MENU

Sections

More

January 24, 2021

The Chestertown Spy

An Educational News Source for Chestertown Maryland

News Maryland News

Report: Incarceration Destabilizes Neighborhood Economies, Doesn’t Increase Safety

by Leave a Comment

Share

A report released by the Maryland Center for Economic Policy suggests decreasing the state’s prison budget will lead to a healthier economy and increased public safety.

The report, released Wednesday, found that Black Marylanders are 4 1/2 times more likely to serve prison sentences than any other racial or ethnic group. Indigenous Maryland residents are twice as likely to be incarcerated than any other racial or ethnic group.

“None of what we’re doing is making any of us safer and it’s most certainly not making those Black communities that are being robbed of human capital ― it’s not making them any safer,” Tara Huffman, director of the criminal and juvenile justice program at the Open Society Institute-Baltimore, said during the Maryland Center for Economic Policy’s third annual policy summit Thursday afternoon.

“It’s destabilizing them even more and you cannot contain destabilization; it will eventually spread.”

Christopher Meyer, research analyst for the Maryland Center for Economic Policy, a liberal think tank, said at the summit that the state currently spends about $1 billion of its budget on incarceration.

“We’re spending all of that money locking up all of those Black folk, and we’re not any safer for it,” Huffman asserted. “We’re not any safer for it.”

Maryland has the highest rate of incarceration for Black men among the 50 states. Despite making up just 31% of the state’s total population, 70% of the prison population is Black.

According to Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services spokesman Mark Vernarelli, there were 18,300 sentenced individuals in the custody of the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services at the end of October.

The agency also runs Baltimore City’s pre-trial facilities, which, according to Vernarelli, has population changes “very often.” At the end of October, those facilities held about 2,000 people.

According to a February 2015 Justice Policy Institute report, the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services spent $288,304,000 of its $1 billion budget incarcerating Baltimore City residents, alone.

Huffman said that one-third of the state’s incarcerated population comes from the city. According to a 2019 estimate conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, almost 63% of the city’s population is Black.

“What we know is that taxpayers in the state of Maryland are paying a lot of money from year to year to lock up a whole lot of Black folk,” she said. “Period.”

The report from the Maryland Center for Economic Policy said that there is “scant evidence” that heavy-handed sentencing policy leads to healthy economies and safer communities.

Instead, their report points to cutbacks in housing, healthcare, public transportation and economic opportunities and the criminalization of underground economy jobs, like sex work and the sale of illicit drugs, as factors that lead to increased incarceration and declining public safety.

For example, Marylanders who live in the 50 zip codes with the highest unemployment rates are five times more prone to being incarcerated than those living in other areas of the state.

The Maryland Center for Economic Policy recommends legalizing jobs in the underground economy, abolishing policies in the criminal justice system that criminalize poverty, and implementing comprehensive sentencing reform to decrease the state’s prison population.

Additionally, the findings of the report suggest that investment in public schools, public spaces and adequate drug treatment is the pathway towards a healthy economy and public safety.

“Then thinking about how we ensure that those investments are benefiting … communities,” said Meyers. “Again that comes back to measuring equity as part of the budget-making process [and] making sure that our investments are distributed geographically in an equitable way because we know housing discrimination makes geography really kind of a fulcrum of racial justice and injustice.”

By Hannah Gaskill

In an Anxiety-Ridden Year, U.S. Voter Turnout Rate Highest Since 1900

by Leave a Comment

Share

More people voted in this year’s election than ever before, some motivated by fear, some by peer influence, some by the wide options available for voting, some by social media and still others by love or hate for President Donald Trump.

As of Thursday, an estimated 159 million people, accounting for 66.4% of the eligible voting population, cast ballots in this election, according to the University of Florida’s United States Elections Project. That exceeds the turnout percentages for the past 120 years, going back to the 1900 race, when 73.2% of the voting eligible population cast ballots, ultimately re-electing President William McKinley over Democratic challenger William Jennings Bryan.

“High turnout is a sign of a healthy democracy,” Michael McDonald, who runs the Elections Project, wrote in USA Today on Wednesday.

He also pointed to a pre-election Gallup Poll in which 77% of registered voters said the 2020 election mattered more to them than previous elections – the highest level since the polling firm started asking that question in 1996. Still, over one-third of voting eligible people did not cast a ballot in this election.

Experts say fear of the ongoing coronavirus pandemic and about the economy, strong feelings about Trump, the current social climate and peer influences, among other factors, spawned this historic turnout. And many states still are tabulating ballots.

Following an established pattern since at least 2000, turnout rates were especially high in key swing states. Over 75% of eligible voters cast ballots in Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and Iowa, while over 70% of eligible voters did so in Ohio, Michigan, North Carolina and Florida. Georgia received ballots from just under 70% of eligible voters.

“There’s a couple of things going on there,” said Michael Hanmer, research director of the University of Maryland’s Center for Democracy and Civil Engagement.

“The feeling that something more is at stake could be part of the internal motivator” for individual voters, Hanmer said, in states where, because of the Electoral College system, a vote for Trump wouldn’t have much impact in a state that voted Democratic, and a vote for Biden wouldn’t count for much in a state that voted Republican.

Voters in the battleground states don’t have that concern. Campaigns spend more energy and money in states that could go either way.

“It’s harder in those states to ignore what’s going on. It’s going to be on TV, it’s going to be on radio, it’s more likely to be on their social media, they’re more likely to get a door knock,” Hanmer said.

Non-swing states with especially high turnout rates, estimated by the Elections Project, were Maine, Minnesota, Colorado, Washington and Oregon – all saw three-quarters or more of their eligible voters cast ballots. Maryland ranked fifteenth in voter turnout, with just over 72% of eligible voters, according to the Elections Project estimates.

The availability of mail-in voting and early voting due to the coronavirus pandemic may have contributed to high turnout in some states. In Maryland, about half of the state’s voters mailed in their ballots.

Historically, states that regularly conduct elections by mail, such as Oregon, have greater voter turnout than those states that traditionally do not use the mails for balloting.

In Pennsylvania, where ballots still were being counted, Secretary of State Kathy Bookvar told reporters Thursday that she expected a very high turnout in the battleground state.

“Pennsylvanians have had more choices this year than in the history of the commonwealth,” she said.

Hanmer said that voting law changes to accommodate the pandemic likely generated some turnout, but added that since even many states that did not make these changes, like Texas, saw increased turnout, there were other factors at play as well.

“I really think that the turnout story for this election is more about general interest and mobilization,” Hanmer said.

The pandemic may have been responsible for some of this mobilization: “We’ve had our lives upended and we’re in this environment where our physical social circles have largely shrunk, and we’re really hard pressed to avoid coverage of what’s going on in the news,” Hanmer said.

David Paleologos, director of Suffolk University’s Political Research Center, said usually “what increases voter turnout is the quality of the candidates,” but this year is historic in that high voter turnout seemed to be primarily motivated by fear.

“it’s just ironic to me that Joe Biden … has the ability to get the most votes, ever, ever, and he’s not the person that people are excited about,” Paleologos said.

Memories of Hillary Clinton’s loss in 2016 may also have spurred additional turnout for Biden.

“People didn’t get out to vote because they assumed she was going to win,” Paleologos said, adding that there wasn’t “that element of surprise” this time around.

Hanmer also suspects social media and peer influence contributed to the high turnout.

“A lot of people were engaged this year in contacting other people, and I mean just regular people contacting their friends, not necessarily always part of some wider formal campaign activity,” Hanmer said. “That’s just been increasingly common as a tactic.”

Alexandra Palm, a 24-year-old nanny and pizza deliverer in Spokane, Washington, said she did not want to vote this year, but was shamed into casting a ballot for Biden.

“On social media is where I felt shamed a lot,” Palm said. She said that it wasn’t usually personally directed toward her, but “if I ever brought up that I was not voting, there was never a time when someone would just ever respect that decision, ever.”

Instead, she said people told her she couldn’t complain about election results if she didn’t vote, and that if she didn’t vote for Biden it counted as a vote for Trump. Her father and people on social media told her “you have to vote, you have to vote, you have to vote,” she said.

Ralph Watkins, a volunteer with the League of Women Voters, said “just the tone overall seemed to be far stronger than in many recent elections.”

“Democrats were very passionate about wanting to turn (Trump) out of office, and many Republicans were equally passionate about wanting to keep (Trump) in office,” Watkins said.

Watkins said the pandemic and the resulting economic downturn generated turnout along party lines: those who worried more about the economy tended to vote Republican, while those who worried more about the pandemic tended to vote Democrat.

Additionally, “concerns about racism are really critical, and turnout in African American areas was very high and very democratic,” Watkins said.

Marqus Shaw, 35, of Oklahoma City, voted for Biden — his first time voting. He said it was mainly to vote against Donald Trump.

“(Biden)’s better than Trump to me,” Shaw said. “Trump just says things that you shouldn’t say, he shows no compassion, and he’s a racist.”

In the past, Shaw said, he has felt like his vote wouldn’t matter, but this year he said he “just can’t take Trump anymore.”

Paleologos said turnout driven by fear “doesn’t bode well for the system at large” and may indicate a failure of the party system.

“If we’re going to have two parties, the key is for the party system to enable and support candidates who have broad appeal,” he said. “Right now we don’t have that. Right now the party system thrives on negativity.”

By Gracie Todd and Luciana Perez Uribe

Hogan Signs Regional Compact to Promote Offshore Wind — But Md. Projects Move Slowly

by Leave a Comment

Share

The headline news is that the governors of Maryland, North Carolina and Virginia signed a compact on Thursday to collaborate and advance offshore wind projects and to promote the Mid-Atlantic and Southeast as hubs for the industry.

In reality, it’s another twist in the tortured debate over bringing wind turbines to Maryland’s waters.

The announcement by Maryland Gov. Lawrence J. Hogan Jr. (R) of his pact with Virginia Gov. Ralph S. Northam (D) and North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper (D) was pure Hogan, on-brand with his oft-repeated message of bipartisanship and collaboration.

“Maryland has been leading the charge when it comes to real, bipartisan, common sense solutions and we are proud to continue setting an example for the nation of bold environmental leadership,” Hogan said in his statement. “Joining this multi-state partnership to expand offshore wind development will further our strong record of supporting responsible energy projects that provide jobs, clean air benefits, and energy independence.”

Creation of the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic Regional Transformative Partnership for Offshore Wind Energy Resources (SMART-POWER) provides a framework for the three states to cooperatively promote, develop and expand offshore wind by removing regulatory burdens and providing economic incentives for the industry and related construction and supply operations.

It’s a nod to the potential of offshore wind energy at a time when states are scrambling for economic rejuvenation and job growth and are feeling intense pressure to address climate change.

“Harnessing the power of offshore wind is key to meeting the urgency of the climate crisis and achieving 100% clean energy by 2050,” Northam said.

The governors cited a U.S. Department of Energy study estimating that Atlantic Coast offshore wind projects could support up to 86,000 jobs, $57 billion in investments, and provide up to $25 billion in economic output by 2030. Virginia leaders in particular have aggressively promoted offshore wind in recent years, and the state’s largest power company, Dominion Energy, signaled this year that it plans to put more resources into developing its clean energy portfolio.

In a statement, the Sierra Club hailed the agreement.

“This partnership between Mid-Atlantic States is only the start of unlocking the region’s massive potential for clean affordable offshore wind energy,” said David Smedick, the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal senior campaign representative. “The region must move quickly to attract investment in this burgeoning industry and help ensure we bring clean energy and family-sustaining, union jobs to Maryland.”

But Hogan’s own record and rhetoric on two long-proposed offshore wind projects off the coast of Ocean City have been decidedly mixed — and some environmental groups have grumbled for years that he and his administration could be doing more to promote offshore wind. A year ago, when the Maryland Department of Environment issued a detailed draft proposal about how the state would reduce greenhouse emissions, environmentalists and their allies in the General Assembly argued that offshore wind notably received short shrift — a contention that state Environment Secretary Ben Grumbles pushed back on.

Maryland has two offshore wind projects under review by the U.S. Interior Department’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. The Skipjack Wind Farm Project, to be built by Ørsted Offshore North American, is set to be located 19.5 miles off the coast of the northern part of Ocean City and adjoining Delaware beach towns.

Also under consideration is the MarWin Wind Farm project, which would be situated roughly 17 miles off the Ocean City coast, proposed by U.S. Wind.

Both projects were enabled by the Maryland Offshore Wind Energy Act of 2013, which was heavily promoted by then-Gov. Martin J. O’Malley (D) and passed by the Democratic supermajorities in the General Assembly after a years-long legislative fight. But after receiving approval from the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) in 2017, the wind projects have proceeded at a sluggish pace — and amid increasing vocal opposition from political and business leaders in Ocean City, Maryland’s No. 1 tourist town.

Ocean City hired Bruce C. Bereano — arguably the most enthusiastic Hogan supporter in the Annapolis lobbying corps — to try to derail the proposals or push them farther offshore, and hired Timothy F. Maloney, a former state lawmaker and close Hogan friend, for some legal work related to the wind turbines, even though Maloney had no prior experience arguing cases before the PSC.

In the past year, Ørsted has had to fend off a challenge in the PSC after the company announced that it would be using larger turbines than it had originally said it would — to meet changing standards in the industry. The PSC, whose commissioners all have been appointed by Hogan, could have simply noted the change but instead initiated a lengthy hearing process to gauge community opinion — a process endorsed by the Hogan-controlled Maryland Energy Administration.

In August, the PSC signed off on Ørsted’s bigger turbines, at the MEA’s recommendation. But the PSC proceeding may have delayed the project’s completion by almost a year.

Without knowing how long the federal regulatory process will take — and the outcome of the presidential election could make a difference — both Ørsted and U.S. Wind said they hope to turn the turbines on in 2023, which seems like an optimistic estimate.

Both Ørsted and U.S. Wind issued statements Thursday that applauded the three-state wind energy compact.

Brady Walker, Ørsted’s Mid-Atlantic manager, hailed the governors’ “forward-thinking approach,” and said the company is “excited to engage with their effort to grow this new American industry.”

Salvo Vitale, the U.S. Wind country manager, said the agreement will be good for both Maryland and the region.

“We believe this strategic multi-state partnership will be critical leverage right now as many regions compete to attract the larger economic development that comes with the full offshore wind manufacturing supply-chain,” he said. “Locally based supply chain options will bring cost savings to Maryland rate-payers as we expand offshore wind development. We stand ready to be a creative and dynamic partner, with global expertise, as we work together to meet Maryland’s renewable energy goals, while creating high-quality jobs and driving significant local investment in the Baltimore area and across Maryland.”

Notably, neither company said Thursday’s announcement would improve the prospects for their projects in Maryland’s waters.

By Josh Kurtz

Hogan Announces Second $250 Million Business Relief Plan

by Leave a Comment

Share

Gov. Lawrence J. Hogan Jr. (R) on Wednesday pulled $250 million from the state’s rainy day fund, intending to keep small businesses open during the COVID-19 pandemic through help with rent, employee salaries, upgrades and other efforts.

During a State House press conference, Hogan said the state’s economic and health recoveries depend on everyday Marylanders continuing to follow safety guidance, while he also pushed some of Maryland’s larger counties to reopen businesses further.

The governor also chided the rate that smaller counties have spent federal stimulus money; only about one-third of $362 million in CARES Act funding directed to 19 counties in the state has been spent so far, with a deadline of Dec. 31.

Hogan said the new state funding would also be required to be spent by the end of the year, and suggested that counties use their unspent federal stimulus money to create matching grants.

“I have directed our teams in each agency to ensure that this much-needed funding gets out the door to our struggling citizens and small businesses as quickly as possible,” Hogan said.

The governor’s relief plan announced Wednesday includes:

  • $50 million for the Maryland Small Business COVID-19 Relief Grant Fund; the new infusion brings total state spending for fund to $145 million since March and will clear a backlog of all applications that have been submitted.
  • $50 million in new relief for restaurants, which can be used to help them buy improvements including HVAC filtration, outdoor dining amenities, technology upgrades to help with carryout and delivery orders, protective equipment for employees, or to help with rent. This money will go to counties, which will distribute it to qualifying restaurants.
  • $20 million for grants from the Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development to help businesses and entertainment venues in the state’s “Main Street Maryland” and “Baltimore Main Streets” programs.
  • $20 million to the COVID-19 Layoff Aversion Fund. This program already disbursed $20 million through the Maryland Department of Labor, and has saved 9,000 jobs, Hogan said.
  • Additional funding includes $5 million to the Maryland Small Business Development Financing Authority, $2 million for local tourism efforts, and $3 million for arts organizations and artists.

Another $100 million is set aside as an “emergency response fund,” which would allow the state to immediately direct money to areas of economic concern in the future, Hogan said.

The spending will be “critical to the thousands of struggling restaurants, small businesses and main streets across the state who are attempting to weather this crisis,” the governor said.

“Equally important to their survival will be all 24 jurisdictions finally moving into stage three of the Maryland strong roadmap to recovery plan,” Hogan said. State law allows counties to reopen at a pace slower than the statewide recommendations, depending on local health concerns.

Some of Maryland’s larger jurisdictions, where COVID-19 case rates have been higher, continue to limit certain businesses, including indoor dining.

“They had particular situations on the ground that caused them to go a little slower, which they thought was prudent,” Hogan said. But now, he said he believes health metrics in the counties warrant wider reopening efforts.

“We’re trying to get the schools open, we’re trying to get the businesses open,” Hogan said.

Overall, Maryland’s economy is rebounding faster than other states, but more help is still needed for small businesses, Hogan said.

“Our economy is doing better than the country and most almost all the states in America, but it’s still really bad. It’s not it’s not a great situation for all these hardworking, struggling folks,” he said.

The governor continued to call on federal lawmakers to get moving on a second round of nationwide stimulus relief.

“We need both parties in Washington to stop playing politics to end the gridlock and to get this done for the American people,” Hogan said. “Our small business community and our struggling Marylanders who depend on them for their jobs cannot afford to wait any longer.”

Comptroller Peter V.R. Franchot (D), who has been instigating for a state-level small business stimulus, including at Wednesday’s Board of Public Works meeting chaired by Hogan, said after the announcement that the proposal was insufficient.

Franchot, a likely candidate for governor in 2022, has suggested an infusion of at least $500 million, either from 2020 surplus funds, the state’s rainy day fund, or through borrowing.

“Today’s announcement by Governor Hogan is a good start, but it’s simply not enough,” Franchot said. “Contrary to the Governor’s analysis of our fiscal posture, we are in a position to do more without taking another penny from the Rainy Day Fund.”

Franchot also noted that $100 million of Hogan’s proposal is not yet earmarked for relief.

“Just two years ago, the State of Maryland was willing to pony up $8.6 Billion to lure Amazon’s East Coast headquarters. Surely, we can do better than letting tens of thousands of small businesses, nonprofits, and Main Street communities fight over scraps,” Franchot said in a statement.

Hogan said during the press conference that his administration landed on the $250 million figure because it would leave the state’s rainy day fund with about $1 billion, which has been the state’s longtime recommended reserve level.

Hogan also cautioned Wednesday that the state is monitoring a small uptick in coronavirus-related hospitalizations in the past week and that small gatherings and parties continue to be the number one source of new cases in the state.

“We can’t let our guard down and we should remain vigilant ― even when we are in close contact with the people that we know and love,” Hogan said. “Outdoor activity continues to be much safer than indoor activity, and frequent hand washing remains a critically important tool. Following these simple guidelines will keep us firmly on the road to recovery and help us slow the spread, prevent the surge and keep Maryland open for business.”

By Danielle E. Gaines

Franchot Urges Hogan to Help Md. Small Businesses

by Leave a Comment

Share

Maryland Comptroller Peter Franchot urges Gov. Larry Hogan to provide additional COVID-19 relief to small businesses in the state. Franchot, who made the request Wednesday morning during the Maryland Board of Public Works meetings, wants the state to provide $500 million to help small businesses.

Hogan said the state has provided $250 million for small businesses and passed through billions in federal funds to aid businesses and those who are unemployed.

The governor said he would be announcing additional measures to benefit small businesses on Thursday.

Both men agreed that Congress needs to put aside party differences and pass a federal stimulus package to help citizens and businesses.

Franchot is seeking the Democratic nomination for governor in 2022; Hogan is term limited and has been the subject of speculation about a future presidential bid.

Marylanders’ Attitudes About Government’s COVID Response Vary By Demographic

by Leave a Comment

Share

Nearly half of all Marylanders have experienced financial hardship since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and people remain concerned that they or a loved one will get sick, according to a just-released survey. 

Skepticism about a potential vaccine is high across the state, regardless of ideology. 

Republicans are much more skeptical about the benefits of mask-wearing and social distancing than Democrats. 

And Gov. Lawrence J. Hogan Jr. (R) continues to get very high marks for his handling of the crisis — particularly from residents of the Washington, D.C. suburbs, where Democrats outnumber Republicans by wide margins. 

The wide-ranging poll’s cross-tabs, which look at gender, ideology, race, geography and other characteristics, reveal fairly broad demographic differences.

The Goucher College poll of 1,002 Maryland residents was taken between Sept. 30 and Oct. 4 by the Sarah T. Hughes Field Politics Center at Goucher College. It had a 3.1-point margin of error.

The main takeaways:

A strong majority (58%) of residents said Maryland’s approach to reopening the economy has been “about right.” Nearly a quarter (23%) believed the state moved “too quickly;” 16% said reopenings came “too slowly.” 

Half of survey respondents (51%) said they believe the worst of the pandemic “is behind us,” a view that runs counter to the warnings being expressed by public health experts. Forty percent of Marylanders believe the worst “is yet to come.”

Just under half (45%) of residents have experienced “severe” or “moderate” financial hardship since the virus hit the state in March; 55% said they had endured no money woes. 

Nearly seven in 10 Marylanders said they have some or a great deal of concern that they or a loved one will become infected, while 31% who have little or no concern.

By an overwhelming margin, residents remain happy with Hogan’s coronavirus leadership. The former head of the National Governors Association moved aggressively to close schools, limit business activity and ramp up the public health response when the virus first hit. 

By a better than 5-to-1 margin, Marylanders give the second-term executive, who has started to position himself for a potential White House bid in 2024, a thumbs-up for his decision-making and rhetoric. 

The poll’s cross-tabs reveal a lot about the ways race, age, political ideology and geography shape Marylanders’ attitudes toward the epidemic and public health. 

Exposure concern, masks and the future of COVID-19 

Republicans are much less concerned about COVID-19 infection hitting their family. Overall concern about an infection is high (69-31). Among Democrats it’s even higher (82-18). But only 47% of Republicans say they’re worried about exposure. 

Party affiliation also affects residents’ views of public-health precautions.

By an 11-1 margin, residents believe that wearing masks and social distancing “can help stop the spread” of the virus. Support is highest among Democrats (98-2) and women (94-5). It is lower among Republicans (77-19) and men (84-13). 

Echoing the concerns raised by scientists and public health leaders, Democrats (52-38), Blacks (54-40) and women (46-45) believe the pandemic will get worse. Conversely, Republicans (74-18), whites (56-33) and men (57-33) believe “the worst is behind us.”

Although a majority of residents of all stripes think the pace of the state’s reopening has been “about right,” women, Democrats and younger adults were more likely to say that the state has moved “too quickly.” 

“Women are displaying more caution than their male counterparts,” said political science professor Mileah Kromer, the director of the survey, in an interview. “It seems to be on the basis of caution. It’s slight, but it’s present.”

Financial hardship

The COVID-19 has had a devastating impact on the state’s economy, and while some rehiring has occurred, the impacts on families have been widespread. Jobs have been lost and tens of thousands of people have been forced to dig into their savings and rely on help from friends, family and food banks to meet basic needs. 

Younger adults (56-44), Blacks (53-47), people of “other races” (54-46) and people who didn’t go to college (52-48) reported moderate or severe financial hardship due to the economic slowdown. 

People aged 35 and up, college graduates and whites — those more likely to be able to work from home or are retired — were more likely to say they had not endured any financial woes due to the coronavirus. 

In an analysis for Maryland Matters, Goucher revealed that residents of the Baltimore region were more likely to have experienced financial distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Residents of Baltimore City and Baltimore County (56-44) said they have had money woes. People who live in the Washington, D.C., suburbs (43-57) were less likely to have struggled financially. The same was true for the residents of Central Maryland, the Eastern Shore and Western Maryland (41-59).

Hogan

Hogan turned over the reins of state government to Lt. Gov. Boyd Rutherford (R) in March, so that he could focus on the pandemic full time.

Like his overall job-approval numbers, Hogan’s handling of the virus (82-16) would be the envy of any leader. 

His support is highest, remarkably, in two counties dominated by Democrats, Prince George’s (91-9) and Montgomery (85-12). 

Democrats (86-13) like his COVID game plan even more than Republicans (75-23). And his support among Blacks for the way he has handled the public health crisis (85-14) edges out his white backing (81-17). 

Kromer thinks the stark contrast between Hogan and President Trump works in the governor’s favor in the D.C. suburbs.

“I have to wonder if there is something there, given how prominent the federal government is in the D.C. suburbs,” she said. “They are in a hot spot and they’ve been in a hot spot for a while.”

Hogan is part of a group of Northeast governors whose early, aggressive actions have won them applause. Many Southern and Midwestern governors who were outspoken about the need to reopen have seen their poll numbers tank. 

Vaccines

President Trump, who has made more than 20,000 false statements since taking office, according to a Washington Post count, has repeatedly promised that a vaccine will be available this year, a statement contradicted by his own to advisers. 

The Goucher poll found that Marylanders are skeptical about vaccines. 

Asked whether they would take an “FDA-approved” vaccine, 49% said no, while 48% said yes. 

Younger adults (56-41) and whites (54-43) were more willing to do so. Adults between 35 and 54 (38-59) and Blacks (38-61) said they would decline. 

By Bruce DePuyt

Hogan Releases ‘Roadmap’ for Reopening State — But No Definite Timetable Yet

by 1 Comment

Share

Maryland will pursue a phased approach to business activity, social interaction and recreation, but the timing will be dictated by the state’s day-by-day tracking of its COVID-19 hospitalization rates, Gov. Lawrence J. Hogan Jr. said Friday afternoon.

In releasing his eagerly anticipated three-part “roadmap” during a State House news conference, he cautioned that a premature rush to resume commerce — or an over-eager return to socializing — would result in a second wave of illness, hospitalization and death.

And until there is a vaccine, life will continue to be different, the governor warned.

“The number of new cases of COVID-19 is still rising here in Maryland,” Hogan said. “Maryland is not yet able to lift our restrictions.”

The governor’s plan for reopening businesses and easing the stay-at-home order will take place in three phases.

In Phase 1, which he said “could” begin in early May, the stay-at-home order would be lifted, many small businesses would be allowed to open and “lower-risk” community activities would resume.

Examples he listed included small retail shops, boating, golfing, fishing, tennis, outdoor religious activities, outdoor fitness and gym classes, and the resumption of outpatient surgeries and hospital procedures in counties with lower coronavirus infection rates.

Phase 1 would also bring flexibility for counties to open parks, playgrounds, recreation centers and libraries — “if they deemed that appropriate safety protocols could be followed,” a reference to the use of masks and social distancing.

If Phase 1 doesn’t result in “a spike in deaths” or ICU use, Maryland could move to Phase 2, the governor said. If hospitalizations see a sustained rise, there are clusters of new infections, or people aren’t complying with social distancing, the state can pause Phase 1 and not advance to Phase 2 until conditions improve.

In Phase 2, a “larger number of businesses would open” and “other public activities would come back online.” Those would include indoor religious gatherings, larger social gatherings, more normal transit schedules, and — potentially — restaurants and bars.

Phase 3 would allow for the return of “higher-risk activities” such as larger social events and entertainment venues, non-emergency hospital care and an end to restrictions on nursing home visits.

For Maryland to reopen, individuals must continue to be vigilant, Hogan said. And they should be prepared to wear masks and avoid crowds until there is a vaccine, which experts have said could take more than a year.

“If we try to rush this, and if we don’t do it in a thoughtful and responsible way, it could cause a rebound of the virus, which could deepen the economic crisis, prolong the fiscal problems and slow our economic recovery,” he said.

Dr. Thomas V. Inglesby, director of the Center for Health Security of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, speaks Friday afternoon at a press conference. Photo courtesy of the Executive Office of the Governor.

Dr. Thomas V. Inglesby, the director of the Center for Health Security of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, echoed Hogan’s warnings.

“It’s clear that if we open the state today, we would risk a fast acceleration in the epidemic to very high numbers,” he said. “New daily cases are plateauing. … For the state to move forward in easing social distancing in a lower-risk way, there needs to be a period of declining hospitalization, and ICU stays and deaths from COVID, in Maryland.”

“There isn’t a decline yet,” he added.

In linking the start of the phased recovery to the COVID-19 data that are compiled by the Maryland Department of Health each day, Hogan implicitly rejected the demands from ReOpen Maryland, the group which formed two weeks ago.

ReOpen, one of several groups to spring up around the country, held a noisy protest last Saturday in Annapolis, urging Hogan to allow normal social and business activity on May 1.

The administration has created 15 advisory groups, made up of health experts, business people, religious leaders and nonprofit organizations, to guide the state’s decision-making on when and how to allow for greater business activity and social interaction.

Though he expressed a desire to get his plan moving in “early May,” the governor stressed that it can’t precede a downward trend in the key metrics. “We won’t be able to just flip a switch. Unfortunately, life is not going to just immediately go back to normal. In fact, it is important to recognize that until a vaccine is developed, the way we go about our daily lives and the way we work is going to be significantly different for a while longer.”

Reaction to the rollout of the governor’s plan was generally positive — though there is a desire to see more detail and a wider outreach.

Mike O’Halloran, head of NFIB-Maryland, said small business owners who have been forced to close face a “very harsh reality” and are in greater need of “reliability.”

“This is their livelihood,” he said. “Their homes are collateral and if they don’t pay their bills, they are looking at some pretty dire consequences.”

“We understand that the administration is between a rock and a hard place,” O’Halloran added, “but we’re hopeful that moving forward that more details will be released — and in short order.”

ReOpen Maryland was highly critical, however.

“Destroying a state’s economy, restricting civil liberties, and straining families’ emotional well-being requires a far higher level of certainty than ‘guesswork,’” the group said in a lengthy statement. “We advocate for an end to the overly broad, economically and socially destructive shutdown and lockdown policies that have injured countless Maryland families and businesses and had a chilling effect upon civil rights.”

Howard County Executive Calvin S. Ball said he appreciated the governor’s conservative approach to reopening the economy, but he urged a greater voice for local governments — perhaps through the Maryland Association of Counties or the Maryland Municipal League.

“There will be specifics that relate to each of our counties and the City of Baltimore that we need to consider, and I think that we can do that collaboratively, working together,” he said.

Senate Majority Leader Nancy J. King (D-Montgomery) said she was “totally impressed” with Hogan’s approach.

“I’m sure not in any big rush to go running out,” she said. “I want to get ahead of this thing before I’m ready to leave my home and go out and do stuff.”

Hogan said he is relying on a team of advisers that includes Marriott CEO Arne Sorenson, American Enterprise Institute President Robert Doar, Under Armour Executive Chairman Kevin Plank, former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb and Ingelsby.

As of Friday, Maryland reported 16,616 confirmed cases of coronavirus, an increase of 879 from the day before. Nearly 800 people have died (723 confirmed and another 75 considered “probable”), with 24 fatalities occurring in the last 24 hours alone, according to the state Department of Health.

The state’s population centers account for more than half the state’s cases. Prince George’s County had 4,403, Montgomery had 3,227 and Baltimore County had 2,234.

Go to https://governor.maryland.gov/recovery/ to read the governor’s “Maryland Strong: Roadmap to Recovery.”

By Bruce DePuyt

Citing Estimated $2.8B Revenue Loss, Hogan Freezes State Budgets, Hiring

by Leave a Comment

Share

Budgets are frozen and new employees aren’t being hired, Gov. Lawrence J. Hogan Jr. (R) said Friday afternoon, moments after the state’s comptroller painted a grim picture of the Maryland’s financial future in light of dramatic revenue losses caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the space of three months, state revenues are estimated to contract by about $2.8 billion, according to new estimates released Friday by Comptroller Peter V.R. Franchot (D) and the Bureau of Revenue Estimates.

Both income tax revenues and sales tax revenues are expected to fall by almost $1 billion before June 30, according to the new predictions. Other smaller pots of revenue, like lottery sales and court fees, have also contracted.

The losses since March and estimated through the end of June amount to about 15% of the state’s overall annual revenues.

The state has never before seen such a steep decline in revenues so close to the end of a fiscal year, officials said.

“The stay-at-home order as well as social distancing are absolutely creating the steepest economic nosedive in modern history,” Andrew Schaufele, director of Maryland’s Bureau of Revenue Estimates, said during a virtual news conference on Friday. “But in their absence, the final economic impacts would be far greater and playing out over a much longer period of time.”

The state will continue to meet payroll expenses and allow necessary increased spending to respond to the novel coronavirus, Hogan said. But his Department of Budget and Management will soon make recommendations for budget cuts, which will be required in all state agencies.

The state will also be tapping into and “spending much of, perhaps all of” the $6-billion-plus Rainy Day Fund to cope with revenue losses, Hogan said.

The state’s three-member Board of Public Works ― which includes Hogan, Franchot and Treasurer Nancy K. Kopp (D) ― is empowered to cut the state’s budget in real-time.

Franchot said the process of trimming the state’s budget by more than $1 billion during the Great Recession was likely easier than the fiscal stress the board will soon be forced to reckon with during the pandemic.

“That period, as awful as it was ― and it was just horrendously painful ― is going to be like a picnic compared to what we’re going to go through with this coronavirus impact on our state budget,” Franchot said.

Hogan noted that the fiscal estimates released Friday were a “worst-case” scenario that he hoped would not come to fruition.

“Hopefully we will not have to make the kind of cuts [the comptroller] was envisioning,” Hogan said later in the afternoon.

With much of the private sector shut down in Maryland to stop the spread of COVID-19, the state is grappling with never-before-seen figures when it comes to losses in tax revenue and employment.

In a matter of weeks, the state’s new unemployment filings have increased by nearly 5,200%, with more than 235,000 people filing new unemployment claims in just the last three weeks.

“We’ve never seen such a decline. Never,” Schaufele said.

By contrast, it took about 10 months during the Great Recession for the state to see 240,000 job losses.

Even with the sobering numbers, there are some things that may blunt the impact to Maryland’s economy.

While state income tax withholdings are expected to drop by 22%, Schaufele said it was a testament to the strength of the state’s workforce and close ties to the government that the number is not larger.

Maryland will see some financial relief from a federal stimulus package, about $4.9 billion, but that funding is generally intended to enhance safety net programs and cover new expenses, not backfill lost revenues.

The lost revenues and economic downturn will almost certainly have an impact on Democrats’ top priority this year ― a decade-long multi-billion-dollar effort to reform the state’s education system.

That bill, along with more than 650 others passed during the 2020 General Assembly session, were formally sent to Hogan’s office for consideration earlier this week. While his office has not yet reviewed the bills, Hogan said Friday “that it is very unlikely that any bills that require increased spending will be signed into law.”

In response, state Senate President Bill Ferguson (D-Baltimore City) agreed with Hogan that “we will be forced to make hard choices about priorities and values. COVID-19 has changed the world and it has changed Maryland.”

But without specifically referring to the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future, the ambitious education spending and reform plan that the legislature passed last month, Ferguson suggested that it would be wrong for state leaders not to look ahead and bolster the state’s education system.

“This crisis will end, and the cost of containing this crisis cannot be the foreclosure on hope for a better future,” Ferguson said. “Now, more than ever, our decisions about who we are and what we believe about every individual’s God-given potential must continue to be our guide.”

Public health will dictate ‘return to normalcy’

The estimated revenue losses released Friday assume that a stay-at-home order remains in place at least through June 30.

In recent interviews, Hogan and the state’s public health professionals have expressed reluctance to begin lifting social-distancing measures too early, fearing that could cause a new spike in the number of COVID-19 diagnoses in the state.

As of Friday morning, there were 6,968 confirmed coronavirus cases in the state, and 171 Marylanders have died since mid-March.

All officials have said advice from public health experts will dictate the end of measures intended to stop the spread of the virus.

“To be clear, the timeline and pace for when we return to normalcy should and must be dictated by our public health experts, and must be influenced by the health dangers this virus may continue to pose to our citizens,” Franchot said.

By Danielle E. Gaines

Nation’s Governors Urge Federal Leaders to Provide Immediate Fiscal Relief for States

by Leave a Comment

Share

Bipartisan Request for $500 Billion To Meet Budgetary Shortfalls Resulting from Unprecedented Public Health Crisis

Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, chairman of the National Governors Association, and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, vice chairman, issued the following statement Saturday:

“Governors across the country are leading the on-the-ground response to the national COVID-19 pandemic, implementing a variety of stay at home orders and other aggressive measures that are successfully flattening the curve of the spread of the virus. While these public health strategies are working to protect the American people, they result in catastrophic damage to state economies.

“Despite this grave challenge, the recently passed federal CARES Act contained zero funding to offset these drastic state revenue shortfalls. To stabilize state budgets and to make sure states have the resources to battle the virus and provide the services the American people rely on, Congress must provide immediate fiscal assistance directly to all states.

“We must be allowed to use any state stabilization funds for replacement of lost revenue, and these funds should not be tied to only COVID-19 related expenses. Congress must amend the CARES Act to allow this flexibility for existing federal funding.

“Moreover, Congress must appropriate an additional $500 billion specifically for all states and territories to meet the states’ budgetary shortfalls that have resulted from this unprecedented public health crisis. This critical stabilization funding for states must be separate from much needed fiscal stabilization for local governments.

“In the absence of unrestricted fiscal support of at least $500 billion from the federal government, states will have to confront the prospect of significant reductions to critically important services all across this country, hampering public health, the economic recovery, and—in turn—our collective effort to get people back to work.”

There’s No Wage Like the Minimum Wage

by

Share

On March 27, 2019 Maryland faced financial Armageddon.

The disaster Hogan saw looming was a bill the legislature had approved that would gradually raise the minimum wage from $10.10 to $15 per hour by 2025.

As disasters go, it qualifies as a Bigfoot: often rumored but never confirmed.

However, in Hogan’s defense, he was upholding the classical economic theory that when prices rise demand drops. If businesses were forced to pay more to their workers, the classical model says they would have to lay off some of their workforce to remain competitive. Or, alternatively, they could raise their prices. But that would put them at a competitive disadvantage with nearby states like Virginia, which has a $7.25 minimum wage. Disaster ensues.

But is the classical theory accurate?

When it comes to child hunger, it is a key question. Raise the minimum wage and people will have more money to buy food. This is especially true in Maryland, where the current minimum wage of $11 means a person would earn $22,880 a year. That is far below the $60,000 that MIT has said a family of one child and one parent would need to survive in Anne Arundel County.

And, as disasters go, it is Maryland’s reluctance to substantially raise its minimum wage that seems more pressing. In places like Anne Arundel County there has been a sharp rise in the number of children eligible for free school lunches over the last decade.

It was precisely the question of the minimum wage that interested David Card and Alan Krueger, two Princeton University economists, in the early 1990s.

On April 1, 1992 the New Jersey legislature did something that appeared to be pretty unremarkable at the time: it raised the state minimum wage from $4.25 to $5.05 per hour.

What Krueger and Card realized was that New Jersey had set up the perfect natural experiment in economics. While New Jersey had raised its minimum wage, the adjoining state of Pennsylvania had not. Its minimum wage was still $4.25.

If the classical theory was correct, unemployment would go up in New Jersey where labor costs had risen and, conversely, businesses would move to Pennsylvania to take advantage of the lower minimum wage there. In other words, New Jersey would be the test group and Pennsylvania the control group.

Before the minimum wage hike took place, the two men started collecting data on employment, wages and prices at 410 fast food restaurants in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. And after the increase they revisited the same restaurants to see what happened.

Much to the researchers’ surprise, employment didn’t drop in New Jersey. In fact, it went up slightly.

“Contrary to the central prediction of the textbook model … we find no evidence that the rise in New Jersey’s minimum wage reduced employment at fast-food restaurants in the state,” the professors concluded.

That would seem to have settled the question. But as one anonymous wag once noted, “If all the economists were laid end to end, they would never reach a conclusion.” And, indeed, subsequent studies have both confirmed and disputed the 1993 paper.

A paper by three researchers at the University of British Columbia said that if the Princeton economists had followed labor trends a bit longer, they would have eventually seen minimum wage workers losing their jobs. On the other hand, a study by four economists who investigated 139 minimum wage hikes over a nearly 40-year period argued that Krueger and Card were right.

And so, the debate continues.

That was why at a February 2019 hearing in Annapolis, Pat McElroy, vice president of Tim’s Automotive Services in Baltimore County, warned, “Our employees suffer if the minimum wage goes up. People in Maryland suffer. We have been in business for 31 years. We’re Marylanders. We aren’t moving. But our employees are victims themselves.”

McElroy’s argument is not new. In fact, it is eerily similar to what was said in another debate a century earlier, over child labor.

In 1916, while Congress debated a bill to restrict child labor, Rep. J. J. Britt (R) of North Carolina said he opposed the bill in part because, “it would take the children’s jobs away and ruin their chances of becoming useful citizens by throwing them out on the streets to loaf.” At the time, children as young as 12 were working 10-hour shifts in textile mills.

The same refrain is also heard when Randy Hargrove, the official Walmart spokesman, tries to defend his company’s low wages. Walmart is actually mentoring its employees, Hargrove says. “It’s not where you start. It’s where you end up. It’s the opportunities you have. Beyond anything else, we offer opportunity.”

And Hargrove’s argument echoes that of former North Carolina Gov. William W. Kitchin (D) in 1916. Kitchin defended child labor saying, “There are orphans, children of widows, and dependents who must work in order to live. A cotton mill pays him more wages than he can get anywhere else in the South … he lives in a better home, has better clothing and better food in 99 cases out of 100 than he had before his parents came to the mill.”

Child labor offers opportunity!

These arguments all use the same trope. Whether defending a 12-year old working 10 hours a day in a factory or paying a worker a salary he can’t possibly live on, it is all being done in the best interests of the person being exploited.

The net result of the political debate at the national level is gridlock. While 29 states have increased their minimum wage, the federal minimum wage is stuck at $7.25 and it has been stuck there since 2009.

The truth may be that the political debate over the minimum wage may not be moored to any kind of reality.

Opponents of any minimum wage increase ignore at the very least such things as inflation and productivity growth. If $7.25 was acceptable in 2009, why would it be a disaster to at least increase it by the rate of inflation?

There has also been productivity growth over the decade. A person who was able to produce one widget in 2009 is now able to produce three widgets thanks to technological innovations. Why shouldn’t workers share in this increased productivity?

This is precisely the argument of Benjamin Orr, executive director of the Maryland Center on Economic Policy. “For much of our history wages and productivity moved in tandem. Then in the 1970s, we saw it divide,” Orr said. “When you look at where our minimum wage would be if we had kept pace with productivity and accounting for inflation, it’s much higher than any of the proposals out there. As of last year, it would be $20.34.”

Those on the other side of the debate have seized on the idea that $15 per hour is a living wage. When the cry for a $15 minimum wage first went up seven years ago in New York City, it came from disgruntled workers in the city’s fast food restaurants. “Many of these workers have to rely on government assistance because they’re being paid poverty wages,” one of the protestors explained.

Now the rallying cry for those who want to raise the minimum wage is $15 an hour.

But that claim runs headlong into the broken yardsticks we use to measure what a living wage is. A $15 minimum wage works out to be $31,200 per year. If we use the federal threshold of $12,490, the person seems to have experienced a windfall.

But the federal measure of poverty is so discredited that, when calculating federal benefits, government typically bumps up that number. For example, to be eligible for food stamps in Maryland you can earn up to 130% of the federal poverty level.

The $15 figure also does not consider how many people must depend on that paycheck. The MIT Living Wage calculator says that if the wage earner has one child, the living wage in Anne Arundel County is $60,000. But add a few more children to the equation and now the MIT calculator says the family income must be over $80,000 to stave off poverty.

“I believe in Maryland there is no jurisdiction in the state where the minimum wage is enough to support a family of four,” said Orr. “People think about the minimum wage as a kind of starter job for high school students. In fact, who makes the minimum wage has changed dramatically in the last 50 years. These are career tracks that people get stuck on at minimum wage or close to minimum wage level.”

If raising the minimum wage is not a panacea, the legislature decided it is also not an impending disaster. The day after the governor vetoed the increase, the legislature overrode the veto.

We now await the arrival of Bigfoot.

COMING MONDAY: The final installment

Read the whole series so far:

Part one: Meet the Food Stamp Firms of Maryland, plus Bum Blockade: How We Got the Food Stamp Data

Part two: All About the Hunger Industry, plus The Tax Deduction Recipe That Feeds Hunger

Part three: Measuring Hunger: One Size Does Not Fit All, plus Calculating How to Go Hungry

Part four: The No Man’s Land of Childhood Hunger

Part five: When the Floor Becomes the Ceiling

Elliot Jaspin is a Pulitzer prize-winning journalist who has worked for over 40 years at newspapers in Pennsylvania, Maine, Rhode Island and Washington, D.C. He has also taught journalism at the University of Missouri and the University of Maryland.

Jaspin founded the National Institute for Computer-Assisted Reporting and was honored for his computer work by the National Press Foundation in 1994. In addition, he is the author of “Buried In The Bitter Waters: The Hidden History Of Racial Cleansing In America.” He lives in Annapolis and can be reached at elliot_jaspin@yahoo.com.