Del. Doyle Niemann said (full message below):
The “people” of Prince George's County have said they don’t want new taxes. But they have also said that they want safe streets, good schools, good transportation, recreation, social services, health care, fire and emergency services, code enforcement, environmental protection, better jobs, cheaper colleges, more workforce development, higher quality shopping, and a multitude of other things – in short a ”livable” community.
He makes a good point,
BUT
The people of Prince George's County already have about the heaviest tax burden in the state, but they don't have the safe streets and good schools, etc., enjoyed by Maryland residents who pay less in taxes. Why not? Does Del. Niemann really expect us to believe that new and even higher taxes will bring us safer streets and better schools when previous tax increases and new revenue sources like the lottery have failed to produce better results?
Del. Niemann lists several things that he says people want. BUT, how about the many things on which our politicians spend money that few if any people (except perhaps some special interests) have actively said they want. Like:
- "Deputies" with unknown or non-existent duties throughout the county government,
- The county executive's imperial entourage,
- Luxury high school gyms when funds are not available for roof repairs,
- Millions for luxury senate offices when funds are not available for essential school construction and maintenance,
- Subsidies for mega-millionaire sports moguls,
- Judgments and legal fees due to bureaucratic and police misconduct, brutality, dog-killing, etc.,
- Pork bills--taxpayer subsidies for non-government activities.
Looking at code enforcement, for example. According to some contractors and builders I've heard from, Prince George's County is alleged to have an inordinately large bureaucracy requiring substantially more red tape that some nearby counties. One builder told me he can build and sell a house in Charles or St. Mary's counties for tens of thousands of dollars less than in Prince George's. Have the people said they want the extra bureaucratic expense or resulting higher prices? Have our elected officials done anything to help the people make an informed decision about the cost and level of services
And looking at both the issues of taxes and the services listed by Del. Niemann, I don't recall him, or anyone else, making much of an effort to:
- Tell us what each new or improved service is going to cost and where the money will come from,
- Ask us how much were are willing to pay for these services
- Tell us what specific results we can expect for specific expenditures.
The feeling I get, which I suspect is shared by Judy Robinson and a lot of fed up "people,' is that the majority of our elected officials
- Want a blank check,
- To spend on whatever they (or the special interests they court) want,
- With as little public scutiny as possible,
- Based on vague generalities about popular services,
- Without specific promises to provide any results commensurate with expenditures, and
- Without having to publicize or justify expenditures on ineffective or unwanted programs, services, and subsidies.
Del. Niemann tells us
People work very hard and diligently at trying to figure out what makes the most sense for the most people. (And that always includes the consideration of how everything is going to be paid for.)
Cost information is often available at some time in the state legislative process, but not always on a timely basis, and is not at all easy to track. Except for pork bills, the eventual cost of legislation is never included in the bill synopses and indexes on the MLIS website. Trying to find such information for county council legislation is a very frustrating, nearly hopeless process.
During the 2010 session of the General Assembly, Del. Niemann sponsored or co-sponsored 115 bills. I wonder how easily he can tell us the total cost to the taxpayers of the roughly 3 dozen of those bills that were enacted into law, as well as what the total cost would have been if all 115 had been enacted.
