Monthly Archives: July 2013

MD State Pension Fund Revives

BY BARRY RASCOVAR / July 31, 2013

A funny thing happened to the Maryland state pension fund on the way to fiscal perdition: It recovered lost ground, reformed itself and came up with a 10-year plan to put its retirement programs on solid, long-term footing.

The pension fund topped $40 billion in assets this summer, regaining all its losses (plus $800 million) since the Great Recession swoon that saw a 20 percent drop in just one year. Since the recession’s trough in 2009, the state fund has added a whopping $11.75 billion in earnings, an average of 10 percent a year.

SRPS_LogoThat won’t please the naysayers and conservatives who have been predicting doom and gloom for the retirement program. Thanks to changes that require more local government and employee contributions, lower annual cost-of-living adjustments and longer years of service to qualify for benefits, the future is beginning to look brighter for Maryland’s fund.

A slowly recovering national economy — and stock market — certainly helped.

In bad times like the Great Recession it is easy to forget that the economic cycle, similar to a roller coaster, eventually ends its gut-wrenching plunge and starts climbing upward once again. Signs now point to a lengthy period of slow growth, which could give the Maryland pension fund a string of good-news stories in the years ahead.

Blame It On Glendening And Ehrlich

Not that everything is rosy. Some wretchedly poor decisions in the early part of this century guaranteed deep pension trouble. The worst move came from former Gov. Parris Glendening, who sacrificed the retirement fund’s future so he could spend more during his final years in office.

When Glendening intentionally underfunded the retirement system, the General Assembly — over the vigorous objections of the pension board and Comptroller William Donald Schaefer — adopted a fatally flawed methodology to shrink required state contributions and thus sanction Glendening’s action. Politics triumphed over sound actuarial policy.

This dubious plan, the “corridor funding method,” worked fine when Wall Street was hitting new highs and the pension fund earned double-digit profits. But the scheme collapsed like a house of cards when the stock market’s “technology bubble” burst and then the Great Recession hit. Each year, it seemed, the pension fund was digging a bigger financial hole.

This was compounded by a terrible political decision from former Gov. Bob Ehrlich to curry favor with state teachers by giving them extra pension benefits. He figured that with a few good years of stock market investments the pension board could afford these political goodies that might help him get reelected.

Neither happened. Teachers didn’t support the governor in 2006 and the more generous pensions dragged the retirement programs deeper into a giant pit of unfunded pension obligations.

At Last, Pension Reforms

That precipitated much-needed legislative reforms, which add more local and employee contributions to the system while slowing the growth in the fund’s annual payouts. Then finally this past legislative session, the General Assembly agreed to phase-out the ill-conceived (and illegitimate) corridor funding method

Combined with surging stock prices, what had been a bleak outlook today is a whole lot brighter.

Of course, debates over the viability of pension funds can distort reality if the funds are held to impossible standards. Those bemoaning the condition of Maryland’s state pension program make it sound as if it’s about to go broke. They want the retirement programs 100 percent fully funded.

While that’s not impossible — Maryland’s pensions were at 106 percent of full funding before Glendening messed things up — insistence on such a high standard can mislead the public.

Even in its lean years, the state’s retirement programs remained in good shape. It’s annual earnings and contributions from 244,000 teachers and state workers (and now local governments) are usually enough to come close to offsetting annual payouts to 132,000 retirees. it all depends on the fund manager’s investment success.

For the pension fund to go broke, it would take decades of poor investment results. History tells us that’s quite unlikely.

In the past quarter-century, even with recessions and bursting financial bubbles, the Maryland state pension fund’s annual  investment return averages around eight percent — in line with historic Wall Street rates.

And while the state spends too much on Wall Street professionals to guide its investments (a whopping $225 million last year), these advisers do earn their pay. The actively managed portion of the state’s portfolio added $800 million more than it would have in passively managed index funds favored by conservatives — even after deducting for the hefty consultant fees.

Taking Out A Mortgage

Ten years from today, Maryland’s pension plans should be nearing 100 percent funding. When that happens, trustees are committed to amortizing the state’s future retirement obligations — taking out a long-term loan similar to a 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage. That would take much of the uncertainty and volatility out of the equation.

Trustees also have agreed to lessen the pension fund’s reliance on the unpredictable stock market. Investments are gradually being shifted to private equity placements, which aren’t affected by the emotions and manipulations of Wall Street, and to other alternative investments that are safer and more diversified income producers.

Of course, the next governor could wreck this carefully constructed approach by promising big retirement raises to state workers and teachers in the gubernatorial campaign. Unexpected market upheavals could mean large equity losses for the fund’s managers, too.

Then again, maybe state leaders have learned some painful lessons. Pension giveaways have long-term, negative consequences. Investing too much of the pension fund’s capital in the stock market is a high-risk step that’s not worth taking.

The state retirement board, led by Treasurer Nancy Kopp, seems rejuvenated and headed in the right direction. It rode out the roughest storm in the retirement system’s history and came away the better for it.

(NOTE: This is a revised version that corrects the historical record on how the corridor funding method was adopted a decade ago.)

Why not subscribe to receive immediate delivery of all future columns? It’s free. Just click on the “Subscribe” button on the right-hand column of the www.politicalmaryland.com page. 

 

Baltimore County’s Changing Of The Guard

BY BARRY RASCOVAR / July 25, 2012

(A version of this article ran in the Carroll County Times online on July 24)  

You’d think every 50 years or so it would be nice to change faces in Annapolis.

Well, it will be 52 years before Dundalk’s favorite political son, Sen. Norman Stone, finishes his 13th term representing Baltimore County and departs the State House for the last time.

The changing of the guard in Baltimore County is led by Sen. Norman Stone, retiring after 52 years.

Stone will be missed. He was a dependable vote for Senate President Mike Miller and Democratic governors, a rock of support for organized labor and one of the few remaining conservatives in the Democratic caucus who acted as a counter-weight to the group’s liberal majority.

Baltimore County is losing many of its other right-of-center legislators next year, too.

On the west side of the county, Delegates Jimmy Malone and Steve De Boy of Catonsville-Arbutus have announced their intentions to retire as has Emmett Burns of Woodlawn-Randallstown.

Both Malone and De Boy have grown in stature over the years. They are constructive, hard-working lawmakers who have not forgotten their blue-collar roots. They are liberal on some social issues but conservative on fiscal and other matters.

Malone, a retired firefighter, is vice-chairman of the House Environmental Matters Committee and a voice for moderation in leadership ranks. De Boy, a retired police officer, sits on the powerful House Appropriations Committee where he has voted for sensible budget reductions that do minimal harm to people in need.

MORE WESTSIDE DEPARTURES

Burns, too, has cast some conservative votes, especially on gay rights and immigration issues that the ordained minister fiercely and loudly opposed.

Also in that part of the county, Del. Shirley Nathan-Pulliam of Woodlawn-Randallstown has decided to give up her seat to challenge incumbent Sen. Verna Jones-Rodwell of Baltimore City in a re-drawn district that is two-thirds in the county and just one-third in the city. This should give Nathan-Pulliam, who has represented the county portions of the new district for 20 years, a strong advantage.

Moving to the northwest section of Baltimore County, Del. John Cardin of Owings Mills-Reisterstown is running for Maryland attorney general, creating an open seat in the June 2014 primary. Jon Cardin’s hopes may rest on voters’ fondness for his uncle, U.S. Senator Ben Cardin, a fixture in Maryland elections since 1966.

Another State House departure will be north-county Del. A. Wade Kach, a quiet, studious conservative Republican first elected in 1974. Redistricting forced his hand. He’s leaving Annapolis to run against County Councilman Todd Huff, whose term in the Council has been marred by a drunk driving conviction and his attempts to use his position to avoid the consequences.

EASTSIDE CHANGES

Over on the eastern end of Baltimore County, Del. John Olszewski Jr., whose father-namesake sits on the County Council, is leaving the House of Delegates to run for Stone’s Senate seat. He has Stone’s endorsement and is the odds-on favorite.

Baltimore County's changing of the guard in Annapolis includes the departure of Sen. Norman Stone and his likely replacement by Del. John Olszewski Jr.

Olszewksi, 31, would be quite different in the Senate from the 78-year-old Stone. Yet both are reflections of their historic steel-town community.

Stone is a throwback to a bygone era. He got his start in 1962 when he was asked to run for the House by Michael “Iron Mike” Birmingham, the eastside boss who became Baltimore County Executive after voters approved home rule.

Stone served a single term in the House and an extraordinary 12 terms in the Senate. Ever-friendly, gracious and polite, Norman Stone is an ardent backer of labor unions. His votes reflect the cautious nature of his district’s older residents.

Olszewski also votes in line with his district’s residents most of time. But he comes from a “green” generation that is dedicated to environmental causes. In the last General Assembly session, the League of Conservation Voters gave Olszewski a 71 percent rating versus Stone’s 40 percent.

The departure of so much seniority in Annapolis will make it more difficult for County Executive Kevin Kamenetz to leverage the next administration for local aid and assistance on important county projects.

While new legislative faces in the county’s state delegation may bring added enthusiasm and eagerness, this won’t make up for the loss of decades of experience in navigating the tricky twists and turns of political Annapolis.

Note: You can receive immediate delivery of each new column by clicking on the “Subscribe” button in the right-hand column of www.politicalmaryland.com.

You can also leave a comment (pro or con) about these columns.

 

Legislating From the Bench in MD — Not This Time

Court of Appeals Sustains Contributory Negligence Doctrine 

BY BARRY RASCOVAR / JULY 16, 2013

IT WAS SUPPOSED to be a grand finale for Maryland’s top jurist, Robert Bell — a sweeping re-ordering of this state’s ancient negligence standards by wiping out the common law doctrine known as contributory negligence.

Retired Chief Judge Bob Bell

Retired Chief Judge Robert M. Bell

But a funny thing happened on the way to Bell’s retirement as Chief Judge of Maryland’s Court of Appeals: He couldn’t get his colleagues to go along with him. Instead, as often was the case during Bell’s tenure on the state’s highest court, he found himself in a distinct minority.

By a 5-2 vote, the court upheld Maryland’s contributory negligence doctrine employing the same logic as did Bell’s predecessor, Chief Judge Robert C. Murphy, 30 years ago.

In Maryland, and a handful of other states, if you contribute to your own injury, don’t bother suing others for negligence. It’s a common law standard that dates to 1848 in Maryland, 1809 in England and possibly all the way back to 1606.

Under this doctrine, personal responsibility is deemed paramount. It’s a quaint libertarian view in a 21st century world that increasingly tries to insulate individuals from any and all harm while blaming others — especially those with deep pockets — for our own stupidity or irresponsibility.

Bell dearly wanted to discard contributory negligence. He even formed a special judicial panel to study the matter and report back to him. Those findings didn’t go Bell’s way. The group’s conclusion: This is a complicated matter best left to the General Assembly.

But the chief judge wasn’t deterred. When a test case came along, he made sure the high court grabbed it.

IF ONLY . . .

In an ideal world, a comparative negligence standard would make total sense. Juries would impartially analyze legal arguments and decide how much the plaintiff was at fault for an injury and how much the defendant was at fault.

But juries often render emotional decisions based on the tragic plight of the defendant, heartbreaking tales of loved ones and fire-and-brimstone arguments from plaintiff lawyers urging jurors to hold Big Bad Business to account.

Opening up Maryland to comparative-fault standards would create a huge financial bonanza for litigators and a veritable tsunami of lawsuits swamping Maryland courts.

It also would present an enormous danger to the financial viability of many Maryland businesses, including the state’s medical industry. The number and size of malpractice lawsuits could go through the roof. If you think finding an obstetrician in Baltimore City — a jurisdiction notorious for outsized jury verdicts against doctors — is difficult today, imagine what it would be like if litigators started suing every doctor in sight for the most minor of medical problems patients encounter. If doctors think their malpractice insurance is high now, just wait.

Contributory negligence was embraced in this country in the early 1800s in part to guard against such predatory practices by litigators. Legislators feared that juries, egged on by plaintiff lawyers demanding huge damage awards, would award sums that could kill the nation’s newly developing industries.

That same fear, in a slightly different form, still haunts state lawmakers in Annapolis — and a majority of the state’s highest court.

SEPARATION OF POWERS

The larger issue facing the high court was whether to legislate from the bench.

The panel agreed it had the power to revise a common law rule like contributory negligence. That the jurists refused to do so is a tribute to the majority’s determination not to extend its authority beyond the traditional dividing line separating judicial and legislative branches.

Five of the seven judges concluded: This is a complex, deeply intertwined legal doctrine that can only be altered after considering a kaleidoscope of ramifications affecting the entire gamut of tort liability and insurance law. That’s the role of the legislature, not the courts.

Judge John C. Eldridge, who wrote the majority opinion, even used Bob Bell’s own words against him. He quoted from a 2008 ruling in which the Chief Judge had written, “It is well settled” that when the General Assembly makes clear its wishes on public issues, “the Court will decline to enter the public policy debate” — even if the issues involve a common law doctrine.

It is doubtful these jurists would have wasted so much time and energy debating this matter had not Bell insisted.

In the end, a substantial majority merely re-stated Bob Murphy’s 30-year-old logic for maintaining the legislature’s right to determine the fate of contributory negligence. Any other conclusion, Eldridge noted, “would be totally inconsistent with the Court’s long-standing jurisprudence.”

In Dissent

 ‘A dinosaur roams yet the landscape of Maryland’

Three cheers for Court of Appeals Judge Glenn Harrell for adding some levity to the dry and often ponderous writings of the state’s highest court.

Harrell passionately believes the state’s doctrine of contributory negligence needs to be deep-sixed. It is unfair and out of date, he says. He prefers a pure comparative negligence standard.

The problem is that he was virtually alone in making this argument. Only retiring Chief Judge Bob Bell sided with him.

Appeals Court Judge Glenn Harrell

Appeal Court Judge Glenn Harrell

Harrell, though, didn’t go quietly. He stated his arguments at great length — nearly three times longer than Eldridge’s majority opinion and nine times the length of a supplemental majority opinion by Judge Clayton Greene (with three co-signers).

What’s eye-catching about Harrell’s rant — he’s not a happy camper — is the judge’s opening salvo, which is dripping with mockery, humor and irony.

Here it is:

     “Paleontologists and geologists inform us that Earth’s Cretaceous period (including in what is present day Maryland) ended approximately 65 million years ago with an asteroid striking Earth (the Cretaceous-Paleogene Extinction Event), wiping-out, in a relatively short period of geologic time, most plant and animal species, including dinosaurs. As to the last premise, they are wrong. A dinosaur roams yet the landscape of Maryland (and Virginia, Alabama, North Carolina and the District of Columbia), feeding on the claims of persons injured by the negligence of another, but who contributed proximately in some way to the occasion of his or her injuries, however slight their culpability. The name of that dinosaur is the doctrine of contributory negligence. With the force of a modern asteroid strike, this Court should render, in the present case, this dinosaur extinct. It chooses not to do so. Accordingly, I dissent.

     “My dissent does not take the form of a tit-for-tat trading of thrusts and parries with the Majority opinion. Rather, I write for a future majority of this Court, which, I have no doubt, will relegate the fossilized doctrine of contributory negligence to a judicial tar pit at some point.”

 Yes, Harrell was outvoted on the state’s highest court. But at least for two paragraphs he was entertaining.

###

To receive immediate delivery of future columns, be sure to click the “Subscribe” button on the right-hand side of the www.politicalmaryland.com webpage.

 

 

Stormwater tax unpopular but necessary

By Barry Rascovar / Community Times | July 10, 2013

WHEN YOUR PROPERTY TAX bill arrived by mail last week, you may not have noticed a slight addition: an extra $21, $32 or $39 — depending on your type of residence — for “Stormwater Remediation.”

This is overdue recognition that stormwater pouring from roofs and parking pads pollutes the Chesapeake Bay, promotes flooding and soil erosion and leads to drinking water contamination.

Embarking on fixes takes money.

It’s similar to another charge, $60, on the same bill for the Bay Restoration Fund. This is better known as the “flush tax” promoted by Republican Gov. Bob Ehrlich.

That money is spent on costly sewage treatment plant upgrades to remove nitrogen and other pollutants before the cleansed water is dumped into streams, rivers and the Chesapeake.

They are necessary expenses if we care about our environment.

None of us like to pay taxes. That’s been true since the American Revolution — remember the original Tea Party in Boston and other colonial cities?

But delivering government services and preserving our valuable natural resources can’t be done for free.

In Baltimore County, the fee to deal with stormwater runoff pays for such services as street sweeping, storm drain cleaning, maintenance and improvements, shoreline stabilization, tree planting and reforestation, among other things.

The county’s charge is $21 for a townhouse, $32 for a condo and $39 for a single-family home. This is far cheaper than Baltimore City, between $40 and $120 per residence, and generally less than Howard County, $15 to $90.

Anne Arundel County is phasing in its stormwater fee, $34 to $85, over three years and Harford County has a 10-year phase-in of its $125 fee while a task force studies other options.

The fee is mandated by state law affecting 10 jurisdictions that contribute the most to stormwater pollution of the bay.

A few counties refused to take the state mandate — required by the federal Environmental Protection Agency — seriously. They could face hefty fines or a whopping cleanup tab down the road.

Carroll County’s staunchly conservative commissioners aren’t imposing any fee and will pay for cleanup projects out of the county’s annual budget. Frederick County’s even more conservative commissioners imposed a $1 per residence fee and dared the EPA and Maryland to object.

Meanwhile, a Baltimore County Republican known for his grandstanding is leading a drive to repeal the so-called “rain tax.” Del. Pat McDonough has as much chance of succeeding as stopping the rain from falling on roofs and other impervious surfaces.

When you think about it, this fee and Ehrlich’s “flush tax” are cost-effective ways to show our support for clean water. For less than $100 a year every resident in Baltimore County contributes to a greener environment that makes it safer to swim in our rivers and bay, drink water from our taps and preserve this state’s greatest treasure, the Chesapeake.

 Barry Rascovar is a political columnist whose writings can be viewed as www.politicalmaryland.com. His email address is brascovar@hotmail.com.

New Day for Maryland’s High Court

By Barry Rascovar / July 9, 2013 

FORGET THE WOMEN’S ANGLE. What’s most important about Mary Ellen Barbera’s elevation to chief of the Maryland Court of Appeals isn’t her gender but her pragmatic, consensus-building tendencies that contrast with the liberal interpretations and easy-going nature of her retired predecessor, Robert M. Bell.

Yes, it’s good to have a female at the top of Maryland’s court system for the first time, especially with the addition of Baltimore Circuit Court Judge Shirley Watts to the high court. This gives women a historic majority on the state’s court of last resort.

New Maryland Chief Judge Mary Ellen Barbera

Mary Ellen Barbera

But the four female votes on Cotap, as it is commonly known, will not be in lock step. Indeed, there’s a gulf separating written opinions of the decidedly progressive Howard County jurist Lynn Battaglia and the more cautious Eastern Shore jurist, Sally Adkins.

Of course, this doesn’t easily break down along a liberal-conservative spectrum. Legal disputes usually involve differing interpretations of the law that have little to do with political leanings.

But on a number of heated issues, the state’s high court seems to have wandered far astray — with the chief judge having neither the desire nor clever dexterity to act as a unifier.

Indeed, Bell may have been too nice a fellow to take on the daunting task of “herding cats,” which is what it takes to keep six stubbornly independent, free-thinking judges in agreement and in the middle of the judicial road.

Effective In Dissent

Barbera is described as forthright, diplomatic and an accomplished bridge-builder. She can be remarkably frank, too.

When a court majority overturned the state’s DNA testing law for people jailed and accused of a crime, Barbera’s dissent stripped away the legal nonsense and hyperbole.

That ruling, she said, inflated privacy rights of people in jail and deflated the public’s right to be kept safe through minimally intrusive DNA sampling of inmates. The majority had taken an unrealistic and alarmist view, she wrote.

Last month, the Supreme Court agreed.

This state’s high court needs to start using common sense and rely less on legal abstractions and hypotheticals.

No Residency Rules for Politcos

Take the recent case of Daryl Jones, who sat on the Anne Arundel County Council until he served time in federal prison for intentionally not filing his income taxes. Members of the council eventually removed him, since he’d been living in a South Carolina prison for months.

Now a majority of the high court, 4-3, wants Jones returned to his council seat because of its tortured interpretation of the words “residence,” “abode” and “domicile.” It’s the legal equivalent of arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Atkins, Barbera and Glenn Harrell said this ruling “defies logic” and “makes no sense.” Even worse, the majority didn’t bother studying the historical record that makes clear what writers of the county charter meant.

The ruling is an extension of the high court’s continuing misadventures in defining political residence and political redistricting lines.

It’s gotten so bad one Baltimore City councilwoman hasn’t lived in her district for a decade (she prefers an Inner Harbor condo view) and communities that expanded beyond city and county boundaries are forbidden from voting in a unified district.

The Jones decision, the dissenters noted, will make matters worse because now there is essentially no legal barrier for politicians to live outside the districts they represent.

Pit Bull Chaos

Similarly, on the pit bull issue, the Bell court created a chaotic mess that the state legislature won’t or can’t figure out how to correct.

Bell & Co. traveled down a dangerous path by declaring pit bulls “inherently dangerous” without finding any empirical evidence to back them up.

It’s a terrible decision lacking in solid scientific data. It amounts to genetic racism among breeds of dog.

The dissenters, who railed against the illogic of this 4-3 ruling, again included Barbera.

Judicial Trailblazer

Nearly all of Bob Bell’s splendid career was served on the bench. He was a trailblazer for African-American jurists. He has a brilliant legal mind.

Yet he lacked the political instincts and negotiating skills of his predecessor, Chief Judge Robert C. Murphy, a jovial but tough-minded Irishman who could deal effectively with state legislators, governors and colleagues.

Barbera promises to bring her own style of leadership to the chief judgeship. It could shape the high court in quite different ways.

Like this column? Dislike it? Write a comment. If you want to receive each new column, click on the free  subscribe button at politicalmaryland.com.

Maryland’s New Taxes: Why Now?

By Barry Rascovar / July 2, 2013

TAXES ON GASOLINE in Maryland went up 3.5 cents on Monday; crossing toll bridges and tunnels got a lot more expensive, especially for truckers. Fees to combat stormwater pollution kicked in as well in the greater Baltimore-Washington area.

Higher gas taxesIt’s a big pill to swallow, even in a state whose leaders have felt no compunction about raising over 40 taxes, especially on businesses and the well-too-do, during the O’Malley-Brown reign in Annapolis.

Yes, the fees and taxes that commenced July 1 are necessary over the long run. We may not like it, but progress comes with a price.

Land of Toxic Living?

Would we rather watch bridges collapse, beltway congestion mushroom and pollution of streams, rivers and the Chesapeake Bay turn Maryland into the “Land of Toxic Living”?

It’s the timing and the size of these tax increases that are so terrible.

The burden imposed on businesses and non-profits is harmful and counter-productive. Critics have a right to mock the state’s chief executive by cynically shouting: “Pile high the taxes, Martin!”

Wait Till Later

Even worse, the first stage of the gasoline tax in Maryland pales compared with future increases dictated under the new law that could total 65 cents. The cries of anguish and anger will dog the next administration in Annapolis — a gift from the departing governor.

It didn’t have to play out this way.

A thoughtful, practical and courageous approach by political leaders in the Maryland State House would have led to action much sooner. That would have meant smaller levies phased in over time and two decades of transportation and environmental upgrades.

A Better  Way

It’s no surprise that more must be spent today to stem pollution caused by stormwater runoff. If Maryland had acted sooner, the fees would have been more modest and the remediation would have been cheaper.

Instead, O’Malley & Co. waited . . . and waited . . . and waited until the Environmental Protection Agency strong-armed Maryland and other nearby states to commit to big pollution cleanups.

It also was no surprise Maryland needed more money to repair dilapidated bridges and highways. Yet no governor and no legislature in the last 20 years had the courage to do the right thing..

Gone With The Wind

Instead, they took the Scarlett O’Hara approach: They put off difficult decisions until Maryland faced a transportation crisis and construction costs had soared.

As a result, Marylanders face a raft of gas tax increases that eventually will make this state one of the costliest in the nation at the pump. The new tolls for some truckers are so severe it may put their businesses in jeopardy.

Governors and legislators also dramatically raised the cost for fixing transportation and environmental shortcomings by waiting.

Parris Didn’t Get It

Had Gov. Parris Glendening overcome his political trepidation and acted in the best, long-term interests of Maryland he would have insisted in the 1990s on a gas tax increase tied to inflation. He also would have imposed modest fees to stem sewage plant and stormwater pollution of the Chesapeake.

The same can be said of Bob Ehrlich, who jacked up transportation licensing fees instead of biting the bullet with a far larger tax increase at the pump. He deserves credit, though, for imposing an unpopular “flush tax” to modernize sewage treatment plants. It didn’t win him points with conservatives — and hurt his reelection chances — but it was the right thing to do.

O’Malley failed to seize his moment (“carpe diem”) in 2007 when he had a golden chance to ram through a gas tax increase along with slots legalization. A small environmental cleanup fee could have been tacked on at that time, too.

So Many Missed Opportunities

We could have averted the current round of tax hikes but no one in the State House took the high road. They worried about re-electability instead of Maryland’s long-term viability.

We would have had better roads and bridges, too, and a cleaner Chesapeake Bay had our political leaders acted wisely in the past. Two decades of progress in transportation and the environment were lost.

Our leaders haven’t been very courageous. We’re paying the price for that today.

To receive immediate delivery of all new columns, click on the subscribe button on the right, or go to www.politicalmaryland.com.