November 13, 2009

Letter to Bob Ehrlich

The complete text of Susan Turnbull's letter is below:

Dear Former Governor Ehrlich,

Running for governor is an intensely personal decision for you and your family, and no one - Republicans or Democrats - should fault you for taking the time to consider your prospects in 2010.  As you conduct - in your own words - your "objective analysis," "hold focus groups" and "look at cross-tabs," I wanted to make sure that you and your pollster ask the right questions on which to base your decision.

For instance, do voters know that:

1. You increased spending by almost 22% in your last two years in office - exceeding the Spending Affordability guidelines?

2. You raised more than $3 billion in hidden taxes, tolls and fees on Maryland families?

3. You raised taxes on income from manufacturing?

4. You raised state property taxes 57%?

5. You raised the corporate filing fees by $188 million during your first three years in office?

These are very important questions that you should ask in your poll - especially since spending levels in the State of Maryland are lower today than they were during your last year in office.  No doubt voters will be very interested in your spending record given the state of the
national economy.

Voters and opinion leaders are already aware that you were the only incumbent governor in the country to lose re-election in November.  Sure it was a bad year for Republicans after six years of George Bush, but you were the only incumbent governor of either party to lose re-election.  So, as you prepare your poll and focus groups, I recommend you ask whether you would, yet again:

* Cut funding for K-12 public education, since you failed to fully-fund Thornton while you were in office.

* Roll-back the progress we have made to make college more affordable by increasing college tuition by over 40% again, as you did during your term in office.

* Start raiding Program Open Space dollars instead of making difficult decisions to balance the budget.

* Block any increase in the minimum wage for hard working Marylanders.

Warm Regards,
Susan W. Turnbull
Chair, Maryland State Democratic Party

P.S. Please also be sure that you ask voters about your flip flop on slots, which you supported for all four years of your Administration as the centerpiece of your budget program, only to oppose in last year's referendum, which passed with 59% of support from Maryland's voters.








Sept. 11, 2009

Lessons Learned on Health Care

Observations on the Health Care Debate

 

After their fourweek visit to the political woodshed in August, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid,Barack Obama, and congressional democrats returned to Washington this week to salvage what is left of theirplan to reform health care. 

 

What did they learnon their visits back to the heartland that the rest of us already knew?  Here are a few observations:

 

First, governmentsat all levels currently lack credibility with the electorate.  We are unable to control our borders, reignin spending, or ensure that only registered voters are able to vote on ElectionDay.  Why, then, would our citizens wantto hand over 16 percent of our economy to the same crowd responsible for thosefailures?

 

Second, one half ofhealth care expenditures today are generated by technological innovation.  Why, then, would Americans want to put thebrakes on medical research if it helps them live longer and higher qualitylives? 

 

Third, historyteaches that nationalized health systems always lead to health care rationing,a clear affront to the American way of life. Government-ordered rationing of goods and services rarely works.

 

Fourth, the recent votein Congress to exempt members of the House and Senate from their own healthreforms reaffirms the extreme arrogance of this congressional leadership.  Their constituents at home no doubt remindedthem of their hypocrisy during heated town hall exchanges in August.

 

Fifth, the chargesleveled by the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer at their constituents mob mentality, un-American -- are the latest examples of the New Leftsintolerance toward opposing views.  Untilvery recently, the American left celebrated open expression and dissent.  What happened?

 

Sixth, its time toexamine a move away from employer-provided health insurance.  Congress should allow employees to use(employer-provided) pre-tax dollars to buy the insurance coverage they want ina competitive market.  We should allowhealth insurance to be competitively bid and purchased across state lines.

 

Why not expandhealth savings accounts that allow workers to deposit pre-tax dollars intoaccounts and receive matching contributions from their employer.  The employee can then purchase a highdeductible plan to guard against large out-of-pocket costs and pay for routinevisits and tests with money from the savings account (preventative care wouldbe reimbursed).

 

Health care is acomplex issue.  The debate over reformcan be confusing.  So heres a glossaryof terms and definitions typically used by the extreme congressionalleadership:

 

       Thepublic option: This is the introduction of a government-run health planinto the market.  Basic economics teachesthat such a policy will lead to gradual elimination of private insurance.  Barney Frank, one of Congresss preeminentliberals, said as much:  

 

I think that if we get a good public optionit could lead to single payer and that is the best way to reach single payer. Ithink the best way were going to get single payer, the only way, is to have apublic option and demonstrate the strength of its power. (July 27, 2009)

 

       Medicaresavings: This is code for reimbursement cuts to physicians at a time whenwe should be encouraging doctors to participate in the system.

 

       Comparativeeffectiveness research: This is code for limiting care based on onesage.  Money for this research wasincluded in the federal stimulus bill enacted earlier this year.

 

        The bill will pay for itself: No, itwill not.  Consider what Dr. ZekeEmanual, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanual, said lastyear:

 

Vague promises of savings from cuttingwaste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical recordsand improving quality are merely lipstick cost control, more for show andpublic relations than for true change. (Feb. 27, 2008)  

 

       Youcan keep your existing plan. Perhaps, but only for a specified period oftime.  Under the Democrats plan, the self-insured(under ERISA) could keep their plan for five years and then become subject toapproval by a government panel.  Thosewith employer-sponsored coverage would keep it until their plan changesbenefits (which most do every year).   Then,you lose it right away.

 

       Youllhave the freedom to choose your benefits.  Not so fast. The Democrats legislation sets up qualified plans through healthcare exchanges that allows the federal government to impose a minimum list ofrequired benefits.  The Department ofHealth & Human Services, which reports to the White House, will have thepower to add to the list of required benefits.

 

       Blameit on the special interests. As President Obama stated in his health carespeech to Congress Wednesday, the special interests are to blame for theLefts failure to take over health care. Despite the Presidents rhetoric, special interests are no limited togroups on the Right.  AARP, AFL-CIO,AFSCME, ACORN, and George Soros are left-leaning organizations and individualsspending millions of their members dollars to influence this debate.  Whether right or left, it is OK to be aspecial interest.  There is nothing moreAmerican than advocating for your special interests.  Just remember that there are interests allover the political spectrum.



April 17, 2009

Must Read

Thursday, April 9, 2009

Maryland among highest in nation for energy costs

Baltimore Business Journal

 

Maryland's energy cost ranks among the highest in the country, according to a new study released by The Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council.

The council's report ranks Maryland 40th among the 50 states. The rankings places the lowest cost states at the top.

 

The index ranks states according to two major energy costs affecting small businesses, individuals and families: The price of regular gasoline at the pump and the cost of electricity.

Raymond Keating, the council's chief economist and author of the report, said making energy more affordable and abundant should be a key objective for policy makers to help small businesses survive the current economic turmoil.

"In tough economic conditions such as these, elected officials at all levels of government need to be aware of how their policies impact energy costs, and in turn small businesses," Keating said in a news release.

According to the index, the lowest cost states are: 1) Wyoming; 2) Idaho; 3) Utah; 4) Kentucky; and 5) West Virginia.

The highest cost states are: 46) Massachusetts; 47) Rhode Island; 48) Alaska; 49) Connecticut-- tied with New York -- and 50) Hawaii.





04-17-09

Legislative session punishes families and small businesses

Legislative session punishes families and small businesses

Martin O'Malley and the General Assembly just concluded the 2009 legislative session. If you are a labor union that funds democrat campaigns, you made out very well. If you are an illegal immigrant in immediate need of a Maryland drivers license, you scored a victory. If you believe that a homeowner or small business owner's greatest worth is the taxes and fees they pay government, you can take a victory lap.

However, if you are a new homeowner, small business owner, state employee, residential or commercial buyer of electricity, or a driver of Maryland roads, you lost big in the 2009 legislative session. Here's how:

Small businesses will pay more under House Bill 310, which increases unemployment insurances tax rates, making it more difficult for employers to keep and hire employees.

Individuals and business pay more for electricity under House Bill 315, which requires companies to cut their CO2 emissions by 25% by 2020. The costs incurred by companies to comply with this mandate will be passed on to you, the consumer. Yet Maryland's most powerful labor unions, who bankrolled the campaigns of the lawmakers who wrote the legislation, were protected by virtue of a "manufacturing exemption" in the bill.

State employees will pay more under House Bill 298, which imposes a $400 annual tax on state employees who are not members of a labor union. Once again, our liberal leaders favored the special interests who financed their campaigns while punishing ordinary, non-union state employees who were already forced to take furloughs in December.

Drivers pay more under House Bill 313, which places speed surveillance cameras throughout the state, despite clear evidence that the devices can be manipulated. For instance, Montgomery County high school students were caught duplicating the license plates of teachers and students and speeding through surveillance camera zones. The cameras do not distinguish between the owner and operator of the vehicle, yet drivers are still forced to pay $40 fines. Drivers who use E-Z Pass will also pay higher fees.

Homeowners with septic systems pay more under Senate Bill 554, which requires nitrogen-removing technology for new home or commercial renovation and construction projects. This legislation will cost new homeowners and renovators an additional $12,000.

Students and parents pay more as college and university room and board charges will increase as much as 7 percent next school year.

Illegal immigrants will continue to reap rewards from Maryland's amnesty policy toward drivers license. Maryland is the only state west of the Rockies that allows illegal immigrants to obtain drivers licenses. As a result, a staggering 300,000 have obtained Maryland licenses since 2006. While legal immigration is an important American tradition, the legislation passed by O'Malley and the legislature this year leaves the welcome mat out for illegal immigrants.

That summarizes the winners and losers of this year's legislative session. So ask yourself: did you win or lose?




March 26, 2009

"1994"

"1994"

All this talk about a two trillion dollar "new" New Deal has brought me back to November, 1994.

It seems so long ago. Newt. The New Majority. The "Contract With America." Lots of newly minted Congressmen with no previous political experience. Most were small business people unapologetic in their enthusiasm for private initiative. They celebrated the market economy. "Work" was in and "entitlement" was out. What passes for fiscal austerity in Washington was in voguea balanced federal budget was passed for four years in a row. A super-majority requirement to pass tax increases passed the House with 243 votes. A significant slimming down of the departments of Education and Commerce was under discussion. There was even criticism about how the Community Reinvestment Act was being manipulated to get community banks to write increasing numbers of risky loans. (But Barney Frank and Maxine Waters assured us it was not the case).

My most vivid recollection was the constant use of the phrase "opportunity society". It was everywhere. Frank Luntz, Newts Contract With America pollster, assured us that it polled quite well. Speaker Gingrich worked it into just about every public (and private) discussion. The words conveyed a sense of individual freedoma romantic notion that in America one could achieve just about any goal with the requisite degree of brains and hard work. As policy, it referenced new growth orientated measures aimed at freeing up capital through cuts in capital gains and the federal estate tax.

At the center of this new agenda was the small business owner. An heroic figure to many of us. He/She was the classic risk taker willing to fail but determined to succeed through self reliance and hard work. This celebrated group was all about "up from the bootstraps" success; their stories emanated from Main Streetnot Wall Street.

A few high profile GOP scandals, a controversial war, a series of spendthrift budgets, and two disastrous election cycles later, the antithesis of that entrepreneurial spirit now envelops our politics. It is not a positive, or promising, development.

A nervous middle class now turns to government to cure all social and economic ills. Our new Vice President assures us that paying higher taxes is our patriotic duty. Our new President bypasses the annual Congressional appropriations process to expand the scope and reach of the federal government as never before. Recently, that same President (ACORNs former lawyer) told everyone who has kept up with their mortgage obligations that they must pay for the mistakes of so many of those who have not. As if we needed it, further proof that "spreading the wealth" is indeed his governing philosophy.

The Obama Administration is all about egalitarian economics and income redistribution. And nobody seems interested in how the unsavory manipulation of the mortgage market by the aforementioned Mr. Frank, Madam Waters and company helped lead to the mortgage crisis in the first place.

The present enthusiasm for everything bailout has pushed aside all those great thoughts about the heroic nature of the entrepreneurial class. Today, in the words of our President, its about limited horizons ("[To] those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to the suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the worlds resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it...") and a lower standard of living ( ["You just cant] keep on using 25% of the worlds energy, even though you only account for 3 percent of the population.").

In the coming months, maybe "We the People" will begin to resist this Obama-Pelosi-Reid assault on American investors and producers. A wholesale repudiation of class warfare rhetoric and policies would (hopefully) follow. A re-energized taxpayer might more fully understand that the Democratic wish list sold as an economic "Stimulus Plan" has very little to do with reinvigorating our economyand far more to do with a fundamental realigning of the role of government and markets dating back to the 1980s. The defeat of the Democrats attempt to end workplace freedom through the so-called "card check" bill would be a great place to begin a great reawakening on the part of "opportunity society" conservatives seeking a legislative victory.

Until then, I (and many others) intend to keep reminding the voters that an agenda based on individual freedom and equal opportunity promises a far better future than the prohibitively expensive nanny state evolving in front of our eyes today.