Wednesday, April 15, 1998

Bob Levey Todd Cross/TWP

Good afternoon and welcome to a special edition of "Levey Live." I’m Washington Post columnist Bob Levey, your host.

"Levey Live" normally appears each Tuesday. Today’s special edition focuses on this year’s session of the Maryland General Assembly, which ended Monday.

Our guest is Washington Post staff writer Charles Babington, who covered the session. It was unusually eventful. Major steps were taken in the areas of ethics, tobacco, tax cuts and school spending. Montgomery and Prince George’s counties did especially well, which some political observers think will strengthen Gov. Parris Glendening’s chances for re-election.

Your questions and comments for Chuck Babington are welcome throughout the hour.

Washington, D.C.: How do you see this year's governor's race in Maryland shaping up? Is it going to be another race to the wire or is Glendening relatively safe? Also, what issues do you see as pivotal in the election?

Charles Babington: The conventional wisdom is that the governor's race will be very close. That's because Gov. Parris Glendening continues to fare poorly in public opinion polls. However, with the economy so strong and crime rates falling, this should be a terrific year for incumbents, and it's possible that Glendening may win more comfortably than many expect.

Bob Levey: There was much noise made by politicians and journalists alike over the tax cut passed by the General Assembly. But it amounts to only $87 for a family of four that earns $40,000 a year. That won't exactly change the course of rivers. Why so much chest-thumping over this? Politics?

Charles Babington: Certainly, politics is part of it. Legislators always like to cut taxes in election years. Still, it amounts to a 5 percent tax cut this year, and I don't think anybody would complain about a 5 percent pay raise. That savings is all that a 5 percent tax cut is going to yield a typical family.

Bob Levey: The Maryland suburbs made out very well in Annapolis, chiefly on money for schools. Was this payback for the bucks the legislature sent to Baltimore last year?

Charles Babington: In some ways, yes. Last year, there was a special $254 million school package for Baltimore city. Suburban counties felt they were shortchanged and demanded better treatment this year. With budget surpluses available, the General Assembly was able to send many millions of dollars to county school systems throughout the state.

Hughesville, Md.: Direction on electric industry deregulation failed to emerge from the General Assembly this year. What's the word in the State House about tackling the issue in 1999? Are the legislators willing to let the Maryland Public Service Commission take the lead on the issue?

Charles Babington: I think they definitely will tackle this issue in 1999, but it's unclear how it will turn out because it was such a complex fight this year. Legislators were sharply divided between accelerating or slowing the rate of deregulation, and that difference may continue next year.

Bob Levey: What is going on with the former love affair between Gov. Glendening and Prince George's County Executive Wayne Curry? Curry was positively vicious when Glendening failed to pass the original school budget deal. Will Curry really not support Glendening for re-election?

Charles Babington: I assume you're being sarcastic about the love affair, because Curry and Glendening have never been close. There is speculation that Curry will not endorse Glendening, which would be a remarkable political event, given that the economy is so strong and Democratic leaders rarely oppose their own governor for re-nomination.

Hartford, Conn.: Our legislators rolled over for the farm co-ops and voted to let them form a milk monopoly. Did your legislators "milk" the voters too?

Charles Babington: Well, the legislature did vote to have Maryland join the regional milk compact. Farm groups very much wanted this. Grocers fought it, saying it will raise consumer milk prices.

Bob Levey: Let's talk for a minute about something the General Assembly DIDN'T do. They voted to study casino gambling, even the most digestible form of it -- slot machines at race tracks. Doesn't this in effect kill the chances of casino gambling ever being approved in Maryland? After all, gambling is now legal in 28 states, and there can't be a bottomless market for it.

Charles Babington: Efforts to bring slot machines to Maryland are certain to continue next year. There really wasn't a serious debate on that issue this year because Glendening had vowed to veto any such legislation, and legislators didn't feel like banging against a brick wall.

Now that Delaware and other neighboring states have slot machines, casino lobbyists will argue that Maryland is losing possible tax revenues to other states.

Bob Levey: About ethics: One senator was expelled, and another resigned, over ethics issues. But the rules are still very vague. They say that legislators may not do anything that lines their own pockets. Yet this isn't defined. Will the rules ever be tightened? Will an independent ethics agency ever be approved?

Charles Babington: This is a difficult issue in a part-time legislature such as Maryland. Most lawmakers have outside jobs that inevitably intersect with state government in some ways. The legislature killed a provision to establish a new ethics officer this year, but a task force will examine the issues this summer and will propose new guidelines next year.

Bob Levey: The legislature refined the rules under which the state may sue tobacco companies for damages. But how can it be constitutional for a legislature to tell a judge how to run a trial? Won't this law be challenged in court and thrown out?

Charles Babington: It will be challenged in court. Obviously, tobacco companies hope it will be thrown out. However, the state attorney general feels the law is constitutional and will help the state in its lawsuit against cigarette makers.

Maryland is one of many states hoping to recover billions of dollars in Medicaid payments for smoking victims. The law passed this year will make it much easier for the state to prove its damages in court. Unless, of course, the law is thrown out on appeal.

Bob Levey: As for Pfiesteria (we've all learned how to spell it). ... Has the crisis been solved by the $1.6 million in study funds the legislature voted?

Charles Babington: We won't know until this summer, when warm waters may help trigger another toxic bloom. This year's legislation will not affect this summer's events, because the mandatory controls on runoffs will be phased in over the next few years.

Bob Levey: Did Ellen Sauerbrey (the likely Republican challenger to Glendening) have much of a presence or much of an impact during this session?

Charles Babington: Sauerbrey showed up for the final day of the session, but like most non-legislators, she had little impact on the 1998 General Assembly. Her legacy, however, is felt in the House of Delegates. As the former Republican leader, she led a more partisan approach to the Democratic leadership, and that partisan atmosphere continues in the House today.

State Republicans fear that this year's tax cut may rob Sauerbrey of one of her best potential issues this fall.

Bob Levey: If I were suddenly running a surplus in my personal financial life, the first thing I would do would be to save some of the "found money." But the General Assembly did no such thing. All the debate was over how to spend the windfall. Did anyone suggest banking a few bucks?

Charles Babington: That's incorrect. The General Assembly did place tens of millions of dollars in reserve funds. Those reserves will help absorb the new tax reduction and buffer the government in case of an economic downturn, at least for a while.

Bob Levey: What were the final hours of the session like? Saturday night in a fraternity house? Satisfied smiles all around? Or was it as if a huge burden was suddenly lifted?

Charles Babington: All of the above. There is always a festive and somewhat goofy atmosphere as midnight approaches on the final day. But because there was so much revenue to spend on tax cuts and popular programs this year, legislators seemed unusually happy and relaxed.

Bob Levey: You made the point in several of your stories that the governor took no major steps during the session that didn't involve safe issues -- schools, kids, health, that sort of thing. In other words, there were no pro football stadiums to finance this time around. Did the General Assembly welcome the lack of controversial issues?

Charles Babington: Yes. Again, it always helps to have a lot of money to spread around. That's why some issues that might have been more controversial, such as devoting $29 million a year for [a] new children's health initiative, drew almost uniform support.

Clearly, Glendening was happy not to be fighting over stadiums or the type of regional divisions that animated the previous two sessions.

Bob Levey: One aspect of the tobacco bill was the right of the state's lawyer to collect his fee. You'll forgive me, but the sight of Peter Angelos (owner of the Baltimore Orioles) lobbying the legislature to protect his right to earn half a billion dollars seemed a little strange. To you, too?

Charles Babington: Well, here's the argument that Angelos makes: He agreed in 1996 to take this case entirely on a contingency basis, for 25 percent of any eventual judgment. Thus far, he has spent about $5 million, and he may spend many millions more. If the state loses, he doesn't recover a penny. Therefore, he says a substantial contingency fee is appropriate, and the state attorney general agreed to the deal in 1996.

Under political pressure, Angelos has agreed to cut his fee in half -- that's 12 1/2 percent -- but when legislators amended the bill to invite a judge to review the overall fee, Angelos hinted that he may sue the state at some point over the fee matter.

Bob Levey: Half an hour remianing with our guest, Washington Post staff writer Charles Babington.

Bob Levey: Lobbyists have always flocked to Annapolis during the sessions, credit cards at the ready, to wine and dine legislators to within an inch of their lives. Still happening? Are the lobbyists still as successful as they have been?

Charles Babington: The lobbyists are still often successful, but there's less wining and dining than there was several years ago. In truth, lobbyists don't need to buy meals for legislators to have influence. Lobbyists have lots of information about pending issues and legislators rely on them for information about the matters they have to vote on. That may make voters somewhat queasy, but a lobbyist's bias is generally well-known, and competing interests have competing lobbyists who tend to cancel each other out in some ways.

Bob Levey: Take us through the politics of the $140 million that the General Assembly approved for Prince George's County schools. Was that money ever in serious danger? Did the governor do the armtwisting himself? How did legislators from Baltimore react?

Charles Babington: We could take all day and not decipher this complicated issue. It's unclear whether the money was ever seriously in jeopardy. Legislators naturally resent having a governor or a county government dictate terms to them. Therefore, when Glendening and Prince George's officials agreed on details of the school financing plan, the General Assembly did not feel obliged to comply. In the end, legislators appropriated the money, but placed some restrictions on its use that Glendening and the county had opposed.

Bob Levey: Why were those new water and sewer fees applied to developers in the Washington suburbs?

Charles Babington: This has been a long-running issue. The groups that finally prevailed this year argued that new development should pay for itself. That is, the owner of a new house or commercial building should pay the cost of extending water and sewer lines. Developers, obviously, dislike this new law and say the entire county should share the cost of such water line extensions.

Bob Levey: You reported the other day that the stage is set for a major Republican resurgence in Maryland, largely because of new suburbanites. Yet Annapolis is still almost entirely a Democratic show. Why the disparity?

Charles Babington: The General Assembly is not as Democratic-dominated as it was a few years ago, although Democrats still have comfortable margins in both houses. Republicans made substantial gains in the 1994 elections, and Democrats in rural and suburban districts fear there could be more inroads this fall.

On the negative side for Republicans, they have failed to present credible candidates this year in the races for U.S. Senate, comptroller, attorney general, and county exective races in Montgomery, Prince George's and Baltimore counties. The party will continue to appear second-rate until it does a better job of competing in these types of races.

Bob Levey: Gov. Glendening is not known as a flesh-presser and backslapper. Did he change that image during this session?

Charles Babington: Actually, Glendening shakes hands and slaps backs fairly often, but for some reason he rarely seems to connect with people on a personal level. This is a matter of concern and consternation to his political supporters. Some analysts feel Glendening got off to a bad start with the 1995 pension scandal, and voters have been somewhat wary of him ever since.

Bob Levey: The General Assembly steered big money to the University of Maryland at College Park. That doesn't usually happen without a strong lobbying effort on the part of the university's president. But William Kirwan resigned just as the General Assembly was convening. How did the big bucks flow without him on the case?

Charles Babington: Again, it helped that there was so much revenue available this year. Glendening and legislative leaders had been somewhat troubled that higher education in Maryland has not been well funded since the recession of the early 1990s. Even before Kirwan announced his resignation, there were moves afoot to use some of this year's bountiful revenues in addressing that problem.

Bob Levey: Was there any discussion of extra money for Metrorail expansion in the Washington suburbs? Granted, the big pressure is to expand in Virginia, but there are some contingency plans that would extend the Red Line north and the Orange and Blue lines east. Is anyone in Annapolis thinking about this?

Charles Babington: I didn't hear any discussion of expanding the Metro system. However, the state did agree to pay more of the costs that previously were borne by Prince George's and Montgomery counties. Glendening wants a wide-ranging review of transportation issues and new plans for the Metro system possibly could emerge from that.

Bob Levey: Baltimore is not used to taking a back seat in Annapolis, yet that seems to be what happened this time around -- and it may happen regularly in the future. Does Baltimore have a plan to reclaim its former power?

Charles Babington: Well, Baltimore actually didn't fare so badly this year. It got a substantial share of the new school funding, even though it had gotten an especially generous package last year. Again, because there was plenty of revenue, few people complained. Baltimore's biggest political problems may come after the 2000 census. The city continues to lose population, and the legislative redistricting that will follow the census will deprive the city of some of its legislators.

Bob Levey: As the father of an almost-licensed teenaged driver, I was delighted to see Annapolis get tougher on first-time license-getters. Was there any serious opposition to this?

Charles Babington: My daughter is 14, so I can relate. There was some debate on this issue, including teenagers who complained that the new midnight curfew extension is unfair. But these comments were overcome by statistics showing that young drivers are responsible for a disproportionate number of accidents in Maryland and throughout the nation.

Rockville, Md.: What are the expectations for the next session of the General Assembly? Are there any large unresolved issues that they have not really even addressed yet?

Charles Babington: Yes. There almost surely will be a gasoline tax increase, because the transportation fund is dwindling and legislators wanted to wait until the 1998 election is over before raising taxes. Electric deregulation could be another major issue next year. Of course, if Sauerbrey or any other challenger to Glendening is elected this fall, there could be a profound shift in legislative initiatives this year.

D.C.: What can be done about the perception in the Baltimore that D.C.-area legislators are beating up on the city?

Charles Babington: There is traditional friction between these two constituencies, and in many ways it's probably exaggerated. Baltimore residents feel most state spending formulas should be based on wealth, which naturally helps Baltimore because the city has many low-income residents. But suburban officials, especially in Montgomery County, feel that income should not be the only criteria for driving state policy and they feel the state has absorbed too many of Baltimore's obligations at the expense of the rest of the state.

Bob Levey: On a lighter note, did the General Assembly really choose a state dinosaur? Is he going to dash onto the field at Camden Yards and kiss the opposing second baseman?

Charles Babington: It did adopt a new state dinosaur, and don't ask me to spell the name. Every year there's a question of whether duckpin bowling should replace jousting as the state sport, so this year's dinosaur debate was very much in that vein.

Germantown, Md.: On the topic of extending the Metro. ... What is the likelihood that the Maryland General Assembly (or Congress for that matter) will appropriate funds to extend Metro's Red Line (or some other form of light rail) to connect Montgomery County with Frederick County?

Charles Babington: I don't really know, because I don't recall hearing any debate on that issue this year in the General Assembly. I'm not aware of what Congress may be thinking on this issue.

Bob Levey: Give us a percentage: How much of Glendening's agenda did he manage to get passed?

Charles Babington: Nearly all of it in one form or another. I hate to sound so repetitive, but money was the driving issue this year, and the healthy revenues situation made it possible for legislators to fund almost every proposal the governor made. Even Sauerbrey couldn't complain very much, saying no one wanted to be the Grinch when the governor was playing Santa Claus.

Bob Levey: Campaign finance reform drew a lot of attention in Washington last year. Did it draw as much -- or any -- in Annapolis?

Charles Babington: Very little. Last year some new laws were passed dealing not so much with campaign limits but with stricter rules on reporting campaign activities. Those laws will make it possible for citizens to search campaign contributions on a database rather than the old system of bulky paper forms.

Bob Levey: More on the tax cut: That was Sauerbrey's key issue against Glendening in 1994. Was his tax cut push simply a cynical attempt to pre-empt a replay of that this year?

Charles Babington: Glendening resisited tax cuts in 1995 and 1996. In 1997, under pressure from conservative Democrats, he agreed to the 10 percent, 5-year income tax cut that was approved last year. This year, the General Assembly hastened the program, allowing for a 5 percent tax cut in this year alone. Whatever Glendening's motives were this year, politicians agree that he largely blunted Sauerbrey's appeal on the tax cut issue.

Bob Levey: That's it for today. Thanks to our guest, Washington Post staff writer Charles Babington. Be sure to join us next Tuesday, April 21, for the regular edition of "Levey Live." Our guest will be Ralph Neas, a Democratic candidate for Congress in Maryland's 8th District (Montgomery County). That seat is now held by six-term Republican Connie Morella.