By Donald C. Fry

The dramatically contrasting philosophies in Annapolis regarding addressing the state’s transportation funding crisis and other issues were on full display Monday at the Greater Baltimore Committee’s 2012 General Assembly Legislative Forum in Baltimore.

The compelling disagreement between the leaders of the Democratic majority and Republican minority on a broad array of important fiscal and policy issues facing the state reminds us all of how stiflingly contentious and intransigent it has become in the State House these days.

On issues relating directly to having a competitive business environment, there is precious little agreement on anything, but lawmakers have plenty to say about everything – some of it not entirely factual, some of it just simply ambiguous – as they basically talk past each other.

For example, they even argue over the state’s No. 1 ranking for education, something for which lawmakers in both parties have voted to increase spending by billions over the last decade. Majority party leaders point to that funding commitment as largely responsible for a continuing No. 1 national ranking for Maryland’s public schools.

Minority leaders, however, argue that our state’s No. 1 ranking is tainted by comparatively lower achievement in the state’s urban school districts and by the large percentage of Maryland high school graduates who need remedial English or math when they get to college. These may be arguable, but the legislator who told the GBC audience that Maryland high schools only graduate 50 percent of students was dead wrong. State data show a graduation rate of 87 percent in 2011.

On state spending, majority party leaders told GBC members that the state is reducing operating spending, contending that hundreds of millions of dollars have been “cut” from state budgets over the last several years and that this year’s general fund budget submitted by Governor O’Malley is less than the one he proposed last year.

Minority leaders say the budget is increasing, not decreasing. The governor’s budget summary, which shows a 1.9 percent increase in the general fund budget he submitted, appears to substantiate the minority lawmakers’ assertion on this one.

On energy, the administration is aggressively pushing for development of offshore wind power as a core strategy to lowering long-term energy costs. Opponents label the idea a boondoggle that will only increase energy costs – not lower them.

I could go on, but the most virulent crossfire this year breaks out over the issue of increasing funding for transportation infrastructure. Virtually everyone agrees on the basic facts:

• Maryland has a multi-billion backlog of unfunded-but-needed transportation projects.

• Revenue to Maryland’s transportation fund has severely stagnated primarily because its largest source of revenue – the gas tax – has not been increased in 20 years, a period of time during which 37 other states have found a way to increase their gas tax.

Almost everyone in Annapolis agrees that something must be done about transportation infrastructure sometime.

Most legislative leaders say the time is now, a position that a very large contingent of business advocates agree with. Leading lawmakers say they are poised to support measures, including potentially a gas tax increase, to generate between $500 million and $800 million in new revenue to the transportation fund and more than 30,000 new jobs in construction and related industries. All are awaiting a proposal from the governor.

Minority opponents virulently oppose the notion of a gas tax increase and virtually any other measures to increase transportation funding. Among other things, they tell audiences that all of the increased funding will go to transit projects in the Baltimore and D.C. regions, implying that none of it will go to rural road projects or that transit projects are not deserving of state funding or serve a legitimate purpose for a segment of our state’s citizens.

This harkens back to 25-year-old rural-versus-urban battles in Annapolis.

In the middle of all of this, a top legislative leader in Annapolis tells the media that a transportation funding measure is not likely to pass this year, even before a specific funding proposal has been made.

Meanwhile, on the topic of “raiding” the transportation fund for other uses, General Assembly leaders say all raided funds have been repaid over the years. Minority lawmakers say not so. One says that transportation funding should not be increased because he doesn’t trust his fellow lawmakers not to raid the fund even if they pass a law to prohibit it.

These are just examples of what passes for public dialogue among lawmakers so far in 2012. There are many others. The best we can hope for is that our elected leaders can find a way to talk to each other, not around each other, between now and April 9 when the session ends.

Donald C. Fry is president and CEO of the Greater Baltimore Committee. He is a regular contributor to Center Maryland.

Recent Center Maryland columns by Donald C. Fry:

Government and business teamwork: an essential prerequisite for economic growth

The things people say on Opening Day in Annapolis

Maryland Stadium Authority detractors prove spectacularly inaccurate

In 2012 only one thing should matter for state lawmakers: jobs

USM decision aims for something better than a merger

Recognizing selfless acts of community service in the private sector

Deadline approaches for businesses to suggest regulations to change or eliminate

Minority and women entrepreneurs provide lessons in seizing opportunity

Aberdeen Proving Ground: Maryland’s newest economic powerhouse

Baltimore region endures recession losses, but drives state’s modest jobs comeback

Back in 2004, at an evening reception in Annapolis a couple of weeks before the Maryland primary, I was surprised to find myself right behind state Sen. Richard Colburn in the buffet line.

Colburn was trying to oust Congressman Wayne Gilchrest in the Republican primary that year, and I figured he’d be spending every free hour meeting voters in the 1st Congressional district. So I asked him why he was in the Loews Hotel in Annapolis instead of in Romancoke or Salisbury or Denton. Colburn looked down at the steam table of stuffed ham before him and then gave me a “you’ve got to be kidding” look.

“Free food,” he replied with succinct eloquence.

No one was surprised when Colburn went on to lose to Gilchrest by 24 points.
So here we are in another presidential election year, and seven Maryland state legislators are running for Congress. Most have about as much chance as Colburn of winding up there.

But all are chasing the dream, however far-fetched, seizing on the quadrennial opportunity in presidential years that enables members of the legislature to seek federal office without risking their seats in Annapolis.

Maryland state legislators are elected to Congress all the time. At present, half of the members of the state’s congressional delegation — Sen. Ben Cardin (D) and Reps. Andy Harris (R ), Steny Hoyer (D), Elijah Cummings (D) and Chris Van Hollen (D) — are Annapolis alumni. Of that group, only Cummings — in a special election that did not require him to sacrifice his seat in the House of Delegates — was sent to Congress in a presidential year.

Far longer is the list of Maryland legislators who ran futile campaigns for Congress, particularly in years that coincided with a White House election.

It’s hard to run for Congress under any circumstance. In Maryland, it’s particularly hard for legislators to run in presidential years.

Over the last several cycles, the primaries in presidential years have taken place anywhere from February to April — in the dead of winter or early spring, when lawmakers are buried in their work in Annapolis, and voters and the media are preoccupied by the ongoing presidential race. It’s hard for a congressional candidate who’s a state legislator to raise money, put together a campaign apparatus, and spend significant time on the campaign trail while he or she is stuck in Annapolis.

Yet many do it — lured, no doubt, by the knowledge that even if they fail spectacularly, they still have their State House sinecures to fall back on. All are no doubt serious about wanting to serve in Congress. But that doesn’t mean that they’re all serious about doing what they need to do to get there.

This year, state Senate Majority Leader Rob Garagiola has an even chance — maybe even a better than even chance — in the newly-drawn 6th congressional district, which is now highly favorable for Democrats.

Two other Annapolis lawmakers, state Sen. David Brinkley and Del. Kathy Afzali, are trying to oust veteran Congressman Roscoe Bartlett in the 6th district Republican primary. Both are appealing political commodities who would probably make fine members of Congress — and many political insiders, both Republicans and Democrats, believe Brinkley would make a stronger candidate than Bartlett in the general election given the district’s new contours and demographics.

But both have precious little time to make their case against the entrenched incumbent, whatever his political shortcomings. And the fact that they’re both running means they’ll be splitting the anti-Bartlett vote.

In the 2nd congressional district, state Sen. Nancy Jacobs and Del. Rick Impallaria are competing in the April 3 Republican primary for the right to take on Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D). The winner will then have seven months to convince voters to fire the incumbent.

The same is true in the 5th congressional district, where state House Minority Leader Tony O’Donnell (R) is taking on Hoyer. Hoyer and Ruppersberger remain strong favorites for re-election, but the legislators represent their toughest opponents in years. If things go badly for the Democrats in this legislative session, if a national Republican wave suddenly materializes in the fall, those races could get interesting.

Then there is the quixotic campaign of state Sen. Anthony Muse, who is trying to upend Cardin the Democratic Senate primary. Kweisi Mfume, a leading figure in Maryland and national politics, couldn’t beat Cardin six years ago, so there’s no reason to believe Muse can.

Assuming that most of these legislators are going to return to Annapolis rather than advance to Capitol Hill, let’s take a quick look at the last five presidential election cycles and see what current and former colleagues they’ll be joining in the losers’ circle. You may be surprised by some of the names you see as we take this little walk down Memory Lane.

In 1992, right after a round of redistricting, U.S. Rep. Tom McMillen (D) was forced to run for re-election in mostly unfamiliar territory. He wound up drawing several Democratic primary challengers, including then-Dels. Samuel Q. Johnson III and John Astle. McMillen won the primary with 55 percent of the vote to 24 for Johnson and 14 for Astle. McMillen went on to lose the general election to Gilchrest in a member vs. member contest; Astle was elected to the state Senate two years later.

That same year, in a newly-drawn congressional district designed to elect an African-American, then-state Sen. Albert Wynn narrowly won a crowded Democratic primary. Also running, as the most prominent white candidate in the race, was then-Del. Dana Dembrow, who finished third.

In 1996, a conservative first-term delegate, Barrie Ciliberti, ran against then-U.S. Rep. Connie Morella in the 8th district Republican primary. He lost by 38 points and quickly faded into obscurity. That same year, then-Del. John Morgan was the Republican nominee against Hoyer, taking 43 percent of the vote — one of the best showings ever by a Hoyer GOP challenger.

But the big scrum involving state legislators that year was the 20-candidate Democratic primary in the spring special election to replace Mfume, when he left Congress to become president of the NAACP. Cummings, then the state House speaker pro tem, finished at the top of the heap, with 37 percent. Baltimore minister Frank Reid was his closest competition, taking 24 percent. Democratic primary also-rans included state Sen. Delores Kelley (10 percent), then-Del. Ken Montague (3 percent), then-Del. Tiger Davis (2 percent) and then-Del. Salima Siler Marriott (2 percent).

In 2000, then-Del. Bennett Bozman was the Democratic nominee against Gilchrest, but he was clobbered, taking just 35 percent of the vote. Then-Del. Tim Hutchins had the same anemic percentage that year as the Republican nominee against Hoyer.

But the prize for futility in 2000 was then-Del. Jake Mohorovic, running in the 2nd district when Republican Bob Ehrlich was the congressman there. He lost the Democratic primary to farmer Ken Bosley, a frequent candidate, by 11 points.

In 2004, in addition to Colburn’s flame-out against Gilchrest, state Sen. E.J. Pipkin, just two years after winning his seat in Annapolis by ousting veteran Sen. Walter Baker (D), was the Republican nominee against popular U.S. Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D). She beat him 2-1 even though he poured millions of dollars of his own into the campaign.

Pipkin tried again four years later, joining Andy Harris in the Republican primary against Gilchrest. The tally: Harris 43 percent, Gilchrest 33 percent and Pipkin 20 percent. Harris went on to lose narrowly to Democrat Frank Kratovil in the general election that year, but beat him in a rematch in 2010. And thanks to redistricting, it looks as if he’ll be in Congress for a long time.

So yes, there is sometimes a political afterlife for congressional losers who serve in the legislature. But just as often, there is political obscurity. You pays your money, you takes your chances.

Josh Kurtz is editor of Environment & Energy Daily, a Capitol Hill publication. He can be reached at joshkurtz92@gmail.com.

Recent Center Maryland columns by Josh Kurtz:

Miller’s Crossing

Can’t You Hear Me Knocking?

O’Malley and the Mod Squad

Jim Rosapepe’s Boot & Roscoe Bartlett’s Poll

Walter Dozier, RIP

Redistricting, By the Numbers and in Black and White

Living in Infamy

Holiday Green and Anthony Brown

All I Want for Christmas Is Bob Ehrlich’s Book (Plus: A Meditation on Tom Perez)

By Donald C. Fry

The road to job creation and economic recovery will be smoother and stronger if state government partners with business to develop policies rather than imposing policies on the private sector. There is an opportunity in the 2012 General Assembly session and going forward to not waste energy by having government and business work at odds with one another, which we all know does not work well for either party.

Everyone remembers the great tech tax battle of 2007-2008. A late-session attempt to plug a $200 million revenue hole during budget deliberations initiated an all-out pitched battle between the tech industry and the state legislature. The tax passed with no input from business, no hearings and no opportunity for industry to argue against it, much less be involved in developing it. A tremendous amount of effort was expended to get it repealed and the net result is a lingering sense of unease between the tech industry and government.

Scarcely a year later, the biotech industry went toe-to-toe with the Maryland Department of Business and Economic Development when it sought to issue new regulations regarding the way the biotech tax credit was administered to young biotechnology companies.

The tax credit is one of the sacred cows of the biotech industry and a model for the nation. Companies did not want anything changed. They were just happy to have it available to them. If, for the sake of efficiencies, changes had to be made, the biotech industry wanted to be right there at the crafting table helping and advising. As it turned out, the regulations were not changed, but Maryland’s young industry remains confused about why it had not been consulted.

The bottom line is that usually companies in an industry know what they want and need. They can be invaluable resources and formidable opponents. For the most part, neither government nor industry comes to negotiations with a negative intent. When government acts, it is legitimately trying to improve a process or solve a problem. The same is true of industry. When companies ask for tax relief, or regulatory relief, it is not out of greed. It stems from a sincere desire to improve the functioning and welfare of the industry and to create more jobs.

One of the Greater Baltimore Committee’s core pillars for a competitive business environment is “government leadership that unites with business as a partner.” This is neither an unlikely nor an unattainable goal. Both government and industry bring expertise, experience and expectations to any negotiations for change. But both have to be at the table from the beginning for the outcome to be positive. Business can’t be seen as an after-thought.

Governor Martin O’Malley’s indication last fall that business regulation reform will be a signature issue for this year’s legislative session is a good sign. This is an initiative that merits strong follow-up. It’s also an initiative to which business can and should have significant input and work in partnership with government for maximum benefit.

This can be the year that a new public-private team is formed to build a strong, smooth road to economic recovery. Let’s hope that this window of opportunity is not missed.

Donald C. Fry is president and CEO of the Greater Baltimore Committee. He is a regular contributor to Center Maryland.

Recent Center Maryland columns by Donald C. Fry:

The things people say on Opening Day in Annapolis

Maryland Stadium Authority detractors prove spectacularly inaccurate

In 2012 only one thing should matter for state lawmakers: jobs

USM decision aims for something better than a merger

Recognizing selfless acts of community service in the private sector

Deadline approaches for businesses to suggest regulations to change or eliminate

Minority and women entrepreneurs provide lessons in seizing opportunity

Aberdeen Proving Ground: Maryland’s newest economic powerhouse

Baltimore region endures recession losses, but drives state’s modest jobs comeback

Center Maryland columnist Josh Kurtz, the editor of the Capitol Hill publication Environment & Energy Daily, will be a featured guest on Thursday’s NewsTalk with Bruce DePuyt.

Topics are expected to include the upcoming gay marriage debate in the Maryland General Assembly, the DREAM Act, and other issues facing the legislature.

NewsChannel 8’s interview show airs each weekday morning at 10 a.m., and also streams live at news8.net. Daily replays are at 11:30 p.m.

By Delegate C. William Frick

Let me start with the bad news. By our best estimates, Maryland spends nearly $4 billion every year through tax expenditures – the panoply of credits, exemptions, deductions, and subtraction modifications that permeate our tax code, giving tax reductions or cash to select individuals and businesses.

Now here’s the really bad news. We can only rely on our “best estimates” because in many instances, Maryland does not even know how much it spends through tax expenditures, or who receives the benefit. There is often no way for taxpayers or policymakers to know whether these tax incentives are serving the public good.

This is the backdrop for legislation I have developed with colleagues on the Maryland House Ways and Means Committee. The Tax Credit Evaluation Act would force 29 of the state’s tax credits to undergo a simple cost-benefit analysis every five years. If this review demonstrates that the credit is inefficient or unnecessary, it would be allowed to expire. If the program is found to be effective, the Assembly would renew the program, and may choose to further enhance or expand it.

The Tax Credit Evaluation Act would help put tax expenditures on the same footing as traditional expenditures. When the state spends money directly, each dollar spent is scrutinized through the Governor’s budget and the General Assembly’s appropriations process. Tax credits, by contrast, sit safely away in the state tax code rewarding select taxpayers, and rarely face meaningful review.

This is common sense legislation. Government should always know that it is spending the public’s money wisely, whether through appropriations or tax credits. This obligation is even greater today, as we continue to face painful decisions about raising taxes or cutting services.

In her op-ed published January 9, Margie Anne Bonnett argues against this simple cost-benefit approach, because the mere possibility that business tax credits would expire would harm the state’s business climate. Bonnett asks, “Should Marylanders Get Mad?”

Absolutely. Marylanders should get mad. They should be upset that any state program would not be justified by a meaningful understanding of the program’s costs and benefits. And they should be outraged at the fiscal NIMBY-ism expressed by Bonnett, who would have us “investigate” general fund and transportation appropriations, but forbid similar treatment of tax expenditures for business. Are these credits really so sacred that we dare not put them up for review twice a decade?

Make no mistake, the Tax Credit Evaluation Act does not destroy tax incentives for businesses or any other taxpayers. It is just a first step toward accountability and transparency for millions in annual expenditures that face little of either.

A Maryland Daily Record editorial summarized the argument in its four-word headline: “tax giveaways need scrutiny.” Particularly in this period of strained budgets, they do indeed.

Delegate C. William Frick is a Democrat who represents District 16 in Montgomery County.

With a wink and a nod and a few taps on a computer keyboard, the wiliest member of the Maryland General Assembly may have effectively ended the career of the second wiliest — even though the two have been allies for decades.

Senate President Mike Miller’s desire to keep a portion of Prince George’s County in his Southern Maryland district going forward has left House Judiciary Committee Chairman Joe Vallario a man without a political home.

Miller has been warning people that “my delegates” — meaning Vallario and Jim Proctor, the two Democrats who represent District 27 along with him — would not be happy with the new district map that Gov. Martin O’Malley officially unveiled last week. Chances are, he’s right.

The current District 27 is divided into two parts — the Prince George’s side, which Vallario and Proctor represent in the House, and a Calvert County portion, represented by freshman Republican Del. Mark Fisher. If the new map goes into effect, it will have three parts, one in Prince George’s and Charles counties, one with a sliver of Prince George’s but mostly in Calvert County, and a third wholly within the northern part of Calvert.

That doesn’t sound radically different at first glance — except that Vallario’s home is now outside of District 27. He finds himself in a newly-configured District 23B, in the Bowie vicinity — a district where two-thirds of the population is black.

Proctor probably isn’t overjoyed with his new district boundaries, either. He finds himself with a lot of unfamiliar territory in the new District 27A — though about 60 percent of it is in his current district. And he could face a challenge from Tamara Davis Brown, a lawyer and local Democratic leader who ran unsuccessfully for Prince George’s County Council in 2010 and ran unsuccessfully against Proctor and Vallario in 2006.

District 27B may be teed up for Wilson Parran, a favorite of Miller’s who is a former Calvert County commissioner and is currently an assistant secretary at the state Department of Natural Resources.

And there are even more dominoes in this district as a result of the new legislative map: District 27C could see the return of former Democratic Del. George Owings, the ultimate Southern Maryland good ol’ boy, last seen attempting to challenge O’Malley in the 2010 Democratic primary. The new District 27A, meanwhile, is being teed up for Tamara Brown Davis, a lawyer and local Democratic leader who ran unsuccessfully for Prince George’s County Council in 2010 and ran unsuccessfully against Proctor and Vallario in 2006.

But it is Vallario’s fate that is most astounding. Miller and Vallario have represented the same district for 37 years (Miller spent another four years representing the district in the House before being elevated to the Senate in 1974). The two are trial lawyers who travel in the same Prince George’s County-Southern Maryland judicial circles. Their legal practices flourished in tandem with their legislative careers. They have the same Dixiecrat political roots and share the same views, for the most part. And they’ve been two of the most powerful men in Annapolis for decades: Miller has been Senate president since 1987 and was chairman of the Judicial Proceedings Committee before then. Vallario has been chairman of House Judiciary since 1993.

It looked as if Vallario was going to face a tough primary challenge in 2010, when Percy Allston, a police union leader, ran for a House seat, targeting Vallario. Miller, according to knowledgeable sources, quietly put out the word that he could live with Allston, that it wouldn’t be the worst thing for the district to have additional African-American representation. But when Allston didn’t raise a lot of money or gain any traction, Miller cast his lot with Vallario again.

This time, for Vallario, Miller is out of the equation. If Vallario is going to want another term in 2014, when he will be 77 years old, he will probably have to strike an alliance with Del. Marvin Holmes, who currently represents District 23B.

The District 23 alignment is also something of a story. In recent elections, the city of Bowie has had two seats in District 23A. But under the new map, Bowie is split between 23A and 23B — and veteran Del. Jim Hubbard, who has been in the Legislature since 1992, appears imperiled as a consequence. District 23B will have two seats.

Will Holmes offer Vallario a political lifeline? Anything is possible. But there are myriad racial cross-currents just beneath the surface already in District 23 — due largely to the fact that a white state senator, Douglas J.J. Peters, is representing a district that is about 60 percent black. There doesn’t appear to be much gain for Holmes in embracing Vallario — certainly not while other issues in the district are being sorted out.

If Vallario is indeed a lame duck, it will be interesting to see how he comports himself on the Judiciary Committee in the three years ahead. He has been, through the years, an impediment to many progressive pieces of legislation. Does he soften in his final years, thinking about his legacy? Does he take an even harder line than before? What happens to gay marriage while a wounded Vallario wields the gavel?

At the same time, there appears to be some confusion over the final boundaries in Miller’s District 27. George Owings, the Vietnam combat veteran who spent 16 years in the House before becoming Bob Ehrlich’s secretary of Veterans Affairs, thinks he has a clear path to a political comeback in District 27C.

“For all intents and purposes, with a few modifications, it’s practically my old district,” Owings told me the other day.

But after initially being drawn into a district that runs farther south into Calvert County, it appears as if Fisher, the Republican who ousted then-Del. Sue Kullen, a Democrat, in 2010, is now still in 27C, the district where Owings is planning to run. So Owings may find himself in a competitive battle, rather than the cakewalk he was expecting.

Parran, who sought to replace Owings when Owings joined Ehrlich’s cabinet in 2004, appears to be looking at an open seat. Kullen, who now works for U.S. Sen. Ben Cardin (D) and spent six years in Annapolis after replacing Owings, also had a notion of trying to return to the House, but it isn’t clear where her opportunity lies.

What is clear is that there are a thousand interesting nuggets in the new legislative district map — and many are still being discovered.

Editor’s Note: This column has been updated since its initial posting.

Josh Kurtz is editor of Environment & Energy Daily, a Capitol Hill publication. He can be reached at joshkurtz92@gmail.com.

Recent Center Maryland columns by Josh Kurtz:

Can’t You Hear Me Knocking?

O’Malley and the Mod Squad

Jim Rosapepe’s Boot & Roscoe Bartlett’s Poll

Walter Dozier, RIP

Redistricting, By the Numbers and in Black and White

Living in Infamy

Holiday Green and Anthony Brown

All I Want for Christmas Is Bob Ehrlich’s Book (Plus: A Meditation on Tom Perez)

Road to Nowhere

Hoyer on Currie: ‘The system works’

Why Glenn Ivey Will Win — And Why He Won’t

By Donald C. Fry

Lots of things get said on the opening day of the Maryland General Assembly, so it’s difficult to make serious assumptions about session outcomes based on what leading state lawmakers say on the first day of the session.

Nevertheless, first-day remarks by Governor Martin O’Malley, Senate President Mike Miller, and House Speaker Michael Busch clearly signaled that increasing funding for transportation infrastructure, Chesapeake Bay restoration, and education – both in the classroom and in the form of school construction – are key priorities for them this session.

Governor O’Malley generated a flurry of media buzz and subsequent talk-show chatter when, during an opening day radio taping, he mused that a sales tax increase could be a way of straightforwardly raising the magnitude of new revenue needed to address the state’s many fiscal challenges.

“If I had my druthers, I’d rather do the one penny on the sales tax. It gives us flexibility, have that address our operating needs, and then transition that into the sort of revenue stream that allows us to do greater bonding capacity for the transportation. That’s what I’d like to do,” O’Malley told WEAA radio show host Marc Steiner, who had asked him what other ideas he would contemplate, besides the gas tax, to raise new revenue.

The governor made it clear, however, that he was thinking out loud and that whatever fiscal strategy is developed will be the product of discussions with top legislative leaders and would ultimately require support from a majority of the state House and Senate.

As an aside, think about the furor the governor’s honest answer created. He’s being blasted for putting an option, admittedly unpopular, on the table. Governing is, after all, about problem-solving. That process usually involves considering all of the options.

I don’t know about you, but when making challenging public policy decisions, I would much prefer my elected officials to openly consider all the alternatives available rather than disregard options just because they fear political retribution.

In any case, most in Annapolis do not expect a penny increase on the sales tax to be included in any legislative proposals that are anticipated to be put forth soon by either the governor or legislative leaders.

Transportation and education seemed to be the two top business-related fiscal issues of discussion on Opening Day.

Governor O’Malley, Miller and Busch all agreed that a way must be found to strengthen revenue to the state’s transportation fund – a major priority of most business leaders across the state. But there have been no clear signals as to where the consensus among the three leaders might lie. Miller has reportedly said he thinks that a 15-cent increase in the gas tax rate over three years, which was recommended by the state’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Transportation Funding, is “too much.” A transportation funding proposal from the governor is expected very soon.

“Nothing happens in a vacuum down here,” Busch said. He noted that passage of a gas tax increase would depend largely on strong support among state lawmakers from major central Maryland counties, including Prince George’s, Montgomery, and Howard, and Baltimore City.

Meanwhile, there appears to be solid agreement among leaders in Annapolis that education funding will remain a top priority. Busch said that education advocates can expect a full level of funding in accordance with the Thornton Commission recommendations that have driven more than a decade of major state funding increases for K-12 education. But both Miller and Busch expressed frustration that a number of Maryland counties, in receiving increased state education funding, have opted not to maintain an appropriate level of local funding, either keeping local school funding flat or, in some cases, reducing local funding for schools in the face of the General Assembly’s massive ongoing commitment.

Miller suggested that state school construction funding should be packaged with adequate local funding for schools and with pension reform in local jurisdictions. “The fact that the counties continue to set salaries and we (the state) have to pick up the cost of the pension is ridiculous,” he said.

The debate over transportation funding will serve to illustrate a long-running differences between legislative leaders who feel driven by constituent needs to develop funding solutions to meet those needs and critics who instinctively oppose such funding proposals.

“Clearly we need an influx of money to the Transportation Trust Fund,” Miller said, citing long commute times and congestion in the Baltimore and D.C. areas. “It’s an economic development issue. It’s a quality of life issue. It’s a jobs issue. That doesn’t help our General Fund budget, but it’s going to help put people back to work.”

In the debate over transportation funding, the problem is that there is backlog of unfunded transportation projects and the some of nation’s worst traffic congestion is in the Baltimore-Washington corridor, says Busch.

“The question is, particularly for the business community, do you need some relief in the Washington suburbs? Do you need some relief in the Baltimore suburbs, and how do you go about accomplishing it?” says Busch.

About critics, he says, “you have to ask them: if there’s a need out there, what are they going to support? The question is, are you going to address it, or do you just let it go by the wayside?”

Donald C. Fry is president and CEO of the Greater Baltimore Committee. He is a regular contributor to Center Maryland.

Recent Center Maryland columns by Donald C. Fry:

Maryland Stadium Authority detractors prove spectacularly inaccurate

In 2012 only one thing should matter for state lawmakers: jobs

USM decision aims for something better than a merger

Recognizing selfless acts of community service in the private sector

Deadline approaches for businesses to suggest regulations to change or eliminate

Minority and women entrepreneurs provide lessons in seizing opportunity

Aberdeen Proving Ground: Maryland’s newest economic powerhouse

Baltimore region endures recession losses, but drives state’s modest jobs comeback

State web site seeks business feedback on regulations

Job-creation impact of transportation gets lawmakers’ attention

Sluggish growth forecast for Maryland not a recession, but is it ‘okay?’

Mobility: the ultimate jobs issue

Tech jobs are here, more are coming, but can we fill them?

Breaking free of transportation funding limbo in D.C. and Annapolis

He’s doing it again.

Anne Arundel County Executive John Leopold (R ) is knocking on doors again. Which means he must be running for something, right?

Well, probably. But in a recent interview, Leopold, who is term limited in 2014, says the incessant door knocking, which he has made an integral part of his political identity and appeal, is also a vital way of doing business.

“There’s no substitute for face-to-face contact,” he says. “You learn so many things.”

But Leopold does not hide the fact that, even though he will be 71 in 2014, he believes he has a political future — and that he is already weighing his options. He does not rule out the possibility of running for governor, though with Harford County Executive David Craig (R ) already moving to do so, that seems unlikely. A race for state comptroller is, in Leopold’s words, a “realistic” possibility, particularly if the incumbent, Peter Franchot (D), decides to run for governor. So is a run for state Senate, assuming his senator, Bryan Simonaire, follows through on his plans to run for county executive.

Leopold has yet to go door-to-door on a statewide basis in the early part of this election cycle — though it’s something he’s done before. In years past, when he has sought to become an at-large delegate to the Republican National Convention, he has turned up on the doorsteps of members of the state GOP executive committee to press his case.

And even if Leopold is limiting the door-knocking to Anne Arundel County these days, he and Craig have traveled to different parts of the state over the past several months, offering trainings for Republican activists and potential candidates, stepping in where there has been a void within the formal party apparatus. It’s a painless way to establish contacts and collect chits — and showcase their records.

“David and I are the only Republican county executives in the state and we both govern pragmatically because that’s the nature of the job,” Leopold says.

Leopold’s emergence as a possible statewide candidate comes at an interesting time for the Maryland GOP. The party has been down and out for as long as anyone can remember, disheartened and disorganized. And yet there’s something happening here:

With state Sen. Nancy Jacobs challenging U.S. Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D) and state Del. Tony O’Donnell taking on U.S. House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D), Maryland Republicans are fielding two of their strongest challengers in a long while. You’d be hard-pressed to find anyone willing to bet that Jacobs and O’Donnell are going to win, but they may do better than the insiders think. Funny things happen in redistricting years, and at the very least Jacobs and O’Donnell will force the congressional incumbents to work hard for their re-elections.

The crowded Republican primary in the 6th congressional district, even it becomes contentious, even if longtime incumbent Rep. Roscoe Bartlett is ousted, is probably healthy for the GOP at a time when Democrats are targeting the seat heavily. At the very least, Republican activists there will have geared up early for battle, and the ultimate GOP nominee will be battle tested.

Beyond that, Leopold senses something in the Maryland electorate that could loosen the Democrats’ grip on statewide elections.

“These are different times,” he says. “There’s a lot of anger. A lot of anxiety. Redistricting fits in with that…I think there are electoral opportunities that you might never have had before.”

As he imagines a possible run for comptroller, he envisions a simple message: “Should the people of the state want three liberal Democrats from Montgomery or Prince George’s County on the Board of Public Works?”

Of course, Leopold is an unlikely and imperfect messenger for any Republican renaissance in Maryland. While his record is saleable and his work ethic unassailable, he is at best a quirky and at worst a fatally flawed candidate for statewide office.

Leopold has been buffeted by a series of unwelcome revelations. He’s been sued for sexual harassment. A grand jury has been impaneled and is weighing whether he improperly used government resources for political purposes after he sent a member of his security detail to pick up a political contribution. He was accused of suspicious behavior in a county car in the company of an unidentified woman.

Leopold has chosen not to address these allegations in public, and refuses to do so with Center Maryland. But it’s a safe bet that Leopold would not be publicly contemplating his next political move if he felt the accusations were going to hurt him politically.

After all, these stories were already circulating when he ran for re-election in 2010, and he wound up winning pretty handily, at a time when his own polls showed he had 98 percent name recognition. Then again, his Democratic challenger was Joanna Conti, a nice woman with some political potential who had just fallen off the turnip truck after years in Colorado, including an unsuccessful bid for Congress there in 2004 (Democrats clearly need to pick up their game in Anne Arundel County).

Leopold shrugs off the allegations and prefers to talk about his record as county executive, which he‘ll gladly match against any potential opponent — and which makes him hard to fix on the ideological spectrum. The highlights range from fiscal austerity to the installation of 2,000 new lights in high crime areas; from new science initiatives and parenting programs at the community college to increased workforce development funding. He’s tough on illegal immigration but touts his land preservation initiatives.

“I believe that Republicans, to be successful anywhere, need to follow the Teddy Roosevelt model” on conservation matters, he says.

Leopold also has a most unusual political and life journey to talk about. Though he grew up in Philadelphia, he wound up in Hawaii in the 1960’s to teach English at a Chinese school. He was elected to the state Board of Education in 1968 and later to the state legislature. In 1974, he was the Republican nominee for governor.

In Hawaii, Leopold honed the political skills that he’s well known for now. By his own estimation, he was the first candidate anywhere to wave signs along a highway. Campaigning for governor, he not only went door to door, but he also went office to office to meet workers. He says he also went to every bowling alley in Oahu, campaigning lane to lane.

When he moved to Maryland later in the 1970’s he was elected to the legislature almost immediately. He served in the House until 1990, lost a bid for state Senate that year, then won a different House seat in 1994 and served there until his election as county executive in 2006.

Leopold’s political won-lost record is 19-3. He has spent 38 years in elective office. But what it all adds up to going forward is anybody’s guess.

Leopold doesn’t have traditional political skills. He’s not a gifted orator or much of a back-slapper. He’s not a mastermind legislative tactician. He has no family to trot out for the cameras and fewer true friends than most politicians.

Still, you’ll be hard-pressed to find anyone in Maryland politics as driven as John Leopold, or with as much chutzpah — making him impervious to conventional political criticism. Political foes — Democrats and Republicans alike — underestimate him at their peril. After all, this is a man who, in response to a reporter’s question, says, jocularly but with complete sincerity, that one of his “responsibilities” is “to not be boring.”

His next act, it‘s fair to say, certainly won‘t be.

Josh Kurtz is editor of Environment & Energy Daily, a Capitol Hill publication. He can be reached at joshkurtz92@gmail.com.

Recent Center Maryland columns by Josh Kurtz:

O’Malley and the Mod Squad

Jim Rosapepe’s Boot & Roscoe Bartlett’s Poll

Walter Dozier, RIP

Redistricting, By the Numbers and in Black and White

Living in Infamy

Holiday Green and Anthony Brown

All I Want for Christmas Is Bob Ehrlich’s Book (Plus: A Meditation on Tom Perez)

Road to Nowhere

Hoyer on Currie: ‘The system works’

Why Glenn Ivey Will Win — And Why He Won’t

By Margie Anne Bonnett

In recent weeks, a bill being proposed by Delegate William Frick related to Maryland tax credit programs has been attracting attention in the media. Delegate Frick argues that his proposal is a fiscally prudent effort in tight budget times. However, I argue if the Montgomery County Democrat’s legislation is approved by the 2012 General Assembly, Marylanders should be worried, even mad, about its long-term effect on our state’s business climate.

An article in the Baltimore Business Journal explained that Delegate Frick’s proposal would require an analysis of all state tax credit programs every five years – and that each tax credit program would automatically terminate unless it could be demonstrated that the particular tax credit program was being used effectively. This would cover everything from tax breaks for locating businesses in enterprise zones to support for child care expenses.

Though noble and reasonable on the surface, Delegate Frick’s effort makes Maryland look less attractive as a place for businesses to relocate — or even stay. In fact, I would even argue, once Virginia and Pennsylvania economic development authorities discover Delegate Frick’s proposal, they will further encourage and persuade businesses to investigate their offerings while talking negatively about Maryland’s business climate. And at a time of high unemployment, how does this proposal encourage Maryland job growth?

If Delegate Frick is so concerned about the loss of potential tax revenue, then why not propose legislation that investigates the allocation of Maryland’s General Fund revenues? Or, why not investigate how the transportation fund resources have been managed or –- mismanaged –- prompting a proposed gas tax hike on Marylanders? It seems there’s enough to explore regarding the way the state allocates or misallocates resources. To me, Delegate Frick’s proposal acts as a punishment to Maryland businesses and entrepreneurs.

As a call to action, I ask Delegate Frick to reconsider his proposal and truly analyze the impact it will cause. In addition, I also ask that he investigate our nearby competing states to see what they will offer to persuade future companies looking to grow, innovate, locate, and provide jobs.

And, I finally ask, has Delegate Frick ever considered what companies maintain their headquarters in Maryland? What businesses truly provide manufacturing? What businesses are considering expanding into our state to create jobs? Compared to other areas of the country, our state falls short –- and it’s not because of our size.

Margie Anne Bonnett is Vice President at Maryland Sales & Marketing Associates and an Associate Professor at Towson University in the College of Business and Economics. This is her first opinion piece for Center Maryland.

It’s that time of year again to decide who had the biggest impact on Central Maryland in 2011 and should be named the Corridor Inc. Person of the Year. The nominees have been finalized, and now it’s up to readers to determine who will receive top honors. Click here to cast your vote. Voting will remain open through the end of January.

The Person of the Year Awards Reception will be held on Thursday, February 16, 2012 at the Hotel at Arundel Preserve in Hanover, Md. Early registration (through January 20) is $45 per person. Registration is $60 after January 20 and $70 at the event. To register, click here.

To reserve a table at the event, contact Aliza Rosen at (410) 243-5725 x104 or arosen@corridorinc.com.

To become a sponsor of the event or to place a congratulatory message in the highly anticipated Person of the Year issue of Corridor Inc. Magazine, contact Gregory Poehlman at (443) 760-1400 or gpoehlman@corridorinc.com.