MDGOP End of Year Reports

Below is the financial situation of the Maryland Republican Party as of the most recent reports from the FEC and State Board of Elections.

State Account Cash on Hand as of January 1.

28,730.24

Federal Account Cash on Hand as of January 1

6430.01

Now that we have an Executive Director, a Communications Director, a Political Director, a Business Manager, and an Events Coordinator, maybe its time to hire a Finance Director...

Money raised since the election:

State Account: $11,044.03

Federal Account: 14,610.98

Congratulations, Baltimore County Citizens -- You're Landlords!

by Steve Whisler

Every taxpayer in Baltimore County is the proud co-owner of apartment complexes in Dundalk. County government hopes to purchase a total of 56 complexes in the east Baltimore County region by the summer of 2007. You might enjoy being a property owner, but be careful what you wish for.

These new properties in your portfolio exist in a crime-infested neighborhood. Some call these apartments a blight and eyesore for the community. Critics question why the county failed to hold former property owners accountable to basic code enforcement laws. Why hold the current and former property owners accountable? Instead, let’s rely on the county to buy the properties, rebuild them, and revitalize the area. Great idea!

On March 27, 2006, county authorities thought they could purchase all 56 buildings in an 8-acre neighborhood for $11M. Well, their estimates were a bit off and they now expect to pay over $17M – a figure that will very likely increase since landowners are holding out for better offers, which the county seems willing to pay.

And Dundalk is not the only community where county government seeks to expand their role as Section-8 HUD housing landlords. The Smith Administration and his rubber-stamp county council are investigating the purchase of complexes in the Baltimore Highlands, Landsdowne, and Riverview area. Complexes like those in Circle Terrace are notorious crime areas and current owners are not held accountable to follow existing code enforcement standards. Not to worry, the government can purchase these properties too and do a much better job.

County Council Chairman, John Olszewski, seems to think, “It’s worth it … a great investment.” Call me cynical, but the first $7.6M spent on 20 buildings in Dundalk that contained just 79 units is not a great investment.

Would you invest your own money in these projects to buy, demolish, and rebuild the apartment complexes? Officials estimate they will spend $17.2M just to purchase the apartment complexes in Dundalk. What other related issues are taxpayers funding?

Tax dollars will also be used to move the families displaced by the county’s purchase of these apartment complexes. Citizens have already paid to move 51 families that likely already draw public assistance.

Displaced families will also receive rental assistance for one year, and they’ll receive vouchers for new units in February 2007. I’m sure the County Council and Executive are eager to call a press conference and let us know the total cost to purchase 56 apartment complexes in Dundalk and others planned in the southwestern portion of the county.

How much will Baltimore County citizens pay to demolish those buildings this summer? How much will it cost to erect new Section-8 housing? The current pricetag for these so-called Renaissance Redevelopment projects is the tip of the iceberg.

When all the project costs are calculated, I wonder how many police officers could have been hired to suppress and/or eliminate neighborhood crime activity. How many teachers could have been hired to reduce student-teacher ratios in our schools? How many Code Enforcement officials could have been hired to enforce standards in these dilapidated communities? I’m willing to bet the price tag could have been substantially less … and the county could have created new jobs!

County Executive Smith has already touted $90M in renovations for Dundalk during his first four years in office, and it appears that much, much more is on the way to a region that already garners the vast majority of public assistance funds in the Baltimore County budget.

Like it or not, Baltimore County citizens will pay for these projects, and I wonder if any of you or your politicians would stand in line and be first to move into one of the new apartments?

Perhaps those in county government should consider a return to basics and manage the infrastructure of communities – not seek to become a landlord. Like it or not, the crime in these areas will remain unchanged. The total price tag for these efforts will not change statistics that directly influence local housing prices — statistics like local school test scores, shootings, robberies, and car thefts.

Nice try, Baltimore County government, but the tax dollars you’ve allocated and will allocate for these projects is not a great investment, but instead a social experiment that will merely erect a new landscape and do very little for what is truly ailing these areas.

Does Anybody Really Know What Time It Is?

by Steve Whisler

Scientists at the University of Chicago moved the Doomsday Clock two minutes ahead to five minutes to midnight on January 16, 2007. This particular clock has been managed by America’s so-called brightest minds since 1947 and their goal is to gauge how close humans are to destroying the Earth with nuclear weapons.

When asked why the world now sits just five minutes away from total destruction, scientists cited the perils of 27,000 nuclear weapons, 2000 of them ready to launch within minutes, and the effects of global warming. “The dangers posed by climate change are nearly as dire as those posed by nuclear weapons,” the report claimed.

Really ... climate change is just as dire as nuclear weapons? Global warming warrants adjusting the Doomsday Clock for just the 17th time in 60 years?

I wonder if scientists at the University of Chicago are scrambling to justify their existence now that the threat of nuclear war among those who possess these weapons is at an all-time low. There is truly a threat of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists, but this was one of the reasons why scientists moved the clock closer to midnight in 2002.

Perhaps the Chicago scientists should rely on research to justify moving the clock ahead. These scientists obviously have no insight into historic climactic data and glaciation cycles.

Scientific data and computer models suggest that the Earth’s average temperature was 6°F cooler than today when it came out of the last Ice Age around 8500 BC. Just 1000 years later (7500 BC), the average temperature on the planet was just 1°F warmer than it is today. However, the temperature fell again by nearly 2° F over the next 1,000 years, settling at an average of 1° F cooler than the current climate.

Computer models also predict a 0.5° F increase in temperature over the next 1000 years. There is no doubt that global warming is real; however, this phenomenon reflects a normal cycle in nature and it is very unlikely that humans had anything to do with the change. The Earth’s temperature has risen 1° F in 1,000 years – long before onset of the Industrial Age and the multitude of environmental-friendly restrictions that have cost consumers trillions of dollars.

Politicians should think twice before increasing auto emission standards. Current legislation before the Maryland General Assembly will simply increase gasoline and automobile prices, and place even greater burdens on businesses that fuel economic growth in our state.

Feel-good legislation will merely cost consumers more and do very little, if anything, to offset the anticipated 0.5° F increase in temperatures. One only hopes that legislators rely on facts, scientific data, and common sense instead of the propaganda of a former vice president who hopes to revive his political career.

Both the former vice president and scientists in Chicago fail to consider all the evidence – they all appear out of touch with time.

Steve Whisler, a Catonsville resident, is a director of the non-profit Coalition for the Preservation of SW Baltimore County. He can be reached at aswhisler@comcast.net.

Government Data Mining and You

by Steve Whisler

Data mining is a serious issue that all Americans should become familiar with because it can seriously impact their way of life in the future. Unfortunately, many people fail to realize that freedoms are not taken away all at once, but instead incrementally until we realize they are long gone.

According to Ramasastry (2004), “Data mining, without adequate privacy safeguards, has the potential to be used as a tool to spy on American citizens without the judicial or procedural constraints that limit how far more traditional surveillance techniques can infringe privacy” (¶4). There are extensive United States (US) government activities as it relates to data mining. Much of the activity has the best of intentions, but can seriously impact personal liberties if left unchecked. Data mining efforts have become so intense that has raised many eyebrows on Capitol Hill.

In response to a US Senate request, the Government Accounting Office (GAO) recently outlined the federal government’s role in data mining. The GAO report (as cited in Sinrod, 2004) indicated that “. . . no less than 52 federal departments and agencies are using or are planning to use data mining, 131 data mining efforts currently are operational, and 68 such efforts are intended” (¶1). The reporter’s next paragraph provided even more concrete insight into targeted activities:

Significantly, of these 199 current and intended data mining efforts, 122 used personal information. Of 54 efforts to mine data from the private sector (including credit reports or credit card transactions), 36 involve personal information. Of 77 efforts to mine data from other federal agencies, 46 target personal information (such as student loan application data, bank account numbers, credit card information, and taxpayer identification numbers). (¶1)

While in the military, I and my shipmates took very seriously our obligation to observe federal statutes that prohibit using tax dollars to collect intelligence on US persons around the globe or against any entities within the US. There are occasions when the federal government is authorized to collect intelligence against these entities. However, only in extreme circumstances authorized specifically by the US Attorney General, a Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court warrant, or specific legislative provisions annotated in the Patriot Act.

Although my Intelligence Community colleagues and I were vigilant at distinguishing between legal and unlawful, there are some incidents where others in the government have a blurry view of the fine line between protection of the people and protection of civil liberties. Recently, a bi-partisan group of US Senators (Grassley R-IA, Hagel R-NE, and Nelson D-FL) were very concerned to learn that the Defense Advanced Research Programs Agency (DARPA), an office under the military’s Department of Defense (DoD), commissioned a $10 million dollar program to develop an extremely comprehensive data mining tool called Total Information Awareness (TIA). Two issues concerned the senators, specifically:

- potential violation of the Posse Comitatus Act that prohibits the military from participating in domestic police functions and law enforcement, and

- the violation of civil liberties by the development of a tool that collects and analyzes significant amounts of data against US persons.

Senators wanted to know why the military was developing a capability that indicated obvious applications in law enforcement, and was concerned that illegal activity might have already occurred during testing and development. Fortunately, the development process only used false data and the liberties of US persons were not violated. The DoD Office of Inspector General (2003) presented comprehensive information outlining the positive and negative aspects of TIA; one argument suggested, “The data search, pattern recognition, and privacy protection technologies would permit analysts to search vast quantities of data for patterns that suggest terrorist activity while at the same time controlling access to the data, enforcing laws and policies, and ensuring detection of misuse of the information obtained” (p. 1).

However, the DoD Office of Inspector General (2003) scolded DARPA for not at least considering civil liberties issues and stated, “”Because DARPA anticipated that TIA would be used for domestic law enforcement, a privacy impact assessment should have been performed” (p. 6). DARPA suggested that it was not required to consider these ethical questions because they were only using synthetic data during the testing and development of the capability.Overall, the DoD Officer of Inspector General (2003) considered TIA very similar to another program Congress had recently voiced concern over:

Congress has criticized the Transportation Security Agency’s Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System II (CAPPS II) because the system potentially impacts the public’s right to privacy and civil liberties. CAPPS II is a computer system that can screen the backgrounds of airline passengers looking for potential ties to terrorism by searching Government and commercial databases in an effort to make determinations about individuals as potential aviation security risks. (p. 5)

Fortunately, Congress forced DARPA to cease its development of TIA; however, it is still considering implementing a watered-down version of CAPPS II under the guise of protecting the nations airports and air transportation. However if history is any indication, it is only a matter of time when privacy standards will be relaxed incrementally until the government grants itself the power to collect as much data as it deems necessary to protect us all. Many can remember such legislation associated with seat belts and cigarettes — now motorists can be stopped and cited specifically for not wearing a seat belt, and cigarettes are banned in almost every public building, private establishments (restaurants and bars), and nearly banned in private residential homes in a Maryland county in 2004. I just wish that authorities would have come right out and told us all of those years ago that we must drive to a restaurant with our seatbelt fastened and leave the cigarettes in the car!

Questions of ethics are not simple by any stretch of the imagination. There are obvious gains for society by placing limits on a person’s activity. However, I wonder just how careful citizens are at safeguarding their personal freedoms. Unfortunately, there has been a tendency for government to assert that it knows best how to protect us, and many surrender a little piece of their civil liberties little by little over time. Concerning the matter of privacy, the DoD Office of Inspector General (2003) included a synopsis of Public Law 93-579, the Privacy Act of 1974 that:

. . . provides that the privacy of an individual is directly affected by the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination of personal information by Federal agencies. The increasing use of computers and sophisticated information technology has increased the threat to individual privacy that can occur when collecting, maintaining, using, and disseminating personal information. The Privacy Act provides certain safeguards against the invasion of privacy for an individual. One of the purposes of the Privacy Act is to permit individuals to determine which records pertaining to them are collected, maintained, or disseminated to other agencies and grants individuals the right to access and amend those records if they are not accurate, relevant, current, or complete. DoD policy prohibits the disclosure of personally identifiable records that Government agencies maintain without a person’s consent. (p. 12)

Today’s generation may permit the federal government to continue meager and responsible data mining capabilities, and conduct limited targeting of US persons with taxpayer dollars. However, we must always consider that future generations (or domestic or international incidents) might influence lower privacy standards and increased intrusion into a citizen’s civil liberties. Allowing continuous drips of water from a faucet will eventually create an ocean. Very small, incremental steps barely cause one to notice; however, I hope everyone will still nevertheless keep a vigilant watch.

References

Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (2003). Information technology management: terrorism information program (D-2004-033). December 12, 2003 [Electronic Version]. Retrieved July 13, 2005, from http://www.dodig.osd.mil/Audit/reports/FY04/04-033.pdf

Ramasastry, A. (2004, January 7). The safeguards needed for government data mining: The defense inspector general’s recommendations, and beyond.Find Law Resources. Retrieved July 13, 2004, from http://writ.news.findlaw.com/ramasastry/20040107.html
Sinrod, E. J. (2004, June 9). What’s up with government data mining? USA Today. Retrieved July 13, 2005, from http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/ericjsinrod/2004-06-09-sinrod_x.htm

The Dangers of Prescription Drug Subsidies & Price Controls

by Steve Whisler

The stage is set for the 2007 Maryland General Assembly. The Democrats are back in total control and there is nothing in their way this time — no vetoes, no obstacles with the Board of Public Works or Public Service Commission, and no Republican in the Governor’s mansion who could easily call press conferences and share his perspective with the public why extreme, liberal legislation was bad for Maryland. Yes, sir, the Democrats are back in town and the agenda is once again theirs.

There is little doubt that the 2007 Legislature will attempt to subsidize or restrict the cost prescription drugs within our state. Government action to subsidize or cap the price of medicines would have disastrous consequences. Increased government subsidy of prescription drugs in our state would almost certainly require raising Maryland income and sales tax rates. Price caps would decimate profits to pharmaceutical companies that fund research for new cures. Moreover, price caps would impact pharmaceutical industry stock prices and lower the value of many Marylander retirements accounts.

We can’t have that … profits for a pharmaceutical company!

Why is earning a profit really such a bad thing in American society?

Profits are linked with innovation and prosperity; something that many countries in the world lack. Walter E. Williams (2006), a professor of economics at George Mason University and syndicated columnist of A Minority View, offered some insight about profits … something everyone can identify with:

Here’s a little test. Which entities produce greater consumer satisfaction: for-profit enterprises such as supermarkets, computer makers and clothing stores, or nonprofit entities such as public schools, post offices and motor vehicle departments? I’m guessing you’ll answer the former. Their survival depends on pleasing ordinary people, as opposed to the latter, whose survival is not so strictly tied to pleasing people. (¶9)

Liberals and social activists alike suggest that price controls are the answer to solving the costs of prescription drugs. History is replete with examples where price controls have failed miserably. Price controls of meat products in the 1970s were useless because cattlemen and store owners simply changed the name of the meat in the packaging. Again, Williams (2005) illustrates that the public’s outcry for price controls does little to solve a problem created by supply and demand:

In the wake of the spike in fuel prices, many Americans demand that politicians do something. You can bet the rent money that whatever politicians do will end up harming consumers. Despite a long history of their economic calamity, some Americans and politicians are calling for price controls or, what amounts to the same thing, anti price-gouging legislation. As Professor Thomas DiLorenzo points out in “4000 Years of Price Control” (www.mises.org/story/1962), price controls have produced calamities wherever and whenever they’ve been tried. (¶6)

Price controls and government subsidy might be terrific news in the short-term; but such actions will have very damaging effects far into the future.

References

Williams, W. E. (2005, December 7). Caring vs. uncaring. A Minority View. Retrieved from http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/articles/05/economics.html

Williams, W. E. (2006, May 10). Caring vs. uncaring. A Minority View. Retrieved from http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/articles/06/caring.html

A more bipartisan legislature...huh?

Today, the 423rd General Assembly convened. While many bloggers have delved deeply into what this means for Maryland taxpayers, we'll stay away from trying to draw anything meaningful from it.

However, I don't understand why Miller and Busch are talking about being bipartisan in this next session or any other. It's incredibly patronizing. They control both houses with super majorities and the government house. They don't have to be bipartisan, weren't bipartisan prior to 2002, weren't bipartisan while Ehrlich was governor, and won't be bipartisan in the future.

Maryland Democrats have become emboldened as a result of 2006, think that their agenda received a mandate from the voters, and will shove that agenda down all of our throats. Maryland Republicans must pay attention, not be lulled into the democratic deceit, and begin making plans to hold the Democrats accountable for what they do to our state.

We will do that with a strong grassroots and pinpointing Republican resources to the areas we have the greatest chance of winning in 2010.

Will the Real Racist Please Stand Up?

by Steve Whisler

Delegate Emmett Burns, an African American Democrat who represents Maryland’s 10th legislative district, held a “hearing” on January 8, 2007, in Woodlawn. The “hearing” related to whether police in Woodlawn’s 2nd Precinct exhibit racist and rude behavior to the citizenry. Delegate Burns convened his “hearing” after a constituent claimed she was the victim of police intimidation tactics and racism.

According to Barry Barber, the 2nd Precinct Police Captain, the officer was cleared of any wrongdoing by an internal investigation and external review by a court commissioner. Police claim the constituent and two family members were uncooperative and used racial overtones and vulgar language in front of police and paramedics. Essentially a he-said she-said scenario, Burns suggested this incident coupled with other complaints he has received is enough evidence for him that Woodlawn police are guilty of racism. I asked the delegate whether he had any statistical or empirical evidence to back up these extremely serious charges. After all, it was a “hearing,” right?

Instead of presenting any factual evidence or data, he became irate and attacked me claiming that I as a white person cannot begin to comprehend what he and other blacks endure as it relates to police intimidation and/or racist activity. I wonder what the delegate’s response would have been if a person of color had asked the very same question. What factual evidence did he have to suggest that our police are racists? He offered no data or evidence – only an emotionally charged reaction to an honest question. Nevertheless, this was Delegate Burns’ “hearing” … he declared me out of order and demanded that I sit down and be quiet.

Earlier in the hearing, Delegate Burns suggested, “. . . blacks must respect police officers because they have guns, a badge, and the power to lock you up.” I suggested to the delegate that we should respect police officers because they risk their lives each and everyday to maintain public order and safety -- that I'm proud of their efforts in my community and that we should give them the benefit of the doubt. I truly wonder why the delegate used such inflammatory language at his so-called “hearing.” I would expect an elected official to take a more tempered stance to investigate all sides of the issue … not pass judgment and use his position to pander to potential voters who will swallow his anecdotal rhetoric.

Delegate Burns’ “hearing” was a spectacle that offered him a pulpit to deride police officers and paint them as a group in need of sensitivity training. Perhaps he wanted us to think that we need him to step in and save us all from our racist police officers. The delegate was the judge, prosecutor, and jury, and it was a terrible shame that a person elected to represent every single constituent in the 10th district did very little to search out the perceptions of how other communities perceive police conduct.

Before the “hearing,” the delegate offered his plans for the upcoming legislative session and asked for community input on what issues he should champion in Annapolis. The delegate showed is own racism when he responded to a few citizens’ concerns that Arabs and Asians were taking over many businesses in the district. Delegate Burns said, “If we’re not careful, too many foreigners will buy our stores and we’ll be buying items from Iraqis.” The delegate claimed that blacks might not be given equal consideration for owning and operating businesses in his district. He knows all too well that a Muslim, Asian, or any other foreigner is not offered preferential treatment to jumpstart business opportunities in his district. He merely allowed the notion to fester with the 15 to 20 people who attended his meeting.

As we approach Martin Luther King Day, it is unfortunate that Delegate Burns has forgotten Dr. King’s philosophy to look past a person’s skin color or heritage and rely on the content of their character. I applaud the delegate for exercising oversight of the police force to ensure they perform in an ethical and professional manner. However, the delegate’s actions at his “hearing” highlighted his own prejudicial demons and an inability to pursue the truth -- he is intent on relying on conjecture, he-said she-said scenarios, and a lack of facts. We all deserve much better from an elected official.

==

Steve Whisler is President of the Westview Improvement & Civic Association, one of Baltimore County’s largest community organizations with nearly 1800 homes. Steve is also a doctoral candidate with the University of Phoenix and the vice president of a defense-contracting firm's east coast division.

==