20071004 New Clips

News Clips

Oct. 4^th, 2007

STATE NEWS

GOP senators refuse support for slots plan

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071004/METRO/110040039/1004

Senate Republicans yesterday struck a crippling blow to Gov. Martin O'Malley's plan to legalize slot machines during a special session, announcing their unanimous opposition. Republicans, who comprise 14 of the 47 senators, said they are pulling their support because they feel Mr. O'Malley took them for granted.

"This is the one area they had counted on Republican support, but frankly, no one had talked to Republicans about getting their support," said Senate Minority Leader David R. Brinkley, Frederick Republican.

Without Republican support, Mr. O'Malley will need the votes of at least 24 of 33 Democrats on what has become one of the most divisive issues in Annapolis.

Mr. O'Malley frequently said he counted on support from Republicans for his plan to legalize slot machines, but House Minority Leader Anthony J. O'Donnell of Southern Maryland said last week that House Republicans would not broadly support his measure.

At a press event in Howard County, Mr. O'Malley said he talks frequently with Senate Minority Whip Allan H. Kittleman, Howard Republican. But Mr. Kittleman denied that claim yesterday.

"I've talked to the governor twice since he came into office, once was to congratulate me on becoming minority whip, which was in early in January, the second one was in January to let me know he was firing my mother," Mr. Kittleman said yesterday.

Mr. Kittleman's mother, Trent, was president of the Maryland Transportation Authority under Mr. Ehrlich.

GOP shuns slots proposal

Special session is expected despite decision of Senate leaders

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/politics/bal-md.republicans04oct04,0,1176537.story?coll=bal_tab01_layout

Senate Republican leaders said yesterday that they would not vote for the governor's slots proposal during a special session of the General Assembly, potentially jeopardizing the critical cross-party partnership that has been necessary in the past to get a divisive gambling bill through the chamber.

Sen. David Brinkley, the minority leader, chided Gov. Martin O'Malley for not releasing details of his proposal to legalize slot machine gambling in Maryland before his expected call for a special session. Brinkley, who met with O'Malley yesterday, said he and his Republican colleagues will withhold their votes for slots until the administration considers spending cuts.

Joined by Senate Minority Whip Allan H. Kittleman and Sen. E.J. Pipkin, Brinkley said that the Republicans would be open to a slots bill when the General Assembly convenes for its annual three-month session in January - when lawmakers review the budget for the next fiscal year.

Pipkin, an Eastern Shore Republican, said that rural Maryland needs to be represented in the budget debate - especially with so many tax increases in play.

"Each day the tax side goes up and the discussion of the budget goes down," he said. "As a Republican caucus with 14 votes, we don't want to come back to a special session and stamp a backroom deal. And that's what we feel is in the works right now. Where we have one caucus meeting, the other caucus shut out, and we're just not going to be party to that."

Senate republicans say they won't support special session, slots

http://www.hometownannapolis.com/cgi-bin/read/2007/10_04-01/OUD

Maryland Senate Republicans said Wednesday they will not support a slot-machines bill if it comes up in a special session, saying such a session aims to push through an "unnecessary" and "massive tax increase" on Marylanders.

Lawmakers need time to fully analyze the extent of Gov. Martin O'Malley's proposals, said Senate Minority Leader David Brinkley, something that is not provided in a special session.

"We want to get the package in front of us and deal with it in a regular session," said Brinkley, a Carroll County Republican, standing outside the State House. "There's enough time to wait."

The GOP holds only 37 of the 141 seats in the House and 14 of the 47 Senate seats, but Republicans said they were expecting support from conservative Democrats would strengthen their opposition to slots.

"We don't want to vote on huge figures without knowing what next year's budget will be," said Senate Minority Whip Allan Kittleman, R-Carroll. "We want to see it all in one comprehensive package."

"We're not just saying we aren't going to vote for it," O'Donnell said.

"We're also saying, 'We had a plan and you rejected it.'" Under the Republicans plan, slots would have generated revenue much sooner than under O'Malley's plans.

"His is a slots giveaway," O'Donnell said. "There would be no significant money in the state's coffer for two years."

Views Differ On Benefits Of Tax Plan In Maryland

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/03/AR2007100302324.html

The $1.7 billion deficit-reduction plan rolled out by Gov. Martin O'Malley has sparked a fierce debate over how well it treats the working-class families whose interests O'Malley promised to champion last year as a candidate. In some ways, the plan would clearly make Maryland's tax code more progressive. A relatively small number of high-end earners, many of them in Montgomery County, would pay thousands of dollars a year more in income taxes, and most others would pay slightly less than they do now, according to both O'Malley (D) and an independent analysis by the state comptroller's office.

O'Malley said his plan was crafted with the interests of working-class and middle-income families in mind, people "who have really been taking it on the chin.

''Republican leaders sharply questioned this week whether O'Malley's plan would benefit as many working-class families as he suggests, pointing to components of the plan not included in the analysis. The governor, for example, is also proposing to raise the titling tax, which would add $200 to the price of a $20,000 car. And the cost of an increase of 1 percentage point in the corporate tax probably would be passed along to consumers, GOP leaders said.

"This is at best confusing and at worst deceitful to Maryland residents and taxpayers," said House Minority Leader Anthony J. O'Donnell (R-Calvert).

Mahlon R. Straszheim, an economics professor at the University of Maryland, said O'Malley's plan contains some progressive components, some regressive components and others that could be tweaked to make the overall plan more progressive.

Given the number of tax changes in play, an analysis of the plan's overall impact is relatively difficult, he said.

"You have to estimate what people spend on all the kinds of things being taxed," Straszheim said.

Smart Growth policy defended

'We did good,' says Glendening, who crafted Md. anti-sprawl law

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/politics/bal-md.growth04oct04,0,1885922.story

The architect of Maryland's decade-old Smart Growth policy spoke up for it yesterday, arguing that despite its shortcomings at curbing suburban sprawl it has helped revitalize dying downtowns across the state and kick-started a national movement to build more transit-oriented, walkable communities.

Speaking in Annapolis at a conference reviewing the growth-management law he crafted, former Gov. Parris N. Glendening acknowledged that a few metropolitan areas and states such as Oregon and Seattle have had more success than has Maryland at reining in low-density development. He pointed out that those states and regions imposed strict growth boundaries and development regulations - something he said was not politically viable in Maryland then or now.

Md. officials urged to back new tax for bay cleanup

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bay_environment/bal-md.green04oct04,0,1737618.story

A coalition of several environmental groups and the home builders association are urging Gov. Martin O'Malley and the General Assembly to support a new tax that would raise an estimated $85 million a year to clean up the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries.

"Maryland has been slipping behind in the race to save the bay," said William C. Baker, president of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. "Little has been done since the 'Flush Fee' was passed in 2004," he added, referring to the law that raises about $65 million a year to upgrade sewage treatment plants.

The latest "green fund" proposal would assess on commercial, industrial and institutional properties an annual fee of 1 cent per square foot of hardened surfaces --- areas impervious to rainwater such as roofs, roadways, and parking lots, said Kim Coble, the foundation's Maryland executive director.
Environmentalists said that despite a projected $1.7 billion shortfall in the state budget starting July 1, 2008, the time is right to set aside more funds for bay restoration.

Rick Abbruzzese, an O'Malley spokesman, said the governor has not taken a position on the proposal released yesterday.

County officials take wait-and-see approach on slots

Area churches voice opposition to governor's slot machine proposal

http://www.gazette.net/stories/100407/prinnew164533_32359.shtml

Gov. Martin O'Malley's proposal to legalize slot machines in Maryland, a plan pitched to lift the state's horseracing industry and balance the budget, has elicited a surprisingly tepid response from Prince George's County officials, historically some of the most vocal and vehement slots foes.

O'Malley has said the proposed state-owned slots would have little effect on the upcoming spending plan, since the bulk of the revenue wouldn't start to come in for another two to three years. But his proposal would seek to eventually recapture the $400 million Maryland residents reportedly spend on playing slots in neighboring states and send it to public education, school construction and higher education.

Both U.S. Albert Wynn (D-Dist. 4) of Mitchellville and Fort Washington attorney Donna Edwards, who is running against Wynn in the February primary, oppose the governor's plan.

''Bringing slots into Maryland will do much more harm in the long run than any good created by short term financial gains. Slots are low-end gaming that exploits the poor and harms local communities," Wynn said in a statement.

EDITORIALS/OP-EDS

Cut taxes to stimulate city growth

http://www.examiner.com/a-970739~Cut_taxes_to_stimulate_city_growth.html

Would you move to Baltimore for $4 million? That is about what the much-heralded population growth costs per person.

Sure, everybody is delighted revised Census figures show Baltimore gaining population, no matter how small an uptick.

New residents mean more money for essential city services and a more vibrant community. But 897 new people is hardly a "reversal of fortune," as Mayor Sheila Dixon said earlier this week or a harbinger of a flood of new residents. If anything, the mayor should ask: 'What took so long?' 'Why so few?' and most of all, 'Why did it cost so much?'

If Baltimore really wants new residents, it must slash property taxes in half. Doing so will be a lot less expensive than investing another $3.445 billion and has the potential to vastly surpass what the city collects right now. More than 26 percent of property in the city is not taxable because it is owned by government or nonprofits, so luring more homeowners and businesses is essential to expanding the tax base.

What's clear is that Mayor Dixon should use the Census information as evidence the city needs to radically overhaul its tax structure - not praise dubious accomplishments.

Cigarette tax increase plan is flawed

http://www.examiner.com/a-970741~Marc_Kilmer__Cigarette_tax_increase_plan_is_flawed.html

As part of his effort to close Maryland's structural deficit, Gov. Martin O'Malley has set his sights on a favored taxman target: Cigarette smokers. The governor has floated the idea of doubling Maryland's $1-a-pack tax on cigarettes, rekindling a proposal that died in the state Senate last spring. This raises a question: Why should cigarette smokers have to pay off so much of the state's budget deficit? Moreover, is increasing Maryland's fiscal dependence on the cigarette tax such a good idea?

It's highly questionable whether smokers, as a group, should be made to pay this subsidy. Smokers are disproportionately lower-income, and raising the cigarette tax takes more money out of the pockets of the poor than any other tax. It thus seems odd that Gov. O'Malley would want to increase this tax on the poor when he has repeatedly criticized Maryland's tax structure for not being sufficiently progressive.

If Gov. O'Malley and the majority of Marylanders agree that all state spending is so vital and efficient that the structural deficit should not be closed by budget cuts, then Marylanders should agree to pay the taxes necessary to close that deficit. They should not try to foist an unfair share of that tax burden on smokers. After all, given the increasing level of cigarette tax avoidance, it's likely that all state taxpayers will ultimately pay the cost, anyway.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Governor's tax plan to put bigger burden on families

http://www.gazette.net/stories/100407/prinlet121652_32363.shtml

The [Sept.] 20 edition of The Gazette noted that Maryland foreclosures are up. Expect worse - much worse! The governor's proposed increases in sales and cigarette taxes and his call for a heavier tax burden on corporations will only increase foreclosures in the future. Corporations considering Maryland as a home (with the jobs they might have brought) are likely to go to a more tax-friendly state. More immediate, however, is the specter of people who are already bordering on bankruptcy being squeezed even more by this disgusting money grab by Democrats. As a consequence, more will end up losing their homes (or go hungry trying to make up the money they lose in sales and tobacco taxes to pay the mortgage and electric bills). Is this the kind of tradeoff the Democrats want?

Wake up, Maryland! You voted these clowns into office and you can vote them out. Let them know how you feel and how their reckless actions can hurt you and your family today.

NATIONAL NEWS

Bartlett gets heat for stance on health insurance bill

http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?StoryID=65912

Democrats and health care advocates are targeting U.S. Rep. Roscoe Bartlett as a potential swing vote to override President Bush's Wednesday morning veto of a children's health insurance bill.

Bartlett, a Republican who represents Frederick County and a large swath of other counties across Maryland, voted for the State Children's Health Insurance Program when it was enacted in 1997.

Last week, he voted against a reauthorization bill that would have expanded the program.

The political battle is focused on Bartlett because leaders believe if he switches his vote, others might follow suit.

Since Maryland has only one other Republican representative, it's not uncommon for Bartlett to be the only federal Maryland official voting a certain way on any given measure. Despite the calls for a vote switch, Bartlett defiantly reiterated his stance, saying it is consistent with the conservative principles of his district.

If popular program folds, children 'would have nothing'

http:/ /www.times-news.com/local/local_story_277093356.html

Originally created in 1997, the joint federal and state program offers low-cost health insurance to children in low-income families. It has provided coverage to about 6.6 million children while the expanded coverage would bring in another 4 million. In a bipartisan vote, the Senate and the House last week agreed to reauthorize the program and increase spending for it from about $5 billion to $12 billion each year for the next five years.

Saying the increase is too much, Bush vetoed the bill Wednesday.
Congressman Roscoe Bartlett, a Republican representing Maryland's 6th District, was the only Maryland representative to side with the president.

"Only Democratic congressional leaders could demand that a family earning $82,000 a year should qualify for their expanded SCHIP program that Republicans created to help children of the working poor and simultaneously call that same family rich and force them to pay the AMT, Alternative Minimum Tax," Bartlett said via a release. "It just goes to show that what Democrats really want is to have the government control how to spend the money that American taxpayers earn."

In the Senate, Maryland's Barbara Mikulski and Benjamin Cardin, both Democrats, feel otherwise. Like Bartlett, Mikulski voted for the original program, but she supports its expansion.

####