"Working families of our state who have been taking it on the chin the last few years." Martin give us a break and cut the state sales tax by 2 cents. Then every working family that buys a new car will save $400. Everyone will get a tax break every day. Then business people who we have to bestow grants upon to come to Maryland, will come voluntarily and more working families will be working. Anybody who doesn't think the lobbygroups for more selfish money in Annapolis have too much influence, has been in Annapolis too long.

Geez, Ficker. Ok, for the sake of discussion, lets go forward with your hypothetical. What if they did cut the sales tax by 2 cents? That's around $1.4 billion in lost revenue. What does that accomplish?

What spending would you cut to make up the now $3 billion shortfall?

$540 million saved from not proceeding with the ICC is money that can be use for infrastructure improvements that won't need to come from other sources. It's a huge savings that will ultimately save the taxpayers money, not matter which fund it comes from. It will also help start us moving away from the bankrupt paradigm of individuals driving, large, heavy, unsafe, foreign fueled, pollution emitting, road clogging automobiles when we should be using egalitarian public transportation. The ICC will cost much and benefit a wealthy few.

My household earns in excess of 250k annually and we welcome the opportunity for us and those like us to pony up and pay a more fair share. Past tax cuts were irresponsible, and other remedies suggested to date are unfair to those below my bracket.

I no longer live in MD and pay considerably less taxes in DC where we have no local county tax. However, a mentor told me once that he got his start driving an ice cream truck on state and county roads in new housing developments and began to appreciate how the infrastructure of the bustling county in the 1970s was the basis for his profits. How many MoCo'ers were able to be far more productive after I-270 was repaired? Too often I think people take infrastructure for granted. In the 1990 North Ridge, CA (?) earthquake a friend's cousins owned a donut shop near an on-ramp that was shut down due to damage. Their business was cut by 75% because the highway wasn't there to bring cars. They barely survived. That government infrastructure that so many successful businesspeople take for granted was their lifeline. There are many wealthy people who still refuse to acknowledge how these policies keep them afloat.

O'Malley is preying on people's own ignorance of how the system actually works. Just because everyone's rate is the same in Maryland does not mean everyone pays the same. For example, say the MD state tax is 2 percent of annual income. 2 percent from someone who makes 200,000 dollars a year is considerably more than from someone who makes 20,000 a year. People who make more already pay more (duh!). When you combine this with the fact that MD unlike most other states has a county income tax, you see that we are one of the highest taxed states in the union. Maryland is an affluent state and this increase is unnecessary. Why not bring in slots like all our neighboring states have? Why not reinvest in our horse racing industry that sets us apart from many other places for revenue? Why not cut spending or become more effecient with our spending?

The reality is anyone who makes enough to be truly affected by this will be capable of avoiding it by having their lawyers figure out how they can maintain their residency at a vacation home in a cheaper state while continuing to do business in and profit in Maryland. Thus as usual the increased burden will fall on the middle class who have enough money to be a target of tax and spend policies but not enough to afford the legal help to avoid it. So while all this "people paying their fair share" rhetoric sounds warm and fuzzy its hardly reality. No offense my fellow Marylanders but its time to expand your economic theory beyond collectivist drivel that won't accomplish anything.

Well, my family also makes a combined 250K+ HH income and frankly I feel very strongly that we already pay our fair share of income tax. We both have HS educations and have worked very hard and paid our own way to get where we are today. Nothing has ever been handed to us. In the highest tax bracket, we have no tax deductions other than mortgage interest, my one child is starting her 3rd year in college (which I am funding 100%). Close the tax loop holes on big money corporations, reform welfare and all the other outdated hand-out programs, that's where you'll fix the deficit. Increasing sales tax, fees on disposal companies and developers is directly handed down to the consumers, which is far from fair. Stay out of my pocket O'Mally. Maybe you and your money grubbing staff should take a pay cut and elminate all the fancy luncheons, dinners, and parties. That would save us a bundle.

I'll ask you guys once again (as I do everytime you post a piece about our "looming deficit") - how much is this year's budget? How much is next year's budget? PLEASE provide us with some numbers! These politicians are quick to talk about how we need more money, but you never see any numbers that make sense.

Why would any of 50 radio stations play Martin's tax increase message for two minutes? The guy can hold a press conference where he can be asked questions about why he didn't mention all these tax increases in his campaign commercials last fall. Does he really want to increase the sales tax on people who are being forclosed on, who have 50% higher electricity costs and who are paying record high gas prices? He needs to ask every tax increase lobbyist if there is any tax they wouldn't increase and if there is a single cut they would make. This latest tax increase commercial sounds like a re-run of a speech of Warren Buffett, member of the Washington Post Board of Directors and the second richest man in the U.S., who thinks that everyone who earns less than he does should pay more tax.

First, I believe our guv is proposing a tiered tax system. The portion of my income up to the lower bracket is at the lower rate, and the chunk up to the next bracket at that corresponding rate, and so forth. Just like the Feds do. That's why they have tax tables (for those who still do things analog) instead of simply saying: "now multiply your AGI by tax rate."

Although a native Marylander, I have lived all around the nation and the world as an adult. I want to live in a state that has the level of services that Maryland does (who needs road signs to indicate they've entered PA from MD?). And I am happy to pay for those services also. It is great to be back.

And I am am ready to pay a bigger cut from the top tier of my income.

I feel your pain, Rocket. You'd have more deductions at the Federal level if the Feds would reform tax code around the Alternate Minimum Tax. Because of the AMT and your income level, you can not deduct your state taxes like you used to do. AMT was designed to nail the top 150 taxpayers making ungodly sums...but there are no escalation factors in the current law, so now it nails regular schleps like you and me.

GoldFish,

Though I think your willingness to throw in for the better of the state is admirable, I don't think its wise to just give the state a blank check with these kinds of things. A great example of this is the proposed intercounty connecter. This will be a 3 billion dollar investment in expanding our already unsustainable car/highway based infrastructure. Once/If the thing is ever built, it will be an annual drain on money for road maintenance and if the population continues to expand in the state it will become overcrowded and obsolete for its purposes of easing traffic congestion within years of it being built. All of this instead of investing in cheaper to maintain and easier to sustain mass transit. Basically you always need to question what the government is doing with our money in order to make sure that how it uses it truly is going to improve the public services you rightly acknowledge and appreciate.

As for a tiered tax system, I think the whole idea is just inequitable. Basically you're penalizing people for being financially successful which I don't think sends a very good message about the function of the state as a whole (i.e. nothing more than a big redistrubtion machine that isn't concerned with fairness at all). The flat tax we have now is economist recommended and has worked for our state since its introduction. If it ain't broke...

I thought this problem was fixed 2 years ago. Oh, that's right - different adminstration. Fiscal restraint out the window again, just like before Mr. Ehrlich took office. No surprise, though. We knew from Mr. O'Malley's record in Baltimore that this, as well as failing schools and increased crime, was going to happen.

Now I understand where the term Progressive comes from! O'Malley says the "people of Maryland always choose to make progress." Progressively tax us more and more!! Now I get it!! Maybe if I felt like our state government was managing our tax dollars well, I would be ok with this. Oh well, only a few more years to retirement to a low tax area.

I noticed that Robin Ficker didn't bother to answer my question. If all you want to do is spout rhetoric then I'll refrain from trying to engage you in an intelligent debate.

Rocketfuel, I understand your distress about the tax situation, but I doubt you'd get much of a tax increase at 250k/year. I think we're talking about a higher tax for the top 10% and 1% of earners. You don't reach that marker.

The simple fact is that even if slots do get approved, they won't solve the problem by themselves. Closing corporate tax loopholes won't solve the problem entirely either. Welfare money comes from block grants from the Federal Government so that's no help at all. Unless you can think of another revenue source, services will have to be cut. What would you like to do without? Maybe less pollution enforcement? Sure you'll have to pay for your cancer treatment in 20 years, but you won't have higher taxes now! Maybe they'll pick up trash less often. That might save some cash. But I would suggest getting some raccoon traps to put around your overloaded trash bins.

Drive around PA for a few hours. Look at the roads and make sure to look at the road kill that dots the shoulders. There is a noticeable difference in quality. The decreased quality of the roads causes more wear and tear on your tires, a de facto tax on everyone that drives them.

It's easy to say have less parties and special dinners, but you probably don't have any idea how much they cost per year or who pays for them. I certainly don't. Come back at me with some numbers.

JasonL

I'm not against increasing taxes because of some crazy ideological reasons. If the state can make a good case for increasing taxes and show that they've been financially responsible and this is literally just "things get more expensive over time with inflation" then fine. But its up to them to make that case before we all just fork over more money.

I'm personally very perplexed as to how a 1.5 billion dollar shortfall materializes out of thin air, especially after we just solved that budget crisis a few years ago when Ehrlich first came into office. I remember it very clearly because one of the programs he cut hit me personally. I was a student at the time and one of the state programs that was lost was non-need based scholarships which I had. I don't think its fair to berate everyone who is skeptical of throwing more cash to the state without any clear explanation of how we got to this shortfall in the first place.

Some Idiot, although I disagree with you you are at least not spouting senseless rhetoric. I think a name change would suit you. Now, to the disagreeing!

-The ICC
1. The greatest economic expansions of our nation has come in times of increased infrastructure.
2. The ICC would be a toll road so the people using it would be the same people who pay to keep it is good working order.
3. If the population expands as you say and there is no ICC then other major roads will be more congested then ever.
4. Automobile transit will be in use for at least the next 50 years if not beyond according to most any futurist you ask. Fuels might change, but cars will be there.
5. The purple line and the ICC (maybe with a special HOV and Bus lane) together seem to adequately address both concerns and the investment would be well worth the price in increased job efficiency from commuters and lowered fuel consumption.

-A Progressive Tax
Despite Rockville Mom's persuasive play on words, I still think its a worthwhile idea.
1. Not all economists believe that a flat tax is better for a macro or micro economy. Every toothpaste I've ever seen has been recommended by a a dentist and the same is true for fiscal decisions.
2. It is broke whether you like to believe it or not. So it must be fixed. Frankly, If my wife and I make $125k annually and you make $1.25 million annually I think you can afford ten or twenty thousand dollars more easily than I can afford 1 or 2 thousand dollars. Our food costs the same, you don't need to buy a Ferrari and you can afford to help someone else make their life a little bit better.

People who make more already pay more (duh!).
----

Uh, no. If people pay 2% across the board then they pay an equal percentage regardless of their disposable income. You're trying to shoehorn non-tax related definitions into a tax discussion and then feel it necessary to punctuate it with "duh" as if we don't, you know, understand the language of taxes and econ. Are there nuances of this discussion you just don't understand? It's all solved with a high school level Econ class.

I am with you, Idiot. The cross-county connector will mitigate congestion as well as the current I-270 does. I wish we still had the old 2 lane 270 (3 inside from Montrose) and poured *those* dollars into mass transit. Too many cars. I am ready to add $2 per gallon to gasoline tax to get us buying cars more responsibly and repair the great infrastrucure Ike envisioned, our parents paid for in 60s and 70s and we haven't paid to maintain (in favor of personal excess) since then. We're all eating our parents' cake.

And nice try, Phil. But O'Malley didn't run up that deficit. Anyone who listens beyond the sound bites saw the train wreck coming when you boy pushed the unsustainable tax cuts. Hope your kids are done with college. Our tuition hikes dawrf the unbridled increases in the medical sector. Recall when a Md education was affordable to a hard working kid. Given *those* skyrocketing costs and disappearing grants/loans, well intended kids can't do it alone anymore. Parents underwriting is more necessary than ever. Yanks the carpet out from good kids with poor parents.

Crap, I forgot to talk about the "materializing out of thin air" bit. It did not, in fact, do so.

What we have here is called a structural deficit. To borrow the definition from wikipedia (budget policy was a smaller part of my policy education, though it was a favorite). "Structural deficit differs from cyclical deficit in that it exists even when the economy is at its potential.

Structural deficit issues can only be addressed by explicit and direct government policies, such as improvements to technology or labour productivity. It can be described as more "chronic" or long-term in nature hence needing government action to remove it."

Basically, everyone in the State's budget shop knew it was coming for years. Ehrlich raised fees and dipped into the rainy day fund because he knew that he didn't stand a chance at reelection if he raised taxes. That got us by but it's there and it's bigger than ever. If Ehrlich had eliminated more of the states vehicle fleet (O'Malley did that last month or the month before) and/or took steps to reduce the states energy usage (see EmPower Maryland) we might not be in such a deep hole.

S.O.S from every Democrate politician; and Mr. Wagner needs to learn how to spell separate. If he wrote this column with a word processor, he should have used its spelling and grammar checker.

JasonL

Alrighty-

For one I think we disagree on less than we may think.
In terms of infrastructure, I had not read that the ICC would be a toll road and if that is the case then I certainly would change my stance on it, particularly if the revenue raised was being spent on expanding mass transit as well road maintenance. My main point of contention here is that I'm utterly sick of seeing money being dumped into road projects that don't get to the root of our coutnry's infrastructure problems, namely that we are way too dependent on cars. I, like you, am in favor of the purple line as well as maybe even extending the green line further north towards Laurel and Ft. Meade if possible.

As for the progressive tax structure we may just have to agree to disagree. I am of the opinion that the people who advocates of such a system want to target for increased revenue tend to find creative ways of dodging it or in some cases might leave the state altogether at which point we can no longer rely on their taxable investments. I think it was you who earlier mentioned the alternative minimum tax and the fact that way more people are now being hit with it simply because the numbers written into the legislation haven't been updated. Because of public apathy and government greed I take the cynical view that these kind of situations are the destiny of all but the most restrained and reviewed progressive systems.

and DCer,

Where is it so written that we should all be equally affected by our tax burden? I'm speaking in purely dollar terms not on some almost impossible to quantify threshold of standard of living. Not to mention I simply happen to be of the opinion that the state doesn't have an inalienable right to people's money without first making a case for itself.

JasonL

Ah, I don't have a background in economics and I guess despite my efforts to be an informed citizen I simply must've missed that element of it. Though I suppose its not the kind of thing the state government would be shouting from the rooftops either.

Just because you're more financially successful, doesn't actually mean you work hard or ethically. Someone flipping burgers all day works a million times harder than some CEO inheriting a business merely from the people he knows and making 800 million times more money.

I think that the revenue from the tolls would be earmarked for transportation, but I can't say that with absolute certainty. I can't even say with absolute certainty that there would be any significant amount of money left over after upkeep for the ICC, but I do think that it would at least cover it's own costs.

As for this: "Where is it so written that we should all be equally affected by our tax burden?" we're now into more of a philosophical debate. Deontological and Utilitarian theories would tend towards a progressive tax so as to so protect the rights of individuals or further the greatest good for the greatest number, respectively. Socrates would, likewise, call it a virtue to give what one is able so long as they were not beggared by it.

Don't worry about missing out on structural deficits. Structural deficits are spoken of so rarely outside budget shops that the concept borders on the arcane in most circles.

The work day has ended for me so I'm out of here. Have a good one everybody and thanks for the info JasonL. Its nice to have a discussion about issues on one of these blogs that doesn't turn into name calling and extremist rants.

The ICC toll revenue won't begin to pay for the construction costs, those are being paid by everyone, whether you drive it or not. Tolls will ensure that only the well-off can afford to drive on it. Another case of the government taking from the poor and giving to the rich. (But they always say they were never handed anything).

This is the kind of stuff I live for. Thanks to all for a good discussion and safe drives and good nights to everyone.

-Jason

Corporations and the so-called wealthy are already paying more, sometimes much more, than their fair share.

The problem is that the politicians, bureaucrats, and now illegal aliens they pander to, are taking much more than their fair share.

You want fair? Cut back the state and county governments and send the illegals home.

I bet those illegals exert all kinds of influence over our political process, since they can't vote and don't have money. But they sure make a convenient scapegoat.

I didn't hear Gov. O'Malley's message on the radio. But I sure hope that among the "loopholes" he wants to close is the one that allows MD companies to shunt income to an out-of-state subsidiary (typically located in a state with low or no income tax) and thereby avoid Maryland taxation. Maryland has gone to great lengths to make itself attractive to corporations and yet all too many of them don't pay their fair share of taxes because of this loophole. Does anyone know if that's included in his proposals?

Great points from Jason L, Goldfish, Couthouseguy and others! At times over the last six months, I felt everyone else online had a peraonal grudge against O'Malley. He's yet to prove himself, but I think he is off to a decent start. Erlich left us with this deficit, the FY2007 budget was his last. The decisions made now will form the FY2008 budget and I see some great ideas from the conservation group, especially cancelling the $3 billion ICC project. The state highway admin. own study admitted that the ICC would NOT relieve traffic on existing roads, the $7 per use toll will NOT contribute to deficit reduction of staet general funds...it will only serve to make a dent in the enormous debt that MD will sink into for this single 18 mile stretch of road. Perhaps I'm the only driver that notices only two of several east-west routes across MoCo actually see traffic jams? The beltway and Randolph Rd get backed up during rush. Rt 198, Rt 108, and Rt410, well spaced from each other are almost ALWAYS moving freely. The ICC has never been justified to MD tax-payers and I cnnot believe I am the only one demanding fiscal responsibility.

If you're making more than 250K and you don't think its enough, THEN PAY MORE! There is nothing stopping you from paying more, the state will gladly take it, you can donate more than the minimum, as much as you want. Write that check today!

We are in this together. The better off you are, almost certainly the more you (proportionately) have benefitted from the infrastructure of government (roads, banking system, communications, etc.), so the more (proportionately) you should pay toward "the commons" of society -- e,g, "progressive" income tax rates. I am glad we have a governor with the sense and guts to move on this. Maybe we are finally moving away from the Reaganization of America, at least at the state level. Imagine if Robin Ficker (disbarred attorney / whack job commenting here) were in power in Annapolis......

A report from the Interamerican Development Bank at:
http://idbdocs.iadb.org/wsdocs/getdocument.aspx?docnum=826095

shows that Maryland "residents" sent more money to Latin America that "residents" from any other state in 2006. The chart on page 31 of the report shows that $931 million was remitted by Maryland "residents" in just 2006. A foreign remittance tax of 10 percent would bring in nearly 100 million dollars.

Correction: Maryland residents sent the greatest remittance amount per capita of any state, as shown in another IADB report. In any case, $100 million or so from these "remitters" will certainly help to close the funding gap.

The market's down almost 400 pts. Sub-prime lending problems are spreading up the ladder and O'Malley wants to inccrease taxes. You'd think he would cut back on spending while the rest of us are. He's a one termer for sure.

the great thing about going after "the rich" is that noone is rich.

The guy who makes 25,000 a year looks at the person who makes 75K and says, "he's rich"

But, the guy who makes $75K looks to the person who makes $200K and says, "no, not me, HE'S rich."

The guy who makes $200 K looks ot the person who makes a million a year and says, "THAT'S the rich guy."

That person looks at Derek Jeter and says, "He makes $10 million a year, it's people like THAT who are rich"

Jeter looks at Steinbrenner who makes $200 million a year and says, "It's the rich team owners, not us players"

Steinbrenner looks at the hedge fund guys who make a billion a year and say "THOSE are the rich guys."

So, the question is not whether to tax the rich, everyone thinks that's ok. It's who gets to decide who is rich.

The stock market is tanking again today. Subprime mortgages are everywhere. The reaction of the editors and Warren Buffett-led editorial board of the Washington Post? Consider raising corporate, sales, income, gasoline and P.G. celephone taxes and forget about charter property tax revenue limits in Montgomery
County. What's next? everyone should donate his right thumb?

"What's next? everyone should donate his right thumb?" - Robin Ficker

No, without their thumb they would have a very hard time hitchhiking when they can't afford to buy gas anymore.

Seriously, Robin. If all you're going to do here is attack WaPo, why don't you go read the Washington Times. You'll be so much happier there.

Donny, I'd like you to refer back to my post from yesterday about why the ICC is good. The ICC won't "solve" congestion because of the population growth in the area, not because it's a bad road. Without it, congestion will just be worse on existing roads. As for those altenative roads, I've seen Rt. 108 get real slow during rush hour and it doesn't really go anywhere where business is. You just have to get on Georgia avenue to get to offices and things. The other roads you mention are all fairly small (198 is cluttered with lights around Laurel and only 2 lanes wide with periodic lights on the other side of 29). Plus they wind and it'll take a rather long time to get places because of their meandering path and slow speed limit. That's not good for the environment. The ICC is a direct path across the county that will be a big help to a lot of commuters.

Also, I never said that the tolls would pay for the road itself, merely upkeep on the ICC.

Sub prime tax increase, I'd like to hear your ideas on what services you'd like to cut. O'Malley dropped a couple hundred million in spending already. What service that you get now would you be ok with losing?

Crap again. The above anonymous post is me.

Courthouse Guy, a bit of looking on my part shows that the issue with corporate taxes that you describe is a planned feature of the Governors tax reform. Apparently, it's called "combined reporting." Thanks for pointing that out.

Too many facts, cognizant points and considered arguments for Mr. Ficker to respond.

just one more note about "structural deficits" - a structural deficit is nothing more than mandated programs costing more than revenues. those clowns we elected mandated the programs, there is no one else forcing them to put them in place. a structural deficit can be cured in two ways - raise more revenue, or cut mandated programs. And yes, those mandated programs can be cut, if our elected officials vote to do so.

Dig this folks...If O'Malley thinks it's time that "the big giant corporations and wealthiest among us" pay their fair share, then why does he feel the need to sell this idea to ordinary citizens through an expensive radio ad campaign? Obviously, he's preparing everyone to get ready to pay more in taxes. He's already proven that he's more than willing to say one thing but do something all together different. Don't trust a word this guy says.

True, the radio announcement may have cost some change, but wouldn't you rather have a Governor that communicates rather than one who does not? Would you prefer a government that plots in secret. The trust question is also ridiculous! When dealing with American politicians, throw trust out the window. Its simply unsmart to approach American politics with a childish outlook. The founding fathers were wise indeed. They build a system of government where trust was unnecessary...also because it is impossible to trust those in power. We have checks and balances (if any are left) and a free press...also we have the freedom to vote out anyone every election year (as we did with the last Governor). If O'Malley does not "cut it", he'll get similar fate. My suggestion is that if anyone has the goal of trusting politicians (in this world), like a fool and their money, that person and their freedom will soon be parted. O'Malley eaned his turn as Governor...lets see if he can clean up the mess.

Donny,

I wasn't sure at first but now I'm completely convinced that you're delusional.

The people of Maryland elected a Governor to focus on the issues affecting Marylanders. What they got instead is a polarizing mouthpeice for the DNC.

This ad campaign has nothing to do with communication (ask BRAC stakeholders about open, transparent communication) and everything to do with priming the public for tax increases accross the board. Why does the guy delivering pizzas need to be blitzed by radio ads about tax increases limited to large corporations and the "wealthy"? Probably because they will not be limited to large corporations and the wealthy. I'm no genius but if we're in such financial dire straits, why are we spending so much on an ad campaign? A simple email to the legislature would put a large portion of Maryland's wealthy on alert that tax increases are coming for them.

According to you, we're all fools. That is, anyone that supported O'Malley for his promises to take on BGE, hire a qualified PSC, fully fund the Thornton Commission education plan, not engage in politically motived firings, etc., etc... You're correct though, O'Malley gets his chance now because "to the victor belong the spoils". I, however, will not sit here and pretend that doing whatever or saying whatever it takes to get elected is somehow a noble accomplishment. O'Malley cannot be trusted.

Hey "ItsAMatterOfTrust". It seems we share my delusions on some issues, including: giving O'Malley and MD a chance to improve our situation, and on NEVER trusting politicians. I prefer, though, more communication on the part of government (which I view with healthy distrust) and in retrospect, I'd be surprised if the ad was not free (since he's the governor). Peace.

Jason L,

You note: Ehrlich raised fees and dipped into the rainy day fund because he knew that he didn't stand a chance at reelection if he raised taxes. That got us by but it's there and it's bigger than ever. If Ehrlich had eliminated more of the states vehicle fleet (O'Malley did that last month or the month before) and/or took steps to reduce the states energy usage (see EmPower Maryland) we might not be in such a deep hole.

Ehrlich did not in fact dip into the rainy day fund - he quadrupled it. It was O'Malley in his very first budget that dropped it to the minimum level required by law.

And, reducing the state's fleet of cars and energy usage has a symbolic, but entirely negligible effect on the state budget. O'Malley's car reductions saved the state less than $100,000. His press conference to announce the cuts cost almost that much in terms of salary for staff, security, energy to run the lights and microphones, etc.... Turning the air condition to 78 degrees in the Gov's mansion or something? This is your plan to eliminate the structural deficit? And you say that you have actually studied this?

So let those who think they should pay more do so. What's stopping you?

Well, EmPower MD is designed to lower the state's usage of energy by 20%. That actually represents a substantial savings for the government. Has Ehrlich done simple things like replace incandescent lights in state buildings with compact fluorescent ones, like O'Malley is doing now, the state might have saved tens of thousands of dollars during his term.

Maybe I was wrong about him raiding the rainy day fund. I thought I'd read that. I'll look around. My apologies if I was mistaken. However, that does not obviate him from substantial raises in fees and property taxes. And I think it's important to note that the money that O'Malley has taken from the fund is for school construction, so as to fully fund Thornton. Maybe you hate children and learning but I don't. Well, I don't hate learning anyway.

I don't understand why you think that calling an extra press conference would cost extra money. State employees, though maybe not his security, are salaried. And if I remember the news that day, the press conference was held outside with daylight providing all the light needed.

JasonL,

Since you're in the learing mood today, I've got a few facts for you. First, O'Malley has NOT fully funded Thronton. That's one of his many broken promises.

And, the up front costs of replacing all incandescent bulbs with flourescent make it so that any true savings will not materialize for years to come. In this case, it will be some time after O'Malley's one term is up and he's nothing but a bad memory.

If there is a deficit, then it should be made up by cutting aid to the local jurisdictions. Their aid has rapidly increased n recent years.

BG and Jason L.

The "rainy day fund" was tapped to ensure the deficit left by the Erlich administration was not larger that it currently is. Don't forget - anything that is not currently funded is due to the previous administration not funding it. Until Sept 30, 2007, we are still bound by Erlich's last budget (FY2007). O'Malley's first budget cycle will be FY2008. Not one dollar of this shortfall can be placed with O'Malley. All the current planning and balancing is to avoid the problems left by the last governor. I think O'Malley can get things in balance, he's steering the utilities commission in the right direction (for the first time in years) and has been vocal in support of renewable energy. I question his support of a proposed third nuke plant in Calvert Co. (increases national security risk) and his support of the $3 billion ICC project. However, MD seems to be turning in the right general direction for a prosperous 21st century.

So long as nuclear plants are properly secured, I have no problem with them. We need more supply then we have here. Of course, any expansion of Calvert Cliffs is likely to take years.

BG from PG, you're wrong about CFL's (Compact Florescent Lights for those that don't know). Replacing a 40w incandescent light with an equivalent CFL saves around $10 per year if it is used for 4 hours a day and lasts 5-7 years. I just bought a 3 pack for $5 at Wal-Mart. The state is probably getting a much better deal than that because of their bulk purchasing power. CFL's easily pay for themselves in the first year and tend to last much longer than traditional bulbs which is a further savings.

And this is a direct quote from an Office of the Governor press release:
"The FY 2008 budget provides $5.2 billion in K-12 Education funding including a $680 million increase in school aid - the largest ever - and $400 million in school construction. The FY 2008 budget fully-funds the Thornton Education plan and provides funding for teacher pension enhancements." FY '08, my friend.

Everything can't happen all at once. He's been in office for all of 6 months. Give it another few months before you start calling anyone a 1 term Governor.

13% increase in the state educationis unlikely to result in l3% higher test scores. Throwing money at a problem will not replace a lazy approach by educators.

Well, a majority of the increased funding is supposed to be for new construction to get students out of those trailer things, I believe. Only time will tell (or someone who's studied this in another state, perhaps) if new class rooms equate to higher test scores.

I went to one of the best and most expensive private high schools in the country (local too, BTW) and took many classes in those trailer thingys. No parents complained about that...and they were paying top dollar! Nor did it affect my ability to learn. Stop whining about temporary classrooms. When you allow illegals to take advantage of public schooling, of course you run into space issues. If you want to get rid of the trailers, don't allow illegals to work here without paying taxes while sending their kids to public schools.

Nine school construction projects in Montgomery County recently had 50% cost overruns. O'Malley's term will be defined by raising lots of taxes to feed a budget that increases education funding by 13% in one year(how can we guarantee that money will be spent efficiently?), paying people "retirement" benefits before age 55 who have not been in military combat and who are working second jobs, and which barely nudges down aid to local governments even though there have been dramatic increases in such aid in recent years. Montgomery County voters enacted a property tax increase limit in l990. Politicians couldn't deal with that so they increased the piggyback income tax 20%. They have run through that money and now are pressuring to exceed that property tax limit if any local aid is cut. The Montgomery
County budget broke $2 billion in FYl998 $3 billion in FY04 and is now above $4 billion while the population has increased less than $20%. We'll see if O'Malley is more interested in helping money-grubbing lobbyists than is keeping the middle class in Maryland.

A Post article on Sunday revealed that state aid to local jurisdictions is $6 billion or 40% of the $15 billion budget However if state aid to local jurisdictions stayed the same percentage of the general budget which it was six years ago, 32%, state aid to localities would be $4.8 billion, not $6 billion. That $1.2 billion increase should be a prime target instead of talking tax increases.