The permanent disruption

This evening I depart from the maelstrom which is Maryland politics to bring you: reality. It’s the sort of reality that smacks you upside the head like a 2×4, except that there’s not a whole lot of demand for those right now – in case you haven’t noticed, there hasn’t been a whole lot of building going on over the last half-dozen years or so.

That’s a reason this post by Lee Dodson at The Brenner Brief caught my eye, as it asks a vital question: can the construction business survive? And when the opening line is…

The construction business didn’t just collapse, it disappeared.

…there was nothing I could do but sadly agree.

It’s been nearly nine years, but the reason I moved to Maryland in the first place was to take a job at a growing local architectural firm. For 22 years I worked in that business, first as a draftsman with a firm which literally did all its drawings with ink on mylar (anyone remember that?), then moving on to learning AutoCAD beginning with version 11, then taking my architectural exam – for which I grandfathered in because I only had a four year degree but enough work experience to qualify – and finally moving up to project management for small projects and eventual LEED certification a year before I was furloughed. In total, I worked for six different firms, not counting a little moonlighting I did now and then for a home builder.

To make a long story short, the demise of the construction industry locally put me (and, over a period of about 18 months, 16 others, give or take one or two who worked for my firm at various times while I was employed there) out of a job. Most found work in other places, but I decided to stay here and try something different because I like the area and didn’t wish to move yet again. A firm which had nearly 20 employees at its peak is now down to just a couple. Obviously I can’t speak for other firms, and there’s perhaps a few which have opened up during my long interregnum from the business, but I believe I would be safe in saying that, if you added up all those positions held at local architectural, engineering, and design firms seven years ago, less than half remain. And the reason is simple; not much is being built and what is getting done tends to be awarded to firms across the bridge.

So I have had the humbling experience of being downsized as a middle-aged guy out of a profession where I toiled for most of my adult life. But it’s even worse for long-term prospects, as Dodson notes:

The extinction of an entire class of tradespeople is the most dangerous situation. But those in the business who can bring younger people along will play a vital part in the recovery and restore a once vibrant building economy only if there is a will to liberate that class to thrive.

If you don’t do something for a long while, you lose your innate knowledge of the craft. Those who were expert tradesmen but lost their jobs wouldn’t be quite the experts if and when they were rehired. While someone like me wouldn’t forget completely how to do AutoCAD or know how to interpret the building code so a set of drawings could be sent out for permit, the industry has changed enough in a half-decade to present a steep learning curve once the industry recovers.

Unfortunately, the construction industry also suffers from a couple other factors which will affect its long-term local viability. The massive influx of foreign laborers, many of whom are here illegally, is driving wages down and placing craftsmanship in peril for those jobs being built.

Perhaps more ominous, though, is the additional red tape being placed on the construction industry on a number of fronts, but most particularly in the areas of “green” design and compliance with overly restrictive environmental and zoning codes. It’s difficult enough to establish this area as a market with its below average income, but when developers have to jump through a multitude of hoops to try and make their enterprise a profitable one, they may be inclined to try their luck somewhere else. I’m convinced that a large-scale development like Ocean Pines, which was built over 40 years ago, wouldn’t be possible today because the environmentalists would fight it tooth and nail in court or lobby to have the zoning codes written in such a way to prevent it.

It may be another decade before the building industry catches up to the over-saturation of units built in the last ten years or so, as the housing market collapsed here just as it did in many other resort areas. Those who figured on this area to be their second home suddenly had to worry about keeping the roof of their first house over their heads, and many couldn’t. Couple that with the continuing War on Rural Maryland perpetrated by those who think they know better in Annapolis and it’s clear that we may not have yet reached the bottom. Hopefully that’s not the case, but as seen from my perspective the jobs are nowhere to be found in this locality.

A service

I need to give credit where credit is due.

Even though she’s not on the Central Committee – and won’t have a vote unless and until someone else from our county needs a proxy – Jackie Wellfonder has performed a service to the Maryland Republican community by speaking with all three candidates for state party Chair. (So much for the theory it’s a race only interesting to the 300 or so Central Committee members in the state.)

Now I will grant that she’s enthusiastically in the Kline camp, and I can understand her reasoning. Personally, I don’t think I’m quite ready to give my endorsement yet between the two challengers for the Chair position; in fact, I sort of wish I could have a Collins Kline or a Greg Bailey because there’s a lot to like about both gentlemen. I may not know for sure who I’m voting for until I see all three of them on April 18th – fortunately, this is the sort of position where I don’t have to vote for the lesser of two evils in the primary or general election race. (Such was not the case for Salisbury mayor, unfortunately.)

Much has been made about the infighting for Maryland GOP Chair and, in general, the state of the party at large as a gang which just can’t seem to shoot straight. But I’m here to tell you that the other party has its problems too.

Unlike the situation at the national level, where Barack Obama seems to delight in making Republicans the voodoo doll for all of his self-induced problems, the Democrats in Maryland really have no one else to blame for their issues in running the state. Sure, they will try and sell you the notion that the state is succeeding but out here in the hinterlands that message isn’t playing. Instead, we seem to be the chosen whipping boy for liberal policies that of late have restricted our counties, raised our gasoline taxes, and threaten our Second Amendment rights. To some of us, nullification (as proposed by Carroll County commissioner Richard Rothschild and others) is just a half-step – the preferred idea is secession from Maryland altogether.

While a greater Delmarva or even annexation into Delaware probably isn’t in the cards, one question which probably should be asked at our upcoming GOP Chair forum on April 18th is how the candidates will deal with the overall “War on Rural Maryland.” Unfortunately, Kline is somewhat insulated from that discussion since he lives in Anne Arundel County, but Diana Waterman (and to a lesser extent Collins Bailey) should be well-versed in rural issues. Obviously we as a party need to appeal to urban voters to some extent, but the trick will be figuring how to create the proper us-vs.-them message to play will both in the inner city and in rural Maryland – believe it or not, we face some of the same economic issues.

I don’t know if I will be on the panel asking questions at the Cambridge forum (although I think with my inquisitive nature I could easily do so) but I think this is a question which should be answered. While the nine counties of the Eastern Shore account for only about 1 in 10 state residents, we do provide about 1/4 of the Republican vote at the convention. (In the good old days we had over 1/3 of the Maryland Senate too, but that is more a question of secession.)

Worth noting on that front is a note I received from Cecil County Chair Chris Zeauskas: that Eastern Shore coalition isn’t so strong for Waterman. Certainly a few counties are in the tank for her, but I’m finding it more and more difficult to believe she’ll have a clear majority April 20, and my sense is that if Waterman doesn’t get a first-ballot win more will coalesce around the second-place finisher.

We will see what happens.

The decline of rural America

I just got through reading an interesting piece by James Huffman, where the former law school dean theorized that rural Americans are now the victims of disenfranchisement. (Since I set my links to open in a new tab, you can read it and come back here. I’ll wait.)

Thoughtful piece, huh? (And a tip of the hat to Christy Waters, who posted the link on the Conservative Bloggers on Facebook page.) It seems to me Maryland once had a system similar to that described by Huffman, where the House of Delegates was set up to be the people’s house while the Maryland Senate was more for county interests, although also directly elected by county residents. Still, a Senator who represented the minuscule population of an entire Eastern Shore county had the same say over affairs as one coming from populous Baltimore City. Obviously, the urban centers didn’t like an arrangement where 3/8 of the body represented about 1/10 of the state’s population and the Senate was changed decades ago.

Yet I would wager that if the system were in place today, there would be no such thing as a “War on Rural Maryland.” Whether you take it by statewide election results or have Senators appointed by the local county commission or council (as pre-Seventeenth Amendment United States Senators were selected by state legislatures, not popular vote), it’s obvious that such a body would be far more conservative than the Maryland Senate we have now. Arguably it would create a situation where the lower House in Maryland would be as heavily Democratic as it is now, but the upper chamber could be slightly Republican, depending on how some rural counties voted. If each county had two Senators, the Eastern Shore would likely comprise 14 to 16 seats of a Republican voting bloc that, when combined with the counties in other parts of Maryland that also lean Republican, would likely indeed place the GOP in a narrow majority.

Of course, that’s not to say much of the same Annapolis-centric legislation wouldn’t pass, for the closeness of the upper chamber combined with the Democratic dominance of the lower House would probably lead to a number of Republicans crossing the aisle on certain issues, particularly environmental ones. (Moreover, the state’s chief executive would likely also be a Democrat.)

But there would likely be a lot more respect for the agricultural industry if such a system were still in place; alas, we lost our last grip on power when the “one man, one vote” edict was misinterpreted by Maryland lawmakers and jurists into a belief that both houses had to comply. Imagine a U.S. Senate elected on a proportional basis like the House of Representatives is – states like Delaware may as well not bother showing up.

Our founders put into place a beautifully-crafted system of compromises when considering the layout of the government, including the planning of our bicameral system. Larger, more populous colonies wanted more say in affairs, so they received a House which was elected by the people and proportioned according to population. The smaller colonies, though, wouldn’t press forward unless their needs were met so a Senate comprised of an equal number from all states was included as a balance – as originally created, these Senators were selected by the state legislatures. As we mourned a century of Constitutional acceptance of the income tax a week ago Sunday, come April 8th we will have endured a century of another Progressive mistake: direct election of Senators as enshrined in the Seventeenth Amendment.

In his closing, Huffman writes:

The point is that, because of their minority status in statewide population terms and their lack of representation as communities, rural Americans are denied full self-governance. They have become the objects of what might be called the soft tyranny of others desires and expectations.

Just as states seem to be falling in line to the desires of the bureaucrats inside the Beltway, by extension we who choose to live in the hinterlands of the so-called Free State are being corrupted more and more by do-gooders whose ideas of rural Maryland are formed as they drive at seventy miles per hour to the beachfront condo they’ve rented in Ocean City. To them, we are the two-hour obstacle between them and enjoyment – never mind that chicken dinner or produce may be grown right here.

Yet those of us who actually live here and like it – despite their best efforts at driving us away – still deserve our say. The founders intended this to be a republic, with all voices heard. Just because there’s fewer of us out here doesn’t mean we should be drowned out in the cacophony of voices screeching “gimme, gimme, gimme” from the big cities.

Gambling: Maryland’s growth industry?

There are guys who really must like parsing economic statistics, and I’m getting the impression Change Maryland employs several of them. Toying with Martin O’Malley like a catnip-addled feline pawing about a ball of yarn, their latest effort is summed up neatly this way by Change Maryland head Larry Hogan:

Combined, the gambling industry is expected to generate 3,250 jobs or nearly 40% of the 8,500 new jobs announced in 2012. Other sectors pale in comparison with cyber security expected to generate 2,612 jobs, healthcare 379 jobs and manufacturing 334 jobs. By contrast… sectors (lauded) by the O’Malley Administration, most notably green energy, are expected to generate just 110 jobs.

“I don’t know how Martin O’Malley can say with a straight face that jobs are a priority of this Administration with numbers like these,” said Hogan. “These numbers are lopsided and pitiful.”

I’m not sure if the total includes the dozens of jobs created by the fat Christmas bonuses awarded by the media conglomerates who own the television stations made wealthy by the millions of dollars spent contesting Question 7, but it is a sad state of affairs when casinos create more jobs than manufacturing. Yet that’s the reality in Maryland. And as Hogan pithily adds:

While I’m glad that some will get jobs as blackjack dealers and cocktail servers, the best careers are those that require science,  technology and engineering skills that Maryland educators are working so hard to develop in the classroom.

The Change Maryland release compares the job creation in Maryland and Virginia, and makes the case that our neighbor to the south is kicking our tail in that regard.

Looking at these statistics in a more parochial manner, the Eastern Shore as a whole is getting very little benefit this year from the state’s economic development team, with one project apiece in Dorchester and Worcester counties. Total jobs created (over three years, mind you) are projected to be 80. The two companies in question invested a total of $3.5 million in new facilities, but by way of comparison that’s less than a month’s revenue from the casino at Ocean Downs. And 80 jobs is a drop in the bucket compared to some of the major employers here in Wicomico County alone.

Needless to say, the state’s efforts are puny and minuscule compared to how much they put into attracting jobs along the I-95 corridor. Our tenth or so of the state’s population could use more assistance in trying to grow and develop as opposed to the War on Rural Maryland we’re forced to endure from Annapolis. More or less we’d like to be left alone, although if you could work with Delaware and the federal government on an interstate-grade highway from Salisbury to I-95 at Wilmington we would be mighty thankful. I look at it this way:  if we could get ourselves to be an easier 4 hour drive from the New York megalopolis, I believe it could help both tourism and industry. Something I didn’t know until I looked it up is that we here in Salisbury are actually closer to New York City than to Cumberland, Maryland.

But whatever the job creation task required, the folks at Change Maryland are generally quick to point out that Maryland is lacking in that department. You can call it partisan politics if you want, and perhaps you’d have a point since Hogan is a Republican. But facts are facts, and the numbers which come from neutral referees continue to show that Maryland isn’t the job-creation machine our state government would lead you to believe that it is. And when three of the four counties which make up our little corner of the state lag with unemployment over 9 percent (Wicomico isn’t much better at 7.9%) it tells me that the “One Maryland” fallacy espoused by our governor is just that.

If a chain is defined by its weakest link, we’re the ones who need the attention. Stop listening to the Agenda 21 crowd who would like to return the Eastern Shore to a pristine wilderness (aside from the beachfront condos they annually rent in Ocean City and from Ocean Downs, since it creates revenue for the almighty state) and start listening to what we who live here have to say. Really: I’m not lying to you when I say growth is good for us, so help us cut our unemployment rate down by stepping aside and letting us do it.

A battle won in the ‘War on Rural Maryland’

There was some good news for a change for farmers and those involved in the local agricultural industry yesterday. This was celebrated by the advocacy group Save Farm Families in a release:

A federal judge in Baltimore, Md., has ruled against out-of-state environmental activists in a case against fourth generation family farmers brought by the New York-based Waterkeeper Alliance, alleging their chicken farm violated the Clean Water Act. SaveFarmFamilies.org applauds the judge’s decision, and calls on Judge Nickerson to award legal costs to the Hudsons and to Perdue Farms, which was also named in the suit. In addition, the Assateague Coastal Trust, Waterkeeper Alliance, and the University of Maryland Environmental Law Clinic should publicly apologize to the Hudsons and to the Maryland taxpayers who unwillingly funded this wasteful lawsuit.

The Hudsons’ nightmare began three years ago when they acquired biosolids from the town of Ocean City for eventual use on their farm. Whether intentionally or not, the pile was originally placed in a position where its runoff washed into a waterway which flowed into the Pocomoke River and eventually to Chesapeake Bay. The matter was resolved by the Hudsons agreeing with the Maryland Department of the Environment to relocate the biosolid pile to a different location on their farm for usage prior to the next growing season; in addition, the Hudsons were assessed a $4,000 penalty which was overturned on appeal.

Enter the Waterkeepers’ Alliance, which with the other plaintiffs were basically pining for a fight and found the perfect scapegoat when they assumed the manure piled on the Hudson farm came from the chickens they grew for Perdue. It was Radical Green’s wet dream: an eeeeeeevil factory farm controlled by a large poultry producer willfully piling up chicken manure in order to spew pollution directly to Chesapeake Bay. If they didn’t know better, one would believe the raw chicken waste was being piped directly from the chicken houses to the Chesapeake to achieve maximum effect!

Needless to say, their narrative developed holes rather quickly when the pollution data from downstream was inconclusive to whether it came from the biosolid waste pile originally thought to be chicken manure. Undaunted, the Waterkeepers plodded on with the help of Maryland taxpayers. This was because the University of Maryland Environmental Law Clinic, in the name of giving its students “trial experience,” piled on to help the radical environmentalists. (The Hudson farm case is just one of several they’ve worked over the last few years.)

But the judge ruled in the Hudsons’ favor, and to press on further would be “money after bad money,” said Perdue Farms Chairman Jim Perdue. Even Governor Martin O’Malley, who rarely meets a Radical Green proposal he can’t embrace, called the lawsuit a possible misuse of state funds.

Given the deep pockets behind the Waterkeepers’ Alliance, though, I’ll bet they indeed appeal. They couldn’t care less about the Hudson family; to them these rural farmers are just collateral damage in their jihad against “mega-meat” producer Perdue, one of several meat processing companies that Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter calls “the biggest threat to family farming in the United States and around the world.” (Then again, she thinks the waste in question came from Perdue when, as it was conclusively shown, it was biosolids from Ocean City – so what does she know? The D.C. lobbyist may well have contributed to it if she vacationed here.)

And while Hauter snivels that agriculture is but a tiny part of Maryland’s GDP, she conveniently forgets that there are other industrial categories which depend on farm products to bolster their share. While she bashes these farms for what she considers an pollution problem outstripping their actual economic impact, she would do well to remember that urban sewage plant malfunctions are far more of a Bay problem than agricultural runoff ever dreamed of being.

The trouble with all these Radical Green groups is that they seem to believe the food which is placed on their table just magically appears at their local market. Yet a prudent farmer knows how and when to fertilize his crops and to do so releases some amount of pollutants to the watershed. I jokingly say it “smells like Delaware” during those early spring months I drive by a freshly ripe farm field but I realize it’s a small price to pay for the harvest which feeds us, whether directly through corn-, wheat-, or soy-based foodstuffs or indirectly through the chicken most of us enjoy a couple times a week. The Radical Greenies seem to think the Whole Foods store fairy creates the food they eat, but that’s not how those of us who enjoy life happen to live.

So best of luck to the Hudsons. They’ve won this battle, but I fear the war isn’t over for them – or for the rest of us.

Odds and ends number 64

Since my e-mail box is filling up with items I’ve been meaning to get to and I spent part of my day today cleaning out our garage, it’s in that spirit that I present to you yet another heaping helping of items I figure are worth a couple paragraphs or so.

First of all, it seems our newly elected friend up Cecil County way, County Executive Tari Moore, is just getting everyone mad at her. Cecil County GOP head Chris Zeauskas chastised the woman he called “whichever way the wind blows” Moore for appointing Winston Robinson as her finance director. Robinson was a loser in the Democratic primary for the post Moore now holds but has lengthy experience in the financial field, according to the Cecil Whig. Zeauskas also blasted Moore for not hiring either one of two people who she presumably passed up for the appointment: county treasurer Bill Feehley and budget manager Craig Whiteford. Both are Republicans.

Meanwhile, the Campaign for Liberty is raking Moore over the coals for promising to appoint a person to run economic development in Cecil County. Their point is that:

Businesses and individuals build our economy, not government officials.

The idea that we need more bureaucrats to help those in the private sector to navigate red tape is proposterous. (sic)

Why not eliminate the onerous regulations that businesses face and eliminate the “need” to hire a government employee?

(snip)

In a Cecil Whig news article, Tari Moore “promised to create a business advocate position to create incentives and work with businesses to create jobs in Cecil County.”

The key here is provision of incentives.  Why should government have the authority to pick winners and losers in the market place?

Why should county government be giving your hard-earned tax dollars to private companies?

Every time the government uses your tax dollars to give hand outs to private businesses, it distorts and inhibits a truly free market.

It seems to me that both of these parties make valid arguments, particularly the Campaign for Liberty. However, I suspect in the Zeauskas case that if Moore hadn’t changed her registration the Republican Central Committee would have invoked the Eleventh Commandment and remained silent about the Robinson pick. The Campaign for Liberty knows no such thing and will just as readily skewer a Republican as it would a Democrat.

In fact, the C4L goes a little farther, calling on Moore to defund all economic development programs because:

Taxpayers in Cecil County have been forced year after year to give millions of dollars to county run economic development programs.

Yet, over the past two decades Cecil County has had the highest unemployment rate in the region.

By returning the money spent on these programs back to taxpayers we can start to create some real economic growth in our county.

Rather than taking potshots at a decision Tari Moore made simply because the group is upset about a change in partisan affiliation, at least the C4L has a basis in fact that perhaps another direction is needed for economic development. The data doesn’t mean that having an ineffective economic development department is the cause of the issue (since many of the peer counties are in other states, which have their own set of advantages) but could be a factor to consider going forward.

And at the moment the liberty movement in Maryland is feeling its oats, based on the glowing report I received from Maryland Liberty PAC head Patrick McGrady about their hospitality suite at the recent convention:

Our Maryland Liberty Caucus event had more visitors than any other event, by far. Not only were we able to rally our own troops to attend, but we met many new allies and friends who want to fight side-by-side with us in Maryland.

On the other hand, McGrady was blunt in his assessment of the political scene:

Although we met many old and new friends on Friday, we also came away with a very clear conclusion: the Political Establishment in Maryland is strong and will not go away easily.  These people are addicted to power and are sell-outs to the conservative cause.

These Big Government Republicans and Democrats are destroying our liberties and burdening us with over-the-top wasteful spending.

Tell me something I hadn’t figured out already, Patrick. We’ve been fighting that battle off and on since I joined the Central Committee in 2006. Unfortunately, we have way too many Republicans who go along to get along in Annapolis.

Another Pat, Delegate Pat McDonough, bemoans the “Radical Blue” nature of Maryland politics in a recent release:

The dynamic of the voting power in Maryland probably ensures there may never be another statewide Democrat office holder from Baltimore after O’Malley, Cardin, and Mikulski have moved on.  The Baltimore area voters have become captive step-children to the massive voting power of the Washington, D.C. suburbs.  Baltimore’s “radical blue” Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake presides over an urban landscape beset by murder, muggings, economic stagnation and a dim future.  She suffers no real opposition, except possibly from another “radical blue” political challenger.  The diversity of electoral politics or public policy is non-existent in Charm City.

All doubt about this growing power was removed when the 7 questions on the ballot achieved a solid victory created by a deluge of votes from the D.C. suburbs.  The problem is compounded by the fact that the two major press organs dominating Maryland, the Baltimore Sun and The Washington Post, both reflect the “radical blue” philosophy in their editorial and reporting  practices.  They are enablers, not objective journalists.

I would prefer that a neither a Baltimore-based Democrat nor a Democrat based in the Washington suburbs see statewide elected office again after the way both of those groups have ruined a once-fine state. The “landscape beset by…economic stagnation and a dim future” is the state of Maryland as it stands now. So why is Delegate McDonough conceding this ground?

Be that as it may, McDonough later makes the point that the wealthy in Maryland are “voting with their feet” and leaving the state. However, a recent decision by the IRS pointed out to me by Jim Pettit means these changes will be harder to track:

 (T)he IRS Statistics of Income Division attributes the decision to cancel the program, which dates back to 1991, to coordination issues with the U.S. Census Bureau.  There is no official word yet on why the program was cancelled.

Pettit also stated:

The IRS tax migration data is the best indicator we have of how state and local governments are doing in developing their tax base. If there is no effective way to monitor changes in the tax base in the context of macro-economic trends, then state and local governments are at a severe disadvantage in making key legislative, regulatory and fiscal policies that address the challenges of funding government budgets.

This data was a key cudgel used by the advocacy group Change Maryland to point out the multiple failures of Martin O’Malley’s economic program for the state of Maryland. Now we’ll be down to anecdotal evidence of people leaving Maryland and seeking states more friendly to their economic interests.

Soon the transport industry may follow, as it’s all but certain the General Assembly will once again consider a gas tax when they reconvene next month and may even try to work out a mileage tax as part of their “War on Rural Maryland.” But I’m putting that cart ahead of the horse a little farther than Americans for Prosperity is by setting up their opposition to a gas tax via petition. (Of course, it also builds up a healthier e-mail list.)

Let’s just hope Republicans stay unified in opposition to a gas tax this time around, mmmmmmkay?

Another tax which stands a good chance of being increased yet again is the cigarette tax, but Marc Kilmer of MPPI punctures a hole in the logic of the Baltimore Sun and lobbyist Vinnie DeMarco in his usual clear, level-headed way. It’s worth a read since the cigarette tax increase proposal is another of those Maryland General Assembly rites of spring.

Taxes are also on the mind of national politicians thanks to the closeness of the so-called “fiscal cliff.” But a coalition of nineteen conservative groups called on Congress to “…reject tax increases, refocus negotiations on spending cuts and entitlement reform, where they belong, and send a strong signal to Americans they can count on their elected representatives to look out for them in the upcoming budget negotiations.” But that would require members of Congress to exhibit some backbone, which is in short supply inside the Beltway.

I could go on but you get the idea. Despite the holiday season, politics doesn’t seem to take a break and vigilance is always required.

Trying to shed the tiers

Last spring environmental advocates claimed a victory with the passage of SB236. While it was dubbed the “Sustainable Growth and Agricultural Preservation Act of 2012,” the reality is that for most rural areas of Maryland it will do neither.

But radical environmentalists like the 1000 Friends of Maryland characterized SB236 and other measures in this manner:

The 2012 legislative session will be remembered as one that provided critical new tools to clean up our waters and slow rural development. (Emphasis mine.)

While a number of rural counties have debated the effects of the bill, they’ve come to the realization that the state holds the trump card. That wasn’t lost on Delegate Mike McDermott, who noted shortly after the bill’s passage last spring:

(The bill) is a far cry from preserving agriculture and farming in Maryland. This is the great land grab by Maryland – hurting farmers in the name of preserving them.

It is reasonable to draw conclusions from this bill that this spells the end of rural development in Maryland. It will devalue farmland and place farmers who must borrow against their land for the next planting season to have land that is not worth anywhere near what it is in today’s market. This destructive bill is the camel’s nose under the tent.

This view is shared by a growing number of those aware of the insidious effect of government, especially in Cecil County. Their Campaign for Liberty group echoed McDermott’s remarks:

Senate Bill 236 (Sustainable Growth and Agricultural Preservation Act of 2012) requires all counties to adopt a “tier map” that will severely limit future development. It is part of Governor O’Malley’s “Plan Maryland” legislation and the U.N. ‘s Agenda 21 program. SB236 will infringe on private property rights, decrease property values, and cause property taxes to go up.

Yet the state is also planning another route of attack on rural development, as a recent meeting in Wicomico County suggests. The September 2012 Growth Offset Policy Meeting was attended by several in the local TEA Party along with area planners and environmental groups, which may have been the target audience because the meeting was held during the day when most private-sector people work. It outlined a plan by the state to reduce nitrogen loads in Chesapeake Bay via a state-imposed nutrient cap. Of course, that cap is always subject to change, and the costs will be borne by the private sector but collected by a government agency which will obviously take their cut.

But we don’t know what their cut will be, nor do they. One meeting attendee related the following:

When I asked them how many additional state employees they were going to need to administer this program, they had no answer.  When I asked how they were going to regulate such an obvious moneymaking, ripe for fraud scheme, they acknowledged it was a problem, but they had no answer.  When others asked how the farmers were going to be able to finance their operations due to reduced land value to borrow against, they had no answer.  When the NGOs asked how they could make money off this by cleaning up a stream and claiming the credits, they weren’t sure, but the greed was evident in every NGO there.  When I asked how a developer could be sure that his credits that he purchased would be good from year to year (what if the farmer didn’t do a good job and they took his credits away from him?)…would the new homeowner be responsible for getting new credits???  How long did you have to buy credits for?  (they thought maybe 30 years for a house).  Everything was said with the caveat that it might change….

The sentence about how the NGOs could make money off this was telling – no one’s paying a farmer to clean a stream, but these advocacy groups look to make a mint. And the state of Maryland will only be only too happy to hand it over to them by taking it from a farmer or job creator.

Worth noting as well is that the Growth Offset Policy Meeting was organized by the Harry R. Hughes Center for Agro-Ecology and given “generous support” by the notoriously radical Town Creek Foundation, which is “dedicated to a sustainable environment.” “Sustainable” is a code word for controlled.

Yet the state of Maryland may not necessarily be the beneficiary. It may be but a serf to a United Nations master, according to this group which opposes the UN’s Agenda 21. They continue an evolution which has seen the doctrine of one’s home being their castle forfeited to county control through zoning, the subsequent loss of county power to the states, the states losing their grip on local issues to the federal government, and finally nations ceding sovereignty to a world government called the United Nations.

Step one of that evolution was pointed out in the Cecil County Campaign for Liberty’s critique of the bill. If rural land is devalued, it indeed reduces the landowner’s net worth at a greater rate than his property taxes went down – remember, in Maryland assessed land values are only set every three years so the farmer pays on a higher value at the higher property tax rate set when overall land valuation declines (as it will) but a county maintains constant yield. Of course, this is the secondary effect of the county doing the state’s bidding.

But rather than meekly submit to the request of Annapolis, some of Maryland’s rural counties are fighting the state. Late last year four counties formed the Maryland Rural Counties Coalition. What began in western Maryland has spread eastward, with Wicomico County tardily joining the fold a week ago and bringing the total membership to nine. Members are geographically spread across the state, with the original four in the west, Cecil County bridging the gap between shores, and four counties on the Eastern Shore (Caroline, Dorchester, Somerset, and Wicomico.)

Yet not all counties are taking their membership seriously. For example, Wicomico County Executive Rick Pollitt is quoted as wanting to “make it clear that the coalition doesn’t oppose Maryland’s Governor Martin O’Malley or any of the state initiatives.” Maybe he should, considering the state is trying to usurp local control which has served us well for decades. Pollitt will probably be the weakest link on a body which was spearheaded in part by Frederick County Commission head (and 2014 gubernatorial candidate) Blaine Young.

But the toothless Republicans on our County Council might just play along, warned my friend:

It seems that if each county would just designate the preserve land as Tier IV, that would be sufficient.  All the law requires is that the county designate four tiers.  Wicomico is looking at designating all agricultural land Tier IV.  We need to dissuade them.  Do the minimum and fight the state…but can we get our Republican councilmen (6 vs. 1 Dem) to do the right thing?  Plus our county executive is a Democrat and a big spending liberal.

Personally, I’d put everything in the least restrictive tiers and dare the state to stop us. Someone needs to tell those Annapolis bullies to pound sand and we’re just the county to do it – if a few people get the stones to do so.

I think those of us who live in Wicomico County are bright enough to realize that there is land which can and should be preserved as agricultural area because it’s not suited for growth. But that decision should be made locally and in such a manner that when things change – as they always do – we have the flexibility to adapt rather than be tied down because someone in Annapolis (or Washington, or at the United Nations) thought we should place thousands of acres off-limits to development because they feel it would be nice to construct a wildlife corridor down the Eastern Shore.

If an area doesn’t grow, it shrivels and dies. I like to look at old maps and ponder what happened to villages such as those I grew up around in Ohio: towns like Ai (yes, that’s the name), Lytton, Whitesville, Seward, and many other specks on the map were once prosperous enough to be considered a town but somewhere along the line something changed. Perhaps the railroad chose a different route, or the major highway passed them by. In many cases, business and industry failed or departed for greener pastures.

Essentially, the glue which holds the bulk of the Eastern Shore together comes from the products of farmers and watermen. Yet those who run our state continue to make life more and more miserable for them with the only question being whether this effort is a subconscious one, or purely intentional with the aim to conform our little slice of the world with their dream of control over our lives.

Consider that much of the problem with Chesapeake Bay – aside from the fact we’re dealing with a group which will move the goalposts if we ever approach their idea of cleanliness in order to continue their reason for being – comes from those urban areas these environmentalist do-gooders want us to emulate, and it makes me wonder why they want the rest of us to live that way.

The jobs governor? Must be Bob McDonnell (or Rick Snyder)

You know, it’s like a cat cornering a mouse. He paws at it a little and rolls it around, but you know sooner or later the cat will get tired of playing and finally take care of the doomed rodent. Whenever I get an e-mail from Change Maryland, I keep seeing Martin O’Malley’s record as that little squeaky thing trapped in the corner.

The cat’s paw took a nice little chunk out of O’Malley’s self-professed accomplishments the other day, once again noting the abysmal job creation record of Maryland as compared to Virginia as they tied together much of the data released last month:

Maryland has lost 36,200 jobs, while Virginia has lost 12,400 jobs since 2007 according to the latest available numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.  Maryland is a much smaller state so on a percentage basis of jobs lost there is an even wider difference – four times as many jobs have vanished in Maryland as in Virginia.

(snip)

“O’Malley has no business going on national TV talking about the economy, especially with Gov. McDonnell who is pounding our state into submission on job creation,” said Change Maryland Chairman Larry Hogan. “Maryland is lucky enough to be one of the biggest recipients of federal government jobs and federal government spending which has kept the bottom from completely falling out of the unemployment rate. But, we have lost 6,500 businesses under O’Malley and our private sector economy is in shambles.”

Governor O’Malley frequently compares Maryland’s employment picture to the entire nation as if states like Michigan and Nevada have common economic attributes. Actually Virginia is the most apt comparison since they are our next-door neighbors, share the border of Washington D.C. and compete directly for businesses and jobs.

Maryland has lost more businesses, taxpayers and jobs than its southern neighbor since O’Malley’s term in office began in 2007.   What’s more, Virginia is the largest net recipient of that capital flight from Maryland.

Maryland accounted for the largest migration exodus of any state in the region between 2007 and 2010, with a net migration resulting in nearly 31,000 residents having left the state.  Most of these individuals went to Virginia, now home to 11,455 former Marylanders, who took $390 million in earning power from the tax rolls during this three-year period, according to the IRS.

As a percentage of jobs lost since 2007, which in context puts Maryland’s loss at four times that of Virginia, the state saw a decline of 1.39%, while the commonwealth stands at just .33%. In the July preliminary BLS numbers, Virginia’s month-to-month gain of 21,300 jobs was the third-highest in the country, while Maryland’s gain was a measly 800.

Subtract a nation’s capital and add a couple shuttered automakers and Maryland might well be Michigan circa 2010. Both states have a lot of shoreline, too – but Michigan isn’t as restrictive about growth in those areas as we are; in fact, they seem to be moving in the right direction on that front. Moreover, Michigan’s 9% unemployment is down 1.6% over the last year while Maryland only dropped from 7.2% to 7% – and Michigan gained over 21,000 jobs last month, second in the nation.

And if you look at Maryland’s unemployment rate by county, you’ll find the more rural areas of the state like the lower Eastern Shore and western Maryland have unemployment rates comparable to Michigan’s, as does Baltimore City. That’s a component of Martin O’Malley and liberal Democrats’ War on Rural Maryland.

Our governor is one who seems to believe the only valid “investment” is that which is produced from money confiscated by taxpayers, whether they’re through paying increased income taxes, higher sales taxes, or that regressive tax known as money from Maryland’s casinos. (Interesting to note that the predicted gambling revenue is now only around $713 million by FY 2017 – a far cry from the rosy but wild guess that we’d be collecting nearly $1 billion a year by now. In truth, we’ve made less than $300 million.)

By discouraging private investment through punitive taxation and onerous regulation, the governor has belied the “One Maryland” idea he frequently promotes. If you happen to live along the I-95 corridor and/or work for the federal government, you don’t mind paying higher taxes because you’re rolling in clover and the money will eventually be returned to you anyway. But those of us out here in “flythrough country” (so named because people speed on through this area on their way to a beachfront condo) don’t have those luxuries – we have to produce something to make our money, whether it be a chicken, a bushel of crabs, a beanfield, or even a memorable vacation which entices a tourist’s return. We earn every penny government confiscates to promulgate the ineptocracy, whether it’s the one in Annapolis or Washington.

With all that, it’s no wonder a growing number of people want to change Maryland.

Shoring up the rural side

In a release today, Congressman Andy Harris announced he had joined the Congressional Rural Caucus. His reasoning was simple:

Fighting for the rural communities I represent on Maryland’s Eastern Shore is my top priority in Washington. As long as President Obama and Governor O’Malley continue their war on rural Maryland, I will continue to fight to ensure that Delmarva receives the same level of attention and service that urban areas receive. For too long, we have neglected the needs of the communities that make up the agricultural backbone of America.

While I like Andy, it seems like the timing of this smacks of opportunism. One would have thought the CRC would have been one of the first caucuses he joined, although I will grant the possibility that it has only recently been restored. This source notes that the CRC wasn’t among the initial group of caucuses in the 112th Congress. Moreover, with redistricting his district moved away from Anne Arundel County and the eastern suburbs of Baltimore to become one almost exclusively made up of rural areas and small towns, so Andy no longer has to serve two masters.

And he’s correct in stating the rural areas of Maryland are facing a war from the political majority which seems to believe that chicken and other foodstuffs magically appear on the Whole Foods shelf and the Eastern Shore should revert back to a pristine wilderness, save the U.S. 50 corridor which needs to remain so they have rest stops on the way to the beach.

Unfortunately, the Congressional Rural Caucus doesn’t seem to have a website or any way of knowing just what it stands for. Generally I agree with the needs of farmers, but draw the line at farm subsidies or federal crop insurance. Too often it’s the gentleman farmer who simply owns the business billing itself as a farm who gets unneeded help from the government; meanwhile on the other side we get situations like the raw milk shutdown that targeted an Amish farmer and entrepreneur. It’s spawned a cottage industry wishing for government to get out of the way.

Much can be done to help farmers in Maryland and other areas of the country, but it’s not necessarily up to government to provide the assistance. The key to Andy’s success on the CRC will be how well he understands that axiom.

Update: Now here is a caucus Andy should announce his participation in, particularly if he hasn’t joined it yet.

Developing the Shore

There were a couple items I wanted to pass along because, as one who would prefer the area grow rather than shrivel up and die, we could use the help.

I’ll begin with Andy Harris:

(On Tuesday), Rep. Andy Harris (MD-01) joined Rep. Scott Rigell (VA-02) to pass legislation through the House that could create hundreds of jobs at an expanded Wallops Research Park, which is located near NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility. The bill removes restrictive federal government deed provisions that hinder job creation on the Delmarva. The legislation creates these jobs at no cost to hard-working taxpayers. Additionally, up to half of the potential high-paying jobs could be filled by Maryland’s Eastern Shore residents.

“We need to work to reduce undue burdens that the Federal Government is placing on the ability of local communities to create jobs,” said Rep. Andy Harris. “I will support any bill like this that helps foster an environment for job creation while costing hard-working taxpayers nothing.”

And then there’s former Harris opponent Senator E.J. Pipkin, working on the state side:

Senator E.J. Pipkin…announced that the Senate Finance Committee has approved his bill – SB 818 – to begin the process required to consider building a third span of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge.

Pipkin said, “I am elated that the Committee has taken the first step in the long journey toward what must happen – construction of another Bay Bridge span. No one who uses the Bay Bridge on a daily commute or on a weekend to visit Ocean City will debate the necessity for a third span.”

Senator Pipkin pointed out that the bridge carries an average of 68,000 vehicles each day. Five mile backups are not unusual at any time, but are common in the summer when an average of 100,000 vehicles cross the bay each day. “The bridge has the dubious distinction of having the worst traffic delays on the northeast coast,” he said. The Bay Bridge Transportation Needs Report revealed that 402 accidents occurred during its 3-year study period; a significantly higher volume than for similar highways.

(snip)

Before any large project can commence, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires an Environmental Impact Statement. The process includes a public scoping process, data collection, analysis of policy alternatives and preparation of draft and final documents, all of which takes 6.1 years, as estimated in 2003. “Putting Maryland into the NEPA process would finally address the issue of a third span and enable us to make policy decisions to move forward,” declared Senator Pipkin.

Using the cost of NEPA studies for the ICC as a base and adjusting for inflation, the Department of Legislative Services projects a cost of $35 million between 2013-2017 for the NEPA study. The MdTA would pay for the cost of the study out of its operating expenses. “Last summer, the MdTA approved the largest toll increase in the State’s history, so it comes as a surprise that it now claims that this process would be too expensive.”

Pipkin stressed that SB 818 does not require that a third Bay Bridge be built, but enables us to move forward to the next step in considering our transportation needs. It will take 15 to 20 years to build a new Bay Bridge.

The role of government is not to provide a vehicle for crony capitalism, but work on those areas which benefit the public at large. It seems like the Harris/Rigell measure does just that. Knowing Wallops Island is a federal installation which is vital for the national defense (a legitimate Constitutional function) I see no problem with private enterprise having a share in that success. To be quite honest, I never knew there was a Wallops Research Park, but that’s in part because it’s a little off the beaten path. Maybe that was part of their problem as well.

Of course, the local infrastructure may need improvement as the main highway to Wallops Island is the same two-lane artery which takes tourist traffic beyond Wallops Island to Chincoteague. At some point if the new venture is successful we may have to see Virginia Route 175 dualized – but that’s probably at least a decade off.

Transportation woes are hopefully being addressed with Pipkin’s proposal as well. But I believe a third span would be much more practical several miles south of the existing Bay Bridge. Geographically it makes a lot of sense to have a span from Dorchester County to Calvert County at a point where the Bay is relatively narrow, but I could already imagine the hue and cry from environmentalists and NIMBY types, particularly on the Eastern Shore. This would also require Maryland Route 16 to be seriously upgraded, at least to Cambridge.

But there would be advantages as well, particularly on the tourism and accessibility front. Opening a southern route may encourage more commerce between the fast-growing counties of Southern Maryland and the Eastern Shore. Why should the mid-Shore reap all the benefits from a Bay crossing?

As Pipkin says, though, we are probably a couple decades away from a third span and by then there may not be anything left of the Lower Shore to connect with except for Ocean City. A state which is doing its best to strangle rural development in the War on Rural Maryland isn’t going to care whether we receive help or not, just as long as the tax dollars arrive.

Four bits a gallon (or more) for a state gas tax?

Governor Martin O’Malley, he of the trial balloons, may have yet another one up his sleeve.

His latest (of many) tax proposals would extend the state’s 6% sales tax to purchases of gasoline, on top of the current 23.5 cents per gallon surcharge the state takes. If adopted, Maryland would join a handful of other states which use this nebulous practice of profiting off high gasoline prices.

The other states which do this are California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and New York. To see what impact this proposed tax would have on our wallets, we need to use three methods of comparison. First, here are the per-gallon gasoline taxes charged by each of these states and Maryland, ranked lowest to highest, not including sales taxes or various fees added by each state: (Source)

  • Florida, 4 cents per gallon
  • Georgia, 7.5 cents per gallon
  • New York, 8.1 cents per gallon
  • Indiana, 18 cents per gallon
  • Illinois, 19 cents per gallon
  • Michigan, 19 cents per gallon
  • Maryland, 23.5 cents per gallon
  • California, 35.7 cents per gallon

And now the sales tax rates which are (or would presumably be) applied to gasoline, also listed lowest to highest:

  • California, 2.25%
  • Georgia, 4%
  • Maryland, 6%
  • Michigan, 6%
  • Illinois, 6.25%
  • Indiana, 7%
  • New York, 8%
  • Florida, 12%

Finally, the combined bite between all taxes (federal, state, and local) impacting gasoline in the states which charge sales tax, which includes where Maryland would eventually rank. To do their calculations, API uses the average cost per gallon in each state according to AAA as of 1/1/12. For Maryland, I couldn’t find the price on the specific 1/1 date but according to the latest AAA figures, the average price one month ago from today was $3.26 and that should suffice for being roughly the price on January 1st. Again, this is lowest to highest.

  • Georgia, 47.8 cents per gallon
  • Florida, 53.4 cents per gallon
  • Illinois, 57.3 cents per gallon
  • Indiana, 57.3 cents per gallon
  • Michigan, 57.8 cents per gallon
  • Maryland, 61.5 58.9 cents per gallon*
  • California, 67 cents per gallon
  • New York, 67.4 cents per gallon

If this is passed, Maryland would have the fifth-highest total gasoline tax in the country, trailing New York, California, Connecticut (also 67 cents per gallon) and Hawaii (65.5 cents per gallon.) Maryland drivers would be ceding a much higher bite out of their wallets than their neighbors in West Virginia (51.8 cents per gallon), Pennsylvania (50.7 cents per gallon), Washington D.C. (41.9 cents per gallon), Delaware (41.4 cents per gallon), and Virginia (38.2 cents per gallon.) Retailers in those states who are fortunate enough to be close to the Maryland line are probably licking their chops about now.

Of course, this doesn’t factor in the addition of some of MOM’s other trial balloons like a separate 15 cent per-gallon increase in the gasoline tax or increasing the sales tax to 7 percent. And as Todd Eberly points out at The FreeStater Blog, this could all be a feint to make a direct 15 cent additional surcharge more palatable.

As it is currently proposed, the gasoline sales tax would be phased in 2% at a time so drivers wouldn’t be hit all at once. But when they’re projecting $613 million in new annual revenue at a time when the state is over $1 billion in the hole, it will be a surprise if they don’t rush the process. It may get passed this way for now, but wait for the new, improved bill to accelerate the increase next session when money is still tight.

We’re also being told that a gas tax increase is about infrastructure jobs in fixing bridges and roads. But the Maryland Public Policy Institute does a magnificent job of not only blowing that argument out of the water but also pointing out the folly of public transportation while they’re at it. Simply put, it’s another component of the War on Rural Maryland as those of us who drive greater distances because we choose to live away from urban woes will be subsidizing those who ride the buses or light rail in more-developed areas. That group doesn’t quite comprise the 1% but they’re pretty darn close, and they don’t come close to paying their own way.

Putting private transport out of reach to the average family through higher prices also fits neatly into the goals of so-called “Smart Growth” and “sustainable development”, which strives to increase the usage of mass transit. Perhaps this is a line of thought more suited to the tinfoil hat crowd, but one can’t deny it’s much easier to control the population if their movements are controlled.

In any event, the first step in rebuilding Maryland’s crumbling transportation infrastructure needs to come from locking away the Transportation Trust Fund from greedy governors who can’t shake their spending addiction. And if we take back the half of transportation spending we waste on a tiny percentage of commuters and instead gave them a more appropriate share of a nickel per dollar, there are a lot of bridges, road widening projects, and traffic control measures which could be completed for the rest of us who get tired of sitting in traffic.

On the Eastern Shore, we already will bear a significant burden from the newly increased tolls on the Bay Bridge, so we should get a break when it comes to gasoline taxes. The state should quit using the knee-jerk reaction it always seems to have about raising taxes and instead consider spending the vast amounts already collected more wisely.

* I was also taxing the existing tax, not the actual price. Subtract out the 41.9 cents we currently pay in taxes and the sales tax is actually on $2.84 of the $3.26 per gallon.

Movin’ on out

As I’ve said from time to time on this forum and others, Maryland is the first place (besides, to a limited extent, my college alma mater) where I lived by choice. And the main reasons I moved here, as opposed to other prospective places where I could have worked like Jacksonville, Las Vegas, or Phoenix, were the somewhat rural setting and the idea that this area had plenty of room for growth. Needless to say, when compared to those urban areas, Salisbury was by far the smallest location I considered.

There are serious economic handicaps about living here which have always existed more or less, but at the time of my arrival they were held somewhat in check by the state government in place in the fall of 2004. Sure, Bob Ehrlich was no doctrinaire conservative but most of his ideas for revenue enhancement were limited to increasing user fees, and Maryland participated fully in the national economic boom which was taking place during the Ehrlich era here. Unemployment for the state was just 4.4% when Ehrlich took office and 3.6% when he left – the rate never exceeded 4.6% during his tenure. Obviously things are different now, and Maryland reflects the national situation in that respect. Oddly enough, though, the other three places I was considering were among the hardest hit by the recession, so while Salisbury never quite reached that exhilarating height this fact made the low point easier to handle.

Continue reading “Movin’ on out”