U. S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner is adding his voice to growing calls among public officials and advocates for “balanced” approaches to policy-making as our nation and our state claw their ways out of a debilitating recession.

“The shock of the crisis in 2008 and 2009 was truly overwhelming,” Geither said yesterday to a capacity audience of Greater Baltimore Committee executives and CEOs gathered at the Baltimore Marriott Waterfront Hotel. “The level of panic you saw across much of the financial system and across the American business community was incredibly strong.”

The fact that traumatized business owners and managers were not sure when or how the U.S. would come out of the recession has had long-lasting effects on economic growth because of lingering business tentativeness and caution.

Nurturing economic recovery amid the “aftershocks and scars” of the financial crisis coupled with overcoming challenges to U.S. competitiveness – including education weakness, income stagnation, health care costs, deteriorating infrastructure, and poverty rates – will require “a carefully designed, balanced package of long-term reforms to restore fiscal sustainability,” Geithner said.

Even in a tentative economic recovery, “a credible strategy for economic growth requires a willingness to do things, not just to cut things,” Geithner said. “If you try to restore fiscal balance without a penny of additional revenue, then you have to cut deeply—too deeply—into critical functions of government.”

Others talking about “balance” these days include Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, who calls his administration’s fiscal strategy of coupling budget cuts with tax increases a “balanced approach.”

Thomas L. Friedman offered a compelling perspective on the topic of balance and public policy in a March 13 New York Times opinion piece.

Friedman passes on to readers a compelling, insightful definition of capitalism from David Rothkopf, the CEO and editor-in-chief of Foreign Policy Magazine, who has written a new book, “Power, Inc.” about the epic rivalry between big business and government.

“America’s success for over 200 years was largely due to its healthy, balanced public-private partnership – where government provided the institutions, rules, safety nets, education, research and infrastructure to empower the private sector to innovate, invest and take the risks that promote growth and jobs,” Friedman wrote, paraphrasing Rothkopf.

“When the private sector overwhelms the public, you get the 2008 subprime crisis. When the public overwhelms the private, you get choking regulations.”

This observation should be imbedded in the minds of all in business and government alike.
The trick, in both Washington and Annapolis, is to discern specifically where the most effective “balance” lies in making public policy.

To the GBC audience, Geithner contended that “the basic arithmetic of fiscal and economic policy is not political.” He’s right. It shouldn’t be, but these days it quickly becomes highly political in legislative bodies in Washington, Annapolis, and almost anywhere else where elected officials gather to enact things.

To be sure, in finding balance, the stakes are high for politicians. But they are even higher for the private-sector employers and employees who ultimately drive our economic growth and the revenue it generates for our government.

Geithner’s audience yesterday – The Greater Baltimore Committee – offers public policymakers its own road map for balance in the form of eight core pillars for a good business climate contained in the GBC report, “Gaining the Competitive Edge.”

The core pillars are: government that partners with business, a highly-educated workforce that meets business needs, streamlined and stable regulatory policies, a fair and competitive tax structure, competitive costs of doing business, superior and reliably-funded transportation infrastructure, strategic investment in business growth and a coordinated, well-funded business marketing strategy for the state.

To those in business, these core fundamentals of policy “balance” seem obvious. But they do not always remain top of mind for elected leaders in the midst of chaotic, disjointed legislative sessions where politics still remains the primary element that shapes policy decisions.

Geither said it pretty directly yesterday. Finding policy balance in Washington “will require better choices from our political system. And it will require recognition of basic economic realities,” he told GBC members. “No economy can be stronger over time than the ability of its political leaders to come together to make tough decisions.”

Finding proper fiscal policy balance may be easier said than done in today’s national and state policy environments, but it’s even more important in these times for government to find a way to get it right.

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:

Special session could produce uneven income tax increases

Port illustrates value of transportation infrastructure

What did state lawmakers achieve before the meltdown?

An awkward sine die

Transportation: Lawmakers’ ready to adjourn leaving project priority lists unaddressed … again

Legislative impacts on Maryland’s business climate

Mayor’s summer jobs program is opportunity-driven

Facing the tide of opposition to transportation funding

Governing between fiscal extremes in Annapolis

Transportation legislation not the only issue on business radar in Annapolis

Political Armageddon is upon us.

It has major consequences for Gov. Martin O’Malley (D), with potential lessons in store for an array of Maryland political interests.

We’re not talking about the special session now under way in Annapolis – though we could be. No, we’re talking about the election in Wisconsin to recall Gov. Scott Walker (R).

If the White House campaign is this year’s heavyweight championship bout, then the Wisconsin recall is surely the No. 1 undercard. By the time it’s all over three weeks from now, special interests will have spent about $80 million on the slugfest — $60 million to help Walker save his job.

All this when only a very thin slice of the electorate remains undecided and persuadable. In the two most recent public polls on the recall – one of which showed Walker slightly ahead, the other of which showed him trailing but within the margin of error – the undecided voters represented just 5 percent and 7 percent of those surveyed, respectively.

Over the next three weeks, bodies will be littered across the bloody political battlefield. Reputations will be made and lost. And the recall election will very likely set the tone for the fall campaign.

As chairman of the Democratic Governors Association, O’Malley finds himself right in the middle of the fray, whether he wants to be or not. The DGA is pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into Wisconsin to oust Walker, and so are other major donors like labor unions and progressive groups.

In Walker’s camp are the Republican Governors Association, business organizations and conservative super PACs funded by industry titans and masterminded by the GOP’s top – and most cutthroat – political strategists.

It’s not an exaggeration to say that if Walker prevails it will be cataclysmically demoralizing for labor and progressive forces and will call into question their ability to re-elect President Obama, retain Democratic control of the U.S. Senate, and trim the Republican majority in the House of Representatives this fall. And who knows what conservative reign of terror a Walker victory will unleash? If you’re going to try to kill the king, you’d better succeed. If not, be prepared for the consequences.

The DGA alone isn’t going to make or break Scott Walker. And whatever national political future O’Malley is contemplating for himself probably isn’t going to rise or fall solely on his stewardship of the campaign committee.

But the fact is, in a year in which Democrats are in grave danger of losing some key governorships – North Carolina, New Hampshire, Montana and Washington could all flip to the Republican column, and West Virginia and Missouri could too if the bottom really falls out – Wisconsin represents the DGA’s only viable pick-up opportunity at the moment. There will be plenty of internal recriminations if the party doesn’t seize the opportunity. Any post-mortem finger pointing will inevitably ensnare O’Malley in unforeseen ways.

Yet the stakes are probably even higher for organized labor. Unions have waged war on Walker – and he on them – since he took office 17 months ago. But for all the unions’ perceived muscle, they couldn’t get their preferred candidate, former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk, through the pre-recall Democratic primary (Falk was also the favorite of environmentalists, another key Maryland constituency). Now they’ve transferred their political operation to the service of Walker’s Democratic challenger, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, who lost to the Republican by almost 6 points in November 2010.

At a time when Maryland unions suddenly seem much less monolithic than they once did – they rode the wrong horse in last month’s 6th congressional district Democratic primary, and state AFL-CIO President Fred Mason’s threats against U.S. Rep. Donna Edwards (D) for supporting John Delaney over Rob Garagiola in that primary seemed particularly empty – you can be sure they’ll be watching the performance of their brothers and sisters in Wisconsin very, very closely.

Obama has been a big disappointment to labor, but of course the alternative, from the unions’ perspective, is much worse. But the real labor battles in the last year or so have been in statehouses, against Walker and his ilk.

If Walker survives the recall he’ll seem invincible, and he and other conservative governors will be emboldened as they try to dismantle collective bargaining rights. A Walker victory next month will cast a pall over the entire labor movement. Which could hurt Obama and Democrats up and down the ballot in November.

And get ready for this, Maryland: Super PACs will be coming to the state. With such controversial measures as gay marriage and the DREAM Act headed for the statewide ballot in November, it’s inevitable and only a matter of time.

With these shadowy organizations, it’s hard to track who’s funding them, and also hard to regulate – and limit – their contributions and expenditures. Our state Board of Elections seems particularly ill equipped to provide any kind of oversight. Talk about Armageddon!

So by all means pay close attention to – and fret about – this week’s developments in Annapolis. But keep an eye on Wisconsin. The recall is the most significant political development between now and November, and though it’s 850 miles away, the reverberations will be felt very strongly here in Maryland – maybe for a long time to come.

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:

Taxman

Generally Speaking (Part 2)

Generally Speaking (Part 1)

Charm Offensive

Bad Karma in Annapolis II — Limbo Edition

Heather Mizeur, Superstar

Striking Back at the Empire

Bad Karma in Annapolis

More Than a Protest Vote

Doug Duncan’s Next Act

Information on the new website from Center Maryland’s strategic partner is expected to include such topics as how to play new video lottery terminals, the latest on Maryland Lottery games, horse racing updates, political and legislative news related to gaming, and what’s happening at area casinos.

“We are excited to add another vehicle for our followers and the Maryland sports community where PressBox will serve as a main information resource,” said John Coulson, managing partner & vice president of sales and marketing. “The gaming industry is growing rapidly, and we believe MarylandGaming.net enables us to provide a key platform covering that industry and its newsmakers. Additionally, it furthers our mission to expand the PressBox product line.”

Veteran journalist Bill Ordine – who has written about gaming for more than two decades, including a long-running casino travel column for the Philadelphia Inquirer — will serve as the website’s lead columnist. He has worked as a reporter and editor in both sports and news at the Baltimore Sun and Inquirer, and wrote about horse racing and poker for the Sun.

“It’s exciting to be writing for Baltimore’s sports fans and gaming enthusiasts,” said Ordine, “and to be able to contribute to all of the PressBox platforms. With MarylandGaming.net, we’ll be writing about the local gaming scene several times a week with the goal of helping those in our audience who choose to gamble to do so with solid, authoritative information.”

PressBox, a Center Maryland partner and the region’s most comprehensive source of sports information, will add MarylandGaming.net to its extensive portfolio of a free monthly newspaper, website, weekly television show and email newsletter.

Click here to read the Baltimore Business Journal’s article on MarylandGaming.net.

When members of the General Assembly meet next week in special session, they will have a specific “To Do” list crafted by Governor Martin O’Malley, Senate President Mike Miller, and House Speaker Michael Busch for fixing the so-called “Doomsday” budget that was enacted by default last month.

In enacting a budget that will increase state spending by 2.6 percent in FY 2013, lawmakers apparently will be asked to pass legislation that could impose income tax increases of between 4.5 percent and 15 percent for Marylanders earning more than $100,000.

That’s the effect of the tax bill that had been crafted in conference committee when time ran out on the session’s last day, April 9. We’ll have to wait for Governor O’Malley to file the specific legislation on Tuesday, but if the income tax proposal includes the conference committee’s most recent proposed tax rates, it would impose substantial tax increases on major segments of the state’s taxpayers.

It would also create a tax structure with at least one curious inconsistency.

The governor and legislative leaders are absolutely correct in noting that the proposal under consideration will not increase income taxes for single taxpayers earning up to $100,000, nor will tax rates increase for joint taxpayers earning up to $150,000.

But, from there it takes taxpayers on a vacillating experience, a roller-coaster ride of percentage increases.

Single filers

For single filers, taxpayers making between $250,001 and $300,000 would experience the largest percentage tax increase of 15 percent.

Those earning between $150,001 and $250,000 – would have a 10 percent increase, yet those earning between $125,001 and $150,000 would endure a slightly higher 10.5 percent increase.

Taxpayers earning between $100,001 and $125,000 and those earning more than $500,000 would experience the smallest percentage increases of 5 percent and 4.5 percent respectively.

Joint filers

For joint filers, those making between $300,001 and $350,000 would experience a tax increase of 15 percent – the largest percentage increase.

Now for the curious inconsistency: Joint earners with incomes of between $150,001 and $300,000 get a wild ride. For example, joint earners of $175 thousand, $200 thousand, $225 thousand, and $300 thousand would experience income tax increases of 5.3 percent, 10.5 percent, 5 percent, and 10 percent respectively.

Taxpayers jointly earning between $350,001 and $500,000 would experience a 9.5 percent increase. Tax rates would increase 5.3 percent for joint earners of between $150,001 and $175,000 and 4.5 percent for joint earners of more than $500,000.

With one strange exception, the bell curve for tax increases for both single filers and joint filers peaks, for the most part, in middle brackets, imposing income tax increases of 10 percent or more on single filers earning between $125,000 and $300,000 and most joint filers earning between $175,000 and $350,000.

These days, people with these kinds of income levels aren’t poor, but they are far from wealthy. And many are small business owners and job generators.

The first question we have to ask is: in this economy does anybody deserve an income tax increase of 10 percent or more? A second pertinent question: is this kind of tax structure good for our business climate?

It would appear to violate a core pillar of a competitive state environment for economic growth and job creation: “A tax structure that is fair and competitive.”

This key tenet was among eight core pillars advanced by state economic development experts and business executives and compiled by the Greater Baltimore Committee in its report “Gaining a Competitive Edge.”

At least let’s hope somebody considers the impact on economic growth and job creation before enacting an uneven income tax structure.

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:

Port illustrates value of transportation infrastructure

What did state lawmakers achieve before the meltdown?

An awkward sine die

Transportation: Lawmakers’ ready to adjourn leaving project priority lists unaddressed … again

Legislative impacts on Maryland’s business climate

Mayor’s summer jobs program is opportunity-driven

Facing the tide of opposition to transportation funding

Governing between fiscal extremes in Annapolis

Transportation legislation not the only issue on business radar in Annapolis

Protecting transportation fund: not a magic bullet, but still needed

The State Legislature did not raise sufficient revenues during the 2012 Session to avoid the “Doomsday Budget”. When Session ended sine die, many of the Governor’s priorities were in danger of elimination. The Republicans cheered.

Meanwhile … on the other side of the Bay … my Eastern Shore conservative friends seemingly embrace the “Doomsday Budget”. They appear comfortable with cuts to local governments, public education, higher college tuition rates and a curtailment of public works projects. For ostensible well-articulated reasons, they fill the radio airwaves and the blogosphere with a quasi-Austrian school of economics rationale for slashing the State budget to prevent tax and fee increases. Their express disdain for the May 14 special session to raise revenues is loud and clear.

Dissent and debate is the American way. It forges our public policy and shapes our collective future. I respectfully dissent with those who profess that the Governor is embarking on the wrong fiscal course. However, regardless of how I explain the need to fund Mr. O’Malley’s priorities in this 21st Century economy, I am continuously attacked with empty platitudes like “tax and spend…that’s all you Democrats do”. Little do they know they are casting stones from their glass houses.

In the post-Session fog of conservative criticism, I was utterly flabbergasted to learn that in anticipation of cuts in State aid to the counties, local Eastern Shore governments were preparing plans to “increase revenues” to fund county programs and local school system budgets. This is especially shocking in light of the fact that the Shore’s county governments are predominantly operated by Republican county commissioners. What I do not understand is how my conservative Eastern Shore neighbors can on one hand condemn the Governor for supporting raising revenues while on the other hand support local Republican officials who advocate the very same solution.

The purest example of this hypocrisy is the Republican solution for the 2011 Queen Anne’s County budget crisis. Queen Anne’s County faced a potential 2011 budget deficit in excess of $10 million (for Western Shore readers – that’s considered real money here on the Shore). Notwithstanding, and in the face of advance notice of falling tax revenues, in 2010 the Queen Anne’s County voters removed the Democrat Party dominated County Commission with a five-member Republican County Commission in reliance upon the candidates’ traditional conservative mantra that they would “cut taxes and government waste”. The Republican control of Queen Anne’s County governance was plenipotentiary.

In the beginning, the Republican Queen Anne’s County Commissioners appeared to be men of their word. In an initial move to address the looming fiscal problem, they appointed a committee of intelligent well-meaning citizens to recommend an austere budget that did not raise taxes and that sufficiently cut spending in order to balance the county’s books. What the committee proposed was the “Mini-Me” version of the State’s Doomsday Budget. It was conservative nirvana.

However, when faced with the proposition to adopt their own committee’s proposed Doomsday Budget what did the Republican County Commissioners do? They unanimously voted to raise taxes, fund the school system budget and keep important local programs in place! The conservative dogma is a masquerade.

If there was any doubt that the Republican “cut taxes and eliminate government waste” pledge is anything more than an empty campaign promise, all doubt has been removed. The lesson that Republicans learn when they control the sovereign reins of power is that governing is not so easy because it is accompanied by responsibility. Even former Governor Bob Ehrlich refused to sign the “Taxpayer Protection Pledge” in 2010.

It is superstition that Republican governments have ever simultaneously cut taxes and the size of government. If there is to be any credibility with the conservative criticism of Governor O’Malley, it can only come after the Republican-controlled local governments have fully implemented their own Doomsday Budgets – without asking for State aid from the Democrats in Annapolis. Who doubts this will not happen?

Clayton A. Mitchell, Sr. is an attorney in Stevensville and regular contributor to Center Maryland.

The fig leaf comes off Monday.

That’s when lawmakers return to Annapolis for a special legislative session of undetermined length for the expressed purpose of raising taxes.

Which, depending on your point of view, may be just fine. Without these tax hikes, education, social programs and aid to local governments will be hit by major cutbacks. So bring on the taxes, many people will say.

But policy arguments very often become hostage to political optics. And even if you support whatever tax increases Gov. Martin O’Malley and legislative leaders prescribe, you have to admit that the timing and the circumstances aren’t all that great.

Nothing has really changed since the legislature beat a hasty retreat out of Annapolis a month ago, its work unfinished after the House and Senate couldn’t agree on ways to fund the government. A month later, even those people who were there, let alone the public at large, can’t exactly diagnose what went wrong.

But somehow, in the heat of session, the talk of taxes was obscured — in the public’s mind, at least — by other factors, like debates over gambling and gay marriage and wind turbines. Sure, lawmakers were angling to raise taxes then, but those discussions were just part of the overall din of the session, one of many moving pieces of the hard-to-analyze legislative puzzle.

There will be no mistaking what legislators are there to do next week: raise taxes in the midst of perilous economic times — and probably nothing else. A tax hike enacted in a special session, as opposed to a regular session, won’t alter the bottom line on state spending or change the political realities that each individual lawmaker will have to face back home. But senators and delegates will be operating now in plain sight, without competing storylines to hide behind.

A vote to raise taxes in a special session may be no different than a vote to raise taxes in a regular session as a practical matter. But who said anything is practical, or logical, or orderly, in politics? In addition to being more exposed on the tax issue itself, lawmakers will now have to justify the cost of the special session, and explain why they were unable to complete their duties in the normally allotted 90 days.

House Speaker Mike Busch and Senate President Mike Miller had already lined up the requisite votes to pass tax increases in their respective chambers last month, and chances are, they will do so again heading into next week’s session. They wouldn’t be scheduling a special session if they didn’t think they had the votes to pass whatever compromise O’Malley and the Mikes agree upon.

But watch carefully: Will some moderate Democrats squirm and balk when a vote to raise taxes can’t be offset by some legislative goody that’s usually delivered in a regular session? Are leaders assuming that the same coalition that was expected to support tax increases a month ago will hold? How much whipping can be taking place this week when no one knows what the final deal will be?

We don’t really expect gambling to be a serious part of the conversation during the special session next week. But look for advocates of expanded gaming to make some noise in Annapolis and in the media. And however pre-ordained things usually seem in the State House, a special session is its own breed of cat, and anything can happen.

Who pays politically if voter ire is higher than usual in the wake of the tax increases? With the next state election two years away, and voters’ memories short, it may be that there are no serious consequences for anyone.

But if you’re a Democratic legislator from a conservative district with some ties to leadership, like Jim Mathias, or John Bohanan, or Norm Conway, you’ve got to be nervous. One thing John Delaney’s Democratic primary victory over Rob Garagiola last month suggests — along with the high-profile Democratic dissidents who flocked to his side — is that dissent is a saleable position nowadays, and that there isn’t necessarily any political safety for those who go along to get along.

Without the burden of having to run for re-election, O’Malley probably doesn’t have too much to sweat when it comes to political fallout. He’s already banking on the “unafraid to raise taxes to pay for vital services” narrative in 2016.

But will any voter anger be transferred at all to Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown when he’s running for governor in 2014? State Comptroller Peter Franchot, a potential rival for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination, is sure to be chanting his anti-tax hike mantra a little louder than usual in the days ahead.

Miller, Prince George’s County Executive Rushern Baker, Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake and other advocates of expanded gambling have to be on tenterhooks heading into this special session. There probably won’t be much tangible progress on that front next week — in fact, O’Malley is openly contemplating appointing a commission to consider the gaming issue, a move that would probably forestall any serious legislative action until this summer at the earliest.

(Did anyone catch Prince George’s Del. Melony Griffith’s opinion piece on health care in Sunday’s Washington Post? An ally of Baker’s, she’s proving to be one of the most effective critics of expanded gambling in Annapolis — and in Prince George’s. Is it possible that come 2014, when Baker is running for re-election, his toughest opposition won’t come from ministers, or the last vestiges of the Jack Johnson machine, but from a friend like Griffith?)

And what will the stance of Republicans, irrelevant in this process for all practical purposes, but still equipped with a potentially effective bullhorn, be during the special session? Do they show up and fight the good, if futile, fight on the House and Senate floor? Do they stand outside the State House on Lawyer’s Mall, reminding people how much the special session is costing and refusing their per diem? Or do they stay as far from Annapolis as possible?

Proponents of the tax increases, inside the State House and around the state, will express relief when the deed is done next week and will no doubt suggest that order has been restored. But nothing is so simple where the politics of taxes are concerned, and chances are that the special session won’t be so special for a huge swath of policymakers when all is said and done.

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:

Generally Speaking (Part 2)

Generally Speaking (Part 1)

Charm Offensive

Bad Karma in Annapolis II — Limbo Edition

Heather Mizeur, Superstar

Striking Back at the Empire

Bad Karma in Annapolis

More Than a Protest Vote

Doug Duncan’s Next Act

Largely absent from the broader recent debate about health care reform have been questions about the quality of care that those with health insurance receive – specifically, those Marylanders whose legitimate health insurance claims have been denied, or those whose care is needlessly delayed by time-consuming health insurance protocols and paperwork.

MedChi, the Maryland State Medical Society, recently partnered with Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler to launch “Insurance Watch,” a new web portal that will enable physicians to report abusive insurance company practices and provide assistance when consumers are denied their full health benefits.

The Insurance Watch web portal will help physicians submit complaints to the Health Education and Advocacy Unit (HEAU) of the Office of the Attorney General, as well as the Maryland Insurance Administration. The site will also direct physicians and consumers to the professional assistance they may need to ensure they receive the health insurance benefits to which they’re entitled.

Abusive health insurance practices – often deployed under the guise of cost containment – threaten the health of Maryland patients by denying them access to timely and effective care. Insurance Watch will help shine a light on insurer wrongdoing and empower health care professionals and consumers to fight back. Health care practitioners and consumers need to know that there are resources available to help—they don’t have to face the insurance companies alone.

Insurance Watch is an important tool for raising awareness of insurance company protocols, reining in abusive health insurer practices and encouraging more physicians and patients to come forward, but it is not enough. More should be done on the legislative front to help protect the health benefits of Marylanders because far too many of the tricks insurers use to delay or deny coverage to patients are still completely legal in Maryland.

One such protocol is called “step therapy,” or “fail-first,” which requires that one or more cheap medications “fail” to help a patient before the carrier will agree to cover a more expensive option, even if a physician believes it is the best treatment option for that patient. Some insurance companies will require a patient to fail up to five times before they cover the medication or procedure that their physician thinks will be most effective.

Insurance carriers also use a practice called prior authorization, which requires doctors to obtain the health insurer’s approval before the carrier will agree to cover the cost of certain medications or procedures. Patients are often forced to wait days or weeks for insurers to approve the treatments that they need – and resolving denials can take months.

The Maryland Health Care Commission (MHCC) recently studied the problems with prior authorization and recommended switching to a standardized electronic system for filing and processing prior authorization requests. The MHCC concluded that this would both “eliminate administrative overhead” and “allow providers to spend more time with their patients.”

The General Assembly has taken an important step toward reforming the onerous prior authorization process by unanimously passing HB 470, a bill which would implement the MHCC’s recommendations, using new technology to reduce medical costs and help patients overcome hurdles to get care they need. Maryland physicians urge the Governor to sign the legislation.

When Maryland consumers purchase health insurance, they expect reasonable and timely access to care. MedChi urges Maryland legislators to work to ensure that, as we focus on health care cost containment; we are also taking reasonable steps to protect patient access to life-saving and life-sustaining care.

Gene Ransom is CEO of MedChi, the Maryland State Medical Society. More information in Insurance Watch can be found at www.medchi.org.

The poll — conducted by OpinionWorks on behalf of CBAC Gaming LLC — found that two-thirds of Marylanders want the Governor and General Assembly to consider changes to Maryland’s slots program “as soon as possible,” and 84 percent “believe that voters should decide this year whether gaming should be expanded in Maryland.”

The support for urgent action by elected officials on gaming was particularly high in Prince George’s County, according to the poll, where 73 percent of voters want the issue taken up as soon as possible.

In asking about a Prince George’s gaming location, the poll found 60 percent support in the state, with a majority of support in all major regions. And Marylanders who attend religious worship services weekly also back a Prince George’s gaming location, with 52 percent in support and 42 percent opposed.

The poll found 58 percent support statewide for adding table games to slots facilities, with voters supportive in all major regions of Maryland.

The survey of 810 registered voters across Maryland, conducted April 21-23, has a margin of error of no more than 3.5 percentage points. CBAC Gaming LLC is the sole bidder for the Baltimore City gaming facility.

Click here to read the full memo from OpinionWorks on the poll results.

As Maryland enters another election season, Center Maryland continues to welcome credible polling data from all interested parties, and pledges to share as much of the information as we can with our readers. To send polling data to Center Maryland, email us at info@centermaryland.org.

Editor’s Note: Some founders of Center Maryland are involved in the National Harbor project.

In honor of their getting the band (or at least the drums) back together, we present what may be the most insightful report to date on the Occupy movement. It was filed by Triumph the Insult Comic Dog on the Conan show a few months back. One warning: because this is a late night cable show, some may find Triumph’s material offensive.

Now, if only we could get him to cover a Tea Party rally…

Triumph Occupies Wall Street

Looking ahead to the 2014 attorney general’s election, it’s hard to imagine a leading candidate not emerging from the Baltimore region.

Baltimore powerbrokers have always been very protective of their political turf, and after 20 years of Joe Curran in the AG’s office, Doug Gansler had to tread carefully when he was first elected in 2006. But Gansler did a good job of ingratiating himself with the Baltimore legal community, and he was never quite seen as the regional interloper by the Baltimore establishment that Parris Glendening was when he was elected governor after years of Schaefer, Mandel et al.

So who might run? Why not Jim Smith, the erstwhile judge and Baltimore County executive? He’ll be 72 in 2014, but he continues to kibbitz in local politics and had a robust $574,000 on hand in January.

Del. Jon Cardin, who had $123,000 in the bank at the beginning of the year, is said to be taking a look at both the AG and comptroller races, and he has a famous last name. But a high-ranking Democrat who knows Cardin well said his current priority is his newborn baby. And the strange and embarrassing way he proposed to his wife, which wound up involving Baltimore police, could hurt him in an AG’s race.

Stu Simms, the former Baltimore city state’s attorney and Glendening administration cabinet member who was runner-up to Gansler in the 2006 Democratic primary, is another possibility. He’s 61 and has told friends that he’d like one more gig in public service, but whether he wants to mount another high-stakes campaign is very much an open question. If the U.S. attorney’s job for Maryland opens up soon, he’d no doubt like to be considered.

How’s this for a big Baltimore name: Katie Curran O’Malley, judge, Maryland first lady and of course daughter of former AG Joe Curran. Her name is in the ether when it comes to the 2014 race, and she is a more than plausible candidate, someone who’s been unafraid to speak out on certain issues despite her position on the bench.
But how would her candidacy, if it ever came to pass, affect her husband’s putative White House bid? Anthony Brown’s campaign for governor in 2014 will already be seen to a degree as a referendum on the O’Malley administration. Can the governor afford two surrogates on the ballot in 2014 as he attempts to boost his national profile ahead of 2016? Judge O’Malley could be a great candidate — but it could set off more political cross-currents than anyone can bear.

But there are more enticing big names out there, from other parts of Maryland: How about Ike Leggett, the Montgomery County executive? By most accounts, Leggett, who will be 69 in 2014, is looking forward to teaching and traveling when he leaves office.

But Leggett is incredibly competitive and still enjoys the political game. The news that his predecessor, Doug Duncan, is thinking of running for county executive again has Leggett at least contemplating a third term, according to some Rockville insiders. And Leggett also has a string of firsts to his name: First African-American Montgomery County councilman. First African-American chairman of the Maryland Democratic Party. First African-American Montgomery County executive. Why wouldn’t the old Howard University law professor look favorably on the idea of becoming the state’s first black attorney general? He was sitting on $489,000 in his campaign at the start of the year.

And don’t forget about Tom Perez, who has been fighting the good fight as head of the Civil Rights Division of the Obama Justice Department. He’s unlikely to return to Maryland politics so quickly if President Obama wins a second term, but if Obama loses, who knows? Perez, a former Montgomery councilman and state labor secretary, ran a highly-regarded campaign for AG in 2006 before being knocked off the ballot on a technicality.

If party leaders are looking for a potentially solid Latino candidate for AG and Perez is not available, they may want to turn to Leon Rodriguez, a friend and former colleague of Perez’s who currently heads the civil rights office of the Health and Human Services Department in Washington. Rodriguez served as county attorney in Rockville during the early years of the Leggett administration. And his nomination to head the wage and hour division of the Obama administration Labor Department was held up by conservative Republicans — a potential badge of honor in any Democratic primary.

Lastly, the race for attorney general could potentially draw candidates trying to rehabilitate their political careers. His brutal loss in the 6th district Democratic congressional primary on April 3 probably hasn’t diminished state Senate Majority Leader Rob Garagiola’s ambitions. He may envision himself as a viable contender for AG. Whether others would is another matter entirely.

And though he was only recently appointed to a state judgeship, former U.S. Rep. Frank Kratovil was telling people last year that he’d consider running in the Democratic primary for AG if a couple of liberals jumped in the race and he could carve out a solid position in the political center. That possibility certainly still exists.

When the filing deadline for the attorney general’s race rolls around in early April of 2014, chances are that only three or four viable Democrats will make it to the starting gate. It’s pretty quiet out there now — but the seeds of an exciting race are already being planted.

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:

Generally Speaking (Part 1)

Charm Offensive

Bad Karma in Annapolis II — Limbo Edition

Heather Mizeur, Superstar

Striking Back at the Empire

Bad Karma in Annapolis

More Than a Protest Vote

Doug Duncan’s Next Act