Friendly Fire

No matter how liberal Martin O'Malley is, he is never liberal enough for some people. Adam Pagnucco made a note today of something related to the story of Sean Malone leaving the O'Malley Administration. I thought it might be the O'Malley team cashing in, but Adam thinks it might be something else:

Sean Malone has been a close advisor to Martin O’Malley ever since O’Malley was a member of the Baltimore City Council. He rose with O’Malley through the city and state governments, becoming a legal counsel to the Baltimore police department, Baltimore's labor commissioner, and eventually the new Governor’s labor liaison. But Malone was even more than that – he was a member of the Governor’s tight, protective inner circle. That made Sean Malone a powerful figure in Annapolis.

Lisa Harris Jones is the owner of Harris Jones LLC, an Annapolis lobbying firm. Her client list includes the Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC), one of the most anti-union trade associations in the United States. As the above sources reported, Sean Malone is Harris Jones LLC’s newest employee.

Very interesting, particularly in that this is something that is really going to infuriate certain aspects of O'Malley's base. Given the fact that O'Malley regularly rolls over for his union and liberal allies, I find it hard to believe that the unions have that much of a problem with O'Malley, but still very interest.

And all of this brings me back to something I have been talking about for a year now: do stories like this make it likely that Peter Franchot will challenge O'Malley in the primary in 2010 (results of the slots referendum notwithstanding)?

Franchot's Gambit

Comptroller Peter Franchot has gone out a bit on a ledge in order to try to get the computer tax repealed:

Amid growing momentum for a repeal of Maryland's new computer services tax, Comptroller Peter Franchot released a broad interpretation of the levy yesterday, stoking fears that it will force businesses to leave the state.

Under the draft rules, computer services would be subject to the 6 percent sales tax even if the service provider is located outside of Maryland. That will make enforcing the law difficult and could encourage business customers to relocate computer-related operations, said Franchot, an outspoken opponent of the tax.

Clearly Franchot's release of this interpretation of the tax is designed to give more reasons for the General Assembly to pass the tech tax repeal and get this ill-designed law off of the books. But it is not without risk, both to taxpayers and to Franchot. If the General Assembly does not repeal the tax, Franchot's broad interpretation may mean thousands of jobs and millions of dollars will flow out of state. His interpretation of the tax, on top being bad for the economy, will they be used as a cudgel against him in the 2010 primary election.

It's an interesting gambit, and I hope it is successful is getting this foolish tax out of our lives...

Time for a Red Card

Apparently the O'Malley folks still don't realize the state has money problems:

With negotiations to build a stadium for D.C. United stalled in the District, Maryland officials have agreed to consider constructing a home for the soccer team in Prince George's County.

The Maryland Stadium Authority has decided to spend $75,000 on a feasibility study to look at the economic impact and potential tax benefits. The step concerned Vincent C. Gray, chairman of the D.C. Council, who noted the team's success and potential for financial growth.

"I continue to believe that we should work with D.C. United to construct the stadium in Poplar Point," Gray (D) said.

The study comes two months after Prince George's County Executive Jack B. Johnson (D) wrote a letter to David Raith, the stadium authority's acting director, asking the state to help the county lure the team.

I'm not really sure exactly how this benefits the taxpayers of Maryland in any way. Particularly when you consider the fact that the through the profligate spending of O'Malley and legislative Democrats, we are still facing a projected deficit of hundreds of millions of dollars. Annapolis Democrats still cannot grasp the concept of basic economics and fiscal responsibility. To say that the state should be spending money on a study to consider spending more money to build a stadium in an area that already has five stadiums of 30,000 or more seats within a 20-mile radius is laughably absurd.

From a business perspective, D.C. United Holdings should be looking at building soccer-specific stadium to fit their needs, and I am sympathetic to the fact that they probably need such a venue to thrive financially. But if they want to build in Maryland, they should have to find the private capital to do it. The state should not be fleecing taxpayers to direct money towards an already mismanaged agency to build venues again beyond their intended scope. If they want government to build it, talk to D.C. or talk to Virginia.

I mean seriously: do Democrats really want to put stadiums before schools?

The Canary in the Coal Mine

You know that Maryland's Democratic leadership has made some poor choices on taxes and spending when one of their own starts warning that they may have sent the state economy into bad water:

Maryland Comptroller Peter Franchot (D) offered a bleak assessment of the state's economy yesterday, saying recent changes to the state's tax laws could negatively affect an already dire financial outlook.

Delivering Maryland's first State of the Treasury speech in recent history, Franchot, who considers himself the state's chief fiscal officer, said the subprime mortgage crisis, instability in financial markets and declining retail sales are driving the economy into "a period of profound uncertainty."

The full speech is available from the Comptroller's website. And true to form (and my opinion that Franchot is preparing a 2010 primary challenge to Governor O'Malley), the Comptroller railed against the tax package:

Furthermore, I believe that we must acknowledge that the sweeping changes to Maryland’s tax laws – which resulted from last Fall’s Special Session – have only added to this climate of unpredictability. As you know, I publicly objected to the idea of writing complex tax legislation in a frenetic and overheated political environment. Significant tax increases were essentially drafted behind closed doors and adopted without the benefit of substantive analysis, meaningful public hearings or consultation with stakeholders. And while I commend Governor O’Malley and the General Assembly for their shared commitment to resolving Maryland’s structural deficit, I remain deeply concerned about the potential of some of these tax measures to inflict harm on our State’s economy.

I am particularly troubled by the expansion of the Maryland sales tax to computer services. I spoke out in public opposition to this proposal when it was rammed through during the closing days of the Special Session, and I feel the same way today. This technology tax tax, if allowed to stand, will erode Maryland’s competitive advantage in the Knowledge-based economy.

What Franchot's endgame with his criticism of O'Malley and General Assembly leadership is anyone's guess. But it is significant that somebody who is probably to the left of just about every major elected official in the state of Maryland is being critical of O'Malley, the General Assembly, and the way business was conducted during the Special Session speaks volumes of how bad things are in our state. Politically, Franchot would have been expected to be on board with the historic tax hikes that we saw, but instead even he is concerned with the way everything went down.

Is this another salvo in an O'Malley v. Franchot gubernatorial primary? There is a long way to go before we can speculate too much about that. But it says a lot as to why O'Malley's poll numbers are sinking when ever those who are generally philosophically in league with where he wants to take our state can't support his tactics and methods...

Checking in where I have been

In this Friday's Gazette, Barry Rascovar checks in where I have been for some time now: that Peter Franchot is positioning himself extremely well to mount a challenge to Governor O'Malley's left during the 2010 gubernatorial primary.

The more Franchot fights the special session, and the more likely it becomes that O'Malley's tax-hike gambit fails, the more likely a Franchot challenge will become....

Proving the Point About the Size of Government

Those who modify their cars to run on biofuels are doing so, generally to save money in the long term on the cost of gas, but also in order to help clean the environment. Naturally, the bloated size of government could theoretically get in the way:

But it is technically illegal to modify a car to run on any fuel other than the one it was designed for. Because the Environmental Protection Agency has not approved vegetable oil as a fuel, grease cars are in violation of the Clean Air Act.

This does not apply to the use of biodiesel, an EPA-regulated fuel created from soy and other organic oils.

People who modify their cars to run on vegetable oil could face a $2,750 fine, although the EPA has no record of any such penalties, said spokesman Dale Kemery.

People who run their vehicles on homebrewed fuels are also supposed to pay a Maryland fuel tax of 24.25 cents per gallon, be licensed as a special fuel user by the state and file a monthly report on the use of fuel.

But because the use of vegetable oil fuel is so new, nobody has been penalized for not paying taxes, said Warren Hansen, spokesman for the Maryland Comptroller's Office. He said there are only about 100 licensed special fuel users in the state.

I think that it says so much about government overreach that innovators and early adopters of such emerging technologies could be subject to fines and penalties for doing something so innovative. Though I bet somebody in the Comptroller's office is looking at how to enforce this now given Franchot's zeal for collecting tax dollars...

Misusing the Office

We have gone over before the duties and responsibilities of the Office of the Comptroller and Peter Franchot's inability to understand them. And I'm pretty sure that this isn't in there:

State Comptroller Peter Franchot has agreed to cull state income tax records to identify Howard County families who might qualify for health care assistance and then send them letters offering help, county officials said yesterday.

"Who knows better than the state comptroller who is making less than 300 percent of [the federal] poverty [level]?" asked Dr. Peter L. Beilenson, the county health officer, referring to the income cutoff to qualify for federally funded health care programs for children.

The letter campaign was to be announced today at Franchot's Baltimore office on West Preston Street as the latest component of what Howard County officials say will be a comprehensive plan to offer health care access to all uninsured residents. Details of the plan are to be revealed Tuesday.

So the state is going to spend taxpayer dollars to help Howard County spend more taxpayer dollars on covering the uninsured? Where exactly is that in the Comptroller's job description?

Franchot's job is to collect the taxes, and realistically not much else. His job is to not turn the resources of the Comptroller's office over to help Howard County expand the number of citizens on government assistance, no matter how well meaning he is about it. If the people of Howard County want to offer comprehensive health care to its uninsured, and so long as they are using the taxpayer dollars of Howard County residents, I don't really have a dog in the fight. But I do have an issue when the Office of the Comptroller, funded by my taxes, is being misused in this manner.

I will note, however, that the same people who praise Peter Franchot for his "courage" would be first in line to charge the Bush Administration with high treason if they proposed using IRS records to track terrorists...

The Beginning?

Comptroller Peter Franchot unleashed this criticism of the O'Malley tax plan this week:

State Comptroller Peter Franchot criticized government leaders this week by saying it would be "reckless" to add $2 billion of tax burdens in a special session before December revenue estimates can show whether the economy is tanking.

The volatility of the local, state and world economies - and the lack of analysis in the budget plans put forward so far by Gov. Martin O'Malley - have Mr. Franchot concerned the administration is not fully considering the effects of new taxes.

The governor's piecemeal rollout of the different tax options to address a projected $1.7 billion deficit next year has made it difficult to see how all the proposals fit together, he told The Capital's Editorial Board this week.

"We have an opportunity to reform the tax code and instead we have treated it a little bit like a take-out menu," he said. "It's just not comprehensive or inclusive (and) ultimately I don't think it ends up being fair."

Read the whole thing, but I ask you this: is this the start of Peter Franchot's primary challenge to Governor O'Malley in 2010?

Sense from Stoltzfus

I'd be remiss if I didn't point out the Sen. Lowell Stoltzfus wrote an op-ed in today's Sun that's probably a little too sensible for Annapolis:

During this year's session, I offered an amendment that would have balanced next year's state budget without any tax increases. It did not "cut" any appropriation from the previous year but simply restrained growth. Though several Democratic leaders in the Senate privately informed me they liked the amendment, none voted for it. The education, environmental and labor lobbies were powerful enough to alter their better judgment.

It's time now, as Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller repeatedly says, "to make a tough vote." Although he always means to vote for tax increases, it's really time for the Democrats to make a truly tough vote and restrain the growth of government.

Otherwise, government's insatiable appetite for more spending and growth will continue unabated, because that is the way the Democrats court their supporters and the way government generally responds to problems: by spending more money. Your money.

Though on many hot-button issues individual Republicans and Democrats at times may agree, Republicans generally disagree with Democrats on increasing the size and scope of government at the expense of taxpayers. Citizens pay a very large percentage of their income for a long list of taxes: federal income tax, state income tax, local income tax, sales tax, property tax, gas tax, excise tax, plus additional "fees" in numerous areas. I say, Enough already!

The decision to increase taxes is made by government officials who often have discretionary income that is not available to many - particularly to senior citizens on fixed incomes and minimum-wage earners. They are the ones who struggle mightily to make ends meet and to whom each nickel matters greatly in their effort to purchase bare necessities and health treatment. A 20 percent increase in the sales tax would be especially painful to them.

Hear, hear! It is amazing to think that the O'Malley, Franchot and the rest of the fringe left have the hubris to call for tax increases to benefit those on the lowest level of the economic latter when, in actuality, those are the people that O'Malley, Franchot, et al seem hellbent on making poorer to expand their precious government programs.

Incidentally, Stoltzfus is right about the government officials making these decisions; it's kind of ridiculous for Peter Franchot to call for tax hikes when he used nearly a $1 million of his own money to become Comptroller...

Hitting the nail on the head

Kenny Burns:

Franchot is More Show than Action
It’s easy to see why NOT to like Peter Franchot (D) as a politician. In the seven months that he has been in office, he has done more talking in regards to issues effecting the land of pleasant living than actually doing his job. Speaking of which, when it comes to doing what he said as far as scrutinizing contracts, he has…mostly after the fact and then tries to butch up to show that he is doing something.

Read the whole thing.

Incumbent backs Incumbent: Film at 11

Andrew Kujan is puzzled that Comptroller Peter Franchot is backing Al Wynn in his 2008 re-election primary instead of ultra-lefty Donna Edwards:

To say the two men have divergent interests is an understatment.

When Franchot was elected as comptroller, some criticized the expansion of his office's powers. Franchot dismissed these claims....

I once supported the Comptroller's expanded actions, because I figured the man's head was on straight. Now I am not so sure.

Franchot has decided to endorse a congressman who will be actively working against his goals as a progressive. Whether he was fooled or went willinging, I do not know, but I do know I am disappointed.

Sure, an incumbent backing an incumbent against a primary challenger is not exactly breaking news. And there's a lot of material there to deal with (why anybody would want to expand the powers of the Comptrollers office; why would anybody think Franchot had his head on straight). But I think Andrew misses the four little numbers that have everything to do with this decision.

2010

It is no secret that Peter Franchot desperately wants to run for Governor. It is also no secret that O'Malley's a little too moderate for Franchot's tastes. Nor is it a secret that the African-American community is not particularly gung ho for O'Malley or the slate of candidates that came out of the Democratic ticket in 2006.

So ask yourself this; if you were planning on running an insurgent primary to an incumbent Governor's left in three years, wouldn't you want to do whatever you could to help shore up support and build political capital wherever you could get it?

Just a thought....

Well, I Feel Better

We've got Peter Franchot on the job:

As the chief regulator of gasoline in Maryland, Comptroller Peter Franchot says it's his job to stand up and get answers about pricing for Bill and everyone else who is angry. He says, "Consumers have a right to know and big oil companies have an obligation to come clean with this information."

To get the information, Franchot has launched an investigation into exactly how gas is priced. He's focused on the major oil companies...sending each a letter asking them to explain and justify a practice that's been kept secret for years. It’s called zone pricing. Franchot says, "It raises real suspicions. They claim its some elaborate software they have but we'll find out. I look forward to having them explain why gas is 40-cents more expensive at an Exxon in Silver Spring than an Exxon at BWI.".

I'm glad to see that a guy who has no idea how economics work is on the case.

I've got a better idea; why doesn't Franchot go investigate why the cost of government keeps rising and rising despite the fact that the people get less and less in return every day....

Keep one hand on your wallet...

Peter Franchot was sworn in as Comptroller today. So hang on to your wallets because. ready or not, here he comes. Once again though, Franchot seems to not understand the job he has accepted:

Democrat Peter Franchot took office today as Maryland's 33rd comptroller -- and he made it clear within moments that he won't be content to be a behind-the-scenes tax collector.

Franchot, a 20-year House member from Montgomery County who knocked off former Comptroller William Donald Schaefer last year, said after taking the oath of office that he wants to push for biotechnology jobs and to fight slot machine gambling.

The ambitious agenda came even though Franchot no longer has a vote in the legislature or any power to influence state policy except as part of a three-person board that approves state contracts.

We have noted before that Franchot seems to think his office is a bully pulpit from which to fight for his worldview, notwithstanding the limitations set forth in the State Constitution. Mike Miller is actually the voice of reason on this issue:

"He'll quickly learn that his job is a tax collector, not a policy maker," Miller told reporters after Franchot's speech.

And if Franchot sticks to that, he'll keep his own party off of his back. Not that I think Franchot really cares too much about that. However, I am amused that Franchot tells WBAL radio he will be a "fiscal watchdog" for the state of Maryland. I believe that. You see, what the people of Maryland need in a Comptroller is a guard dog, somebody who will be the voice of reason and fiscal sanity when it comes to funding these expensive projects the Legislature and the Administration dream up. Unfortunately, given Franchot's "agenda" and his 20-year record in the House of Delegates indicate, he is going to be a watchdog in the sense that he is the dog that watches the money flow out of the State Treasury. He will be nonexistent when it comes to stopping wasteful spending, but I'm sure Franchot will have no problems leaving the spigot open far and wide for the continued expansion of nannystatism...

Of course, given Franchot's penchant for raising money from out of state and loaning himself $750,000 of his campaign kitty (hey, that sounds familiar) I doubt that he'll be too concerned with the plight of Maryland's taxpayers.