Tuesday, April 11, 2006
The Horde has left Annapolis
The Maryland Legislature ended their 2006 session yesterday so we can begin to review just what they accomplished. The Baltimore Sun has a (surprisingly) helpful review today and of particular interest is just what the legislature did to make Maryland a more business-friendly place.
Statewide, business looks good – the unemployment rate is one of the lowest in the country at 3.8% Employment, Unemployment and Unemployment Rate by Place of Residence But Maryland benefits because years ago it donated the land to create the District of Columbia as our Nation’s Capital and thus reaps the rewards that proximity to federal spending brings. Elsewhere among the state though, things aren’t so good: Baltimore – 6.4%, Worcester – 9.4%. Maryland’s corporate base has become the prey and not the hunter. Hence, we see Constellation Energy merging with Florida's FPL Group, the sale of Alex Brown and (most tragically) the demise of National Brewing as a local entity. Contrast Maryland with the city of Omaha which includes such prominent corporate headquarters as ConAgra, Ameritrade, Peter Kiewit, Union Pacific and Mutual of Omaha.
Long term dependency on federal spending is no way to grow a state so what is the state government doing to encourage business growth in the rest of the state (read: non-blue areas)? Short answer: Not much!
Notables:
The Wal-Mart bill
“Health Care // Maryland became the first state in the nation to require large employers to pay a certain amount for employee health care after legislators overrode an Ehrlich veto. In practice, Maryland's statute will only affect Wal-Mart. Other states are considering similar measures. An effort to expand the law to smaller employers failed. (emphasis added)”
A previous rant on this subject Maryland's bid to get business to move....to Delaware, Virginia, Pennsylvania....
“Minimum wage // Maryland businesses will have to pay $6.15 an hour, $1 more than the federal rate, after legislators overrode an Ehrlich veto early in the session. Efforts to raise the rate further gained little traction.”
On the positive side, some initiatives didn’t get passed…but that doesn’t mean the proponents will be giving up.
Smoking // For the fourth consecutive year, a proposed statewide ban on smoking in bars and restaurants failed. A proposal to increase cigarette taxes by $1 per pack to pay for health care also was defeated.
Montgomery County already has such restrictions and the county executive in place when they went into effect, Doug Duncan, is running for governor.
….all these initiatives rest on an arrogant assumption that there are a select group of people – coincidentally all inhabiting Annapolis for 90 days at the start of the year - that know more about what’s good for business than the people actually running the businesses.
There was some good news though: No New Taxes!
Statewide, business looks good – the unemployment rate is one of the lowest in the country at 3.8% Employment, Unemployment and Unemployment Rate by Place of Residence But Maryland benefits because years ago it donated the land to create the District of Columbia as our Nation’s Capital and thus reaps the rewards that proximity to federal spending brings. Elsewhere among the state though, things aren’t so good: Baltimore – 6.4%, Worcester – 9.4%. Maryland’s corporate base has become the prey and not the hunter. Hence, we see Constellation Energy merging with Florida's FPL Group, the sale of Alex Brown and (most tragically) the demise of National Brewing as a local entity. Contrast Maryland with the city of Omaha which includes such prominent corporate headquarters as ConAgra, Ameritrade, Peter Kiewit, Union Pacific and Mutual of Omaha.
Long term dependency on federal spending is no way to grow a state so what is the state government doing to encourage business growth in the rest of the state (read: non-blue areas)? Short answer: Not much!
Notables:
The Wal-Mart bill
“Health Care // Maryland became the first state in the nation to require large employers to pay a certain amount for employee health care after legislators overrode an Ehrlich veto. In practice, Maryland's statute will only affect Wal-Mart. Other states are considering similar measures. An effort to expand the law to smaller employers failed. (emphasis added)”
A previous rant on this subject Maryland's bid to get business to move....to Delaware, Virginia, Pennsylvania....
“Minimum wage // Maryland businesses will have to pay $6.15 an hour, $1 more than the federal rate, after legislators overrode an Ehrlich veto early in the session. Efforts to raise the rate further gained little traction.”
On the positive side, some initiatives didn’t get passed…but that doesn’t mean the proponents will be giving up.
Smoking // For the fourth consecutive year, a proposed statewide ban on smoking in bars and restaurants failed. A proposal to increase cigarette taxes by $1 per pack to pay for health care also was defeated.
Montgomery County already has such restrictions and the county executive in place when they went into effect, Doug Duncan, is running for governor.
….all these initiatives rest on an arrogant assumption that there are a select group of people – coincidentally all inhabiting Annapolis for 90 days at the start of the year - that know more about what’s good for business than the people actually running the businesses.
There was some good news though: No New Taxes!
Comments:
<< Home
I enjoyed this post. There are a few themes that I would like to discuss in slightly more depth.
First, what do you think would be a good solution to the problem of uninsured workers in the US? I agree with you that it is silly to force specifically Wal-Mart to cover health care, but that's because I don't think employer-sponsored health care is a good idea at all. I favor universal health care. I'd like to get your viewpoint though.
I don't see why raising the minimum wage is so objectionable, although I see what you mean about it driving business to other, cheaper states. That's why there should be a federal minimum wage, to even the playing field and allow states to compete for workers fairly.
Here in New York we have a citywide ban on smoking in bars and restaurants, and I personally love it. I have asthma and it used to be just horrible to sit down to dinner and discover that someone at the next table was smoking. Of course it all depends on where one falls on the public health vs. personal choice spectrum, but with smoking there is really huge evidence of the health consequences of secondhand exposure.
First, what do you think would be a good solution to the problem of uninsured workers in the US? I agree with you that it is silly to force specifically Wal-Mart to cover health care, but that's because I don't think employer-sponsored health care is a good idea at all. I favor universal health care. I'd like to get your viewpoint though.
I don't see why raising the minimum wage is so objectionable, although I see what you mean about it driving business to other, cheaper states. That's why there should be a federal minimum wage, to even the playing field and allow states to compete for workers fairly.
Here in New York we have a citywide ban on smoking in bars and restaurants, and I personally love it. I have asthma and it used to be just horrible to sit down to dinner and discover that someone at the next table was smoking. Of course it all depends on where one falls on the public health vs. personal choice spectrum, but with smoking there is really huge evidence of the health consequences of secondhand exposure.
# posted by 
: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 9:51:00 AM
: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 9:51:00 AM 
Welcome Walrus:
To answer your query's/comments:
1) I'm not sure the problem of uninsured workers is a) a problem and b) even accepting that premise, doesn't necessarily make it deserving of a government-mandated solution. Right now many people w/out health care make a choice not to have it - they spend their dollars elsewhere...which is their right. The figures I see bandied about reflect those not covered whereras the more applicable number s/b need, can't get/outside gov't help right now. Bottom line: I want to minimze gov't involvement in this field.
2)We already have a federal minimum wage, MD has now exceeded it. Most of us do not work for minumum wage because the market puts a price on our services in excess of that minimum wage. The market clearly does not value those workers as much...for whatever reason. I'm philsophically against these government-imposed mandates on private interests....and the actual costs are usually greater than advertised because FICA is paid on that added wage.
3)Re: smoking - I'm all about personal choice - esp. when it involves private business. Beyond the occassional cigar, I am not a smoker and, yes, coming out of a smoke-free bar not smelling of cigarettes is nice but...if it is that important to me, I'll avoid bars that allow smoking - I don't need the nanny state to look out for my interests. again, the interests that take the hit on this is not the government but private interests and my default position is alweays that is wrong.
..of course it is kind of funny to see governments restrict smoking on one hand and lament a potential drop in tobacco settlement dollars on the other hand because people aren't smoking enough....
and David - the day after I got back from Ohio after the 2004 elections, I had two Ehrlich bumper stickers on my car.
Post a Comment
To answer your query's/comments:
1) I'm not sure the problem of uninsured workers is a) a problem and b) even accepting that premise, doesn't necessarily make it deserving of a government-mandated solution. Right now many people w/out health care make a choice not to have it - they spend their dollars elsewhere...which is their right. The figures I see bandied about reflect those not covered whereras the more applicable number s/b need, can't get/outside gov't help right now. Bottom line: I want to minimze gov't involvement in this field.
2)We already have a federal minimum wage, MD has now exceeded it. Most of us do not work for minumum wage because the market puts a price on our services in excess of that minimum wage. The market clearly does not value those workers as much...for whatever reason. I'm philsophically against these government-imposed mandates on private interests....and the actual costs are usually greater than advertised because FICA is paid on that added wage.
3)Re: smoking - I'm all about personal choice - esp. when it involves private business. Beyond the occassional cigar, I am not a smoker and, yes, coming out of a smoke-free bar not smelling of cigarettes is nice but...if it is that important to me, I'll avoid bars that allow smoking - I don't need the nanny state to look out for my interests. again, the interests that take the hit on this is not the government but private interests and my default position is alweays that is wrong.
..of course it is kind of funny to see governments restrict smoking on one hand and lament a potential drop in tobacco settlement dollars on the other hand because people aren't smoking enough....
and David - the day after I got back from Ohio after the 2004 elections, I had two Ehrlich bumper stickers on my car.
<< Home
