considered by companies which actually make their fortunes in the gaming industry.

The problems I had with the issue of slots when it came up on the ballot two years ago were many.

It didn’t need to be a constitutional amendment because doing things that way made adjustments difficult. Prior to the vote, the General Assembly considered slots several years in a row but could never pass the issue the normal way – had they done so we could’ve adapted to the market.
By restricting the state to video slots and taking such a long time to get them to market, we’ve allowed neighboring states to leapfrog into additional casinos close to the border, adoption of table games, and limited sports betting. To adopt table games would presumably require yet another vote of the people in two years and by that time it will be established in at least Delaware and West Virginia.
Since the state’s take is higher than in many other locales, the interest in opening slot casinos in a recession is not great. Out of five approved locations for casinos we only have slots on the drawing board for two – the Cecil County location and Ocean Downs. A location on the western fringe of Maryland drew no interest, which obviously will cut revenue further short of projections.

Another casualty of the failure of slots may be the repeal of the 2008 sales tax increase. When I spoke to Bob Ehrlich regarding how he would make up for the decrease in revenue, part of his answer concerned slots:

Bob explained… the increased economic activity lowering the tax would create would fill in part of the gap (also a good presumption.) In addition, with slots coming online that revenue will enable the state to lower our tax burden in that manner.

Those slots, which already need to create $50 million in revenue to the state just to pay for themselves, have a lot of people counting on them to be productive and create the cash to help solve the state’s problems. It’s a burden bound to create disappointment in Annapolis as the best laid plans of the General Assembly and Governor O’Malley fail once again.