Barve Touts Asian American Support

The following is a press release from the Barve campaign:

ASIAN AMERICAN LEADERS UNITE BEHIND BARVE

Members of Congress, Maryland Leaders Endorse Congressional Campaign

Rockville, November 5, 2015 – Kumar Barve for Congress announced today the endorsement of Asian Congressional and Maryland leaders for his campaign for Congress.

“Kumar Barve is a leader in the innovation and technology sectors and is a proven job creator. He is a fighter for the middle class and working families,” said U.S. Rep. Ami Bera (D-CA). “His family history is the American immigrant success story and I would welcome him as a partner in Congress”.

“The AAPI community is united behind Kumar Barve in Maryland”, stated U.S. Rep. Grace Meng. “Kumar is a fighter for social justice. AAPIs are underrepresented in Congress and Delegate Barve has been a long been a national leader in promoting and protecting the civic and political rights of the Asian American and Pacific Islander communities”.

“Kumar Barve rose through the Montgomery County Public School system to become a groundbreaking leader in our community. His story – from his grandfather’s fight for citizenship to his historic election as the first Indian American state legislator – is our story” said Delegate Aruna Miller, who represents state legislative District 15 which is included with the 8th Congressional District. “Kumar has been a great mentor to those of us who have followed in his path”.

Barve is one the headliners tonight of the Maryland Democratic Party’s Mid-Autumn and Diwali Celebration in Gaithersburg that will gather AAPI leaders throughout the state. AAPIs, comprising about 8-9% of the population, represent a growing and increasingly active community within the 8th District of Maryland. Since his historic election in 1990, Barve has worked to increase the participation of the AAPI community in the civic and political life of their communities.

List of Endorsements
U.S. Rep. Ami Bera (D-CA)
U.S. Rep. Madeline Bordallo (D-GU)
U.S. Rep. Judy Chu (D-CA)
U.S. Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA)
U.S. Rep. Grace Meng (D-NY)
Norman Mineta, former U.S. Secretary of Transportation and Member of Congress
Maryland Delegate Mark Chang
Maryland Delegate Clarence Lam
Maryland Delegate Aruna Miller
Maryland Delegate Kriselda Valderrama
Virginia Delegate Mark Keam
Tufail Ahmad
Alan Cheung, former Member, Montgomery County Board of Education
Ed Chow, former MD Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Suresh Gupta
Rajan Natarajan, former MD Deputy Secretary of State
Farook Sait
Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus Leadership PAC
Asian American Action Fund

Share

MoCo Doesn’t Need Its Liquor Money

Today, I am pleased to present a guest post by Adam Pagnucco:

Even though MoCo consumers are fleeing the county’s archaic liquor monopoly, county officials are going all out to save it. Their arguments boil down to essentially one point: we need the money, and terrible things will happen unless we get it. The County Executive’s spokesman has said that a reduction in liquor monopoly money “means a reduction of county services or an increase in taxes.” And Council Member Hans Riemer has said that a loss of liquor money would mean “jeopardizing our ability to hire teachers or police officers.”

Are they right? Let’s look at the data.

First, let’s consider the nature of the county’s budget. It is not a static, zero-sum thing. Rather, it is a dynamic and growing thing that increases almost every year. The county deliberately sets property tax rates to increase collections at the rate of inflation (its charter limit) regularly. Income and energy tax collections rise with private-sector growth. State aid, mostly going towards public schools, has been rising. All of these factors have contributed to a steadily growing county budget.

The chart below shows a comparison of total county revenues, net income from the county’s Department of Liquor Control (DLC), and the rate of inflation in the Washington-Baltimore metro area from Fiscal Year 2004 through Fiscal Year 2016.

MoCo Revenue vs Inflation

A few things stand out. First, total revenues grew in ten of these twelve years, with small declines occurring in 2010 and 2015. (Data for the latter year is still an estimate). Second, total revenue has been growing at an average rate (4.2% a year) that is almost double the rate of local price inflation (2.4%). Third, net income from the liquor monopoly is a tiny fraction of the county’s budget and has been largely stagnant. In 2004, liquor money was 0.74% of the county’s budget; in 2016, it is projected to be 0.47%. Part of this is because the county has begun issuing bonds against liquor profits and thus must pay debt service. But another part is that the monopoly is poorly managed. Over this period, the county saw an average annual revenue gain of $25 million from liquor and $140 million from other sources.

That means county revenues would still go up even without liquor monopoly money. There would be no need for cuts.

Comptroller Peter Franchot has proposed allowing the private sector to compete with the county’s Department of Liquor Control (DLC). What would happen to county revenues if that were to occur? That depends on how retailers, restaurants and consumers react. Let’s consider what would happen if DLC were well-managed, price competitive and truly focused on customers. Under this scenario, it might lose just 25% of its net income. Here’s how county revenues would have performed since 2004 if that were the case.

DLC loses 25 percent

In the real world, the county’s total revenues grew by an average 4.2% a year. If DLC had lost 25% of its net income, the county’s total revenues would have grown by an average 4.1%. There would be almost no difference to the county’s bottom line.

Now let’s suppose that DLC loses 50% of its net income. Here’s how that scenario would have played out.

DLC loses 50 percent

The county’s average annual total revenue growth changes from 4.2% to 3.9%. Again, not much difference.

Finally, let’s look at what would have happened had DLC net income disappeared entirely.

DLC loses 100 percent

The county’s annual total revenue growth changes from 4.2% to 3.7%. The latter number is still 55% greater than the average rate of price inflation in the Washington-Baltimore area (2.4%). Furthermore, let’s keep in mind that this scenario would only occur if DLC were so awful that all of its customers fled. If that’s the case, why should DLC be protected by a monopoly at all? And the data above completely omits any extra revenue the county would earn from a revitalized private sector free of the monopoly that it calls “an Evil Empire.” Extra money from property taxes and income taxes could close some of this gap.

This discussion is not exclusively hypothetical. In July, the County Council passed a mid-year savings plan that trimmed $54 million from the budget it had passed only two months before. That amount is more than twice as much as the county earns from its liquor monopoly. Public education and public safety were not jeopardized. That’s because the overall budget provided for a $209 million increase from the prior year’s estimated revenue. County government continues to grow and no apocalypse has occurred.

Finally, consider this. There are more than three thousand counties in the United States. Very few of them have MoCo’s resources. All of them except us have figured out how to pay for their priorities and balance their budgets without needing a liquor monopoly. Are MoCo’s elected officials the only county leaders in the entire United States who can’t figure out how to live without one? I think not; I have seen them deal with much more serious budget problems effectively.

The county government doesn’t need its liquor money. So let’s End the Monopoly.

Share

Election Night Preliminary Results

The results are starting to come in and here are the preliminary results:

Rockville is not reporting vote totals but it looks like a good night for incumbents all around. Mayor Bridget Newton has won reelection, as have Councilmembers Beryl Feinberg, Virginia Onley, and Julie Palakovich Carr. Former Councilmember Mark Pierzchala will also return to the Council, leaving the balance on the Council much the same as before the election.

(Update: The Sentinel is reporting Rockville vote totals on twitter:
Mayor: Newton: 4069, Osdoby: 2182. Council (top 4 elected): Beryl Feinberg: 3,387, Julie Palakovich Carr: 2,947, Mark Pierzchala: 2,755, Virginia Onley: 2,698, Gottfried: 2,416, Schoof: 2,375, Mullican: 2,367, Hill: 2,317, Reed: 2,243.)

Patrick Wojahn has been elected as the new mayor of College Park. Here are the preliminary results (top two elected in each council district):

Mayor: Wojahn 1236, Mitchell 846
District 1: Kabir 698, Nagle 569, Sanders 170.
District 2: Brennan 160, Dennis 135, Conway 68, Blasberg 80
District 3: Stullich 402, Day 386, Belcher 366, Rigg 365, McCeney 38
District 4: Cook 184, Kujawa 163, Hew 130, Gregory 47

In Gaithersburg, Jud Ashman is the new mayor. Here are the preliminary results:

Mayor: Ashman 2380, Maraffa 1003, Bell-Zuccarelli 251
City Council (top three elected): Spiegel 2567, Wu 2498, Harris 2374, Sayles 2094.

Congratulations to Mayors Newton, Wojahn, and Ashman as well as all of the other winners and candidates.

Share

Dems Attack Redistricting Reform Proposal

The following is a press release from the Maryland Democratic Party (you can read my analysis of the partisan impact of the proposals here):

MARYLAND DEMOCRATIC PARTY STATEMENT ON REDISTRICTING REFORM COMMISSION REPORT
Annapolis, MD – Maryland Democratic Party Executive Director Pat Murray released the following statement on the Maryland Redistricting Reform Commission’s recommendations:
   
“Larry Hogan’s hand-picked commissioners received their marching orders on the day they were appointed. The outcome was predetermined by a small group of Republican insiders, the process lacked transparency, and the recommendations are fundamentally flawed.
    
“Congressional districting is a national issue, and it deserves a national solution. Republicans drew the lines in six of the nation’s ten most gerrymandered states and eight of the nation’s ten most gerrymandered districts. If Larry Hogan is serious about reform, he should ask his allies in the GOP-controlled Congress to schedule hearings on legislation to provide a national solution.”
Share

Kurtz on Madaleno

In Center Maryland, see Josh Kurtz’s column about Rich Madaleno’s role as a central opponent of the Hogan administration:

With Hogan riding high in the polls – a circumstance fueled partially by his commitment to cutting taxes, fees and tolls (regardless of the consequences to state government) – Madaleno has become a one-man truth squad. No one in the legislature has so consistently questioned the governor’s policies and the arguments behind them – especially on fiscal matters, where Madaleno, vice chairman of the Budget & Taxation Committee, has a particular expertise. . . .

“It did strike me at the beginning of this term, Hogan ran on a budget and tax platform,” Madaleno says. “I became the vice chair of the Budget & Tax Committee. It just seemed that I was positioned to be able to make the counter-arguments to the governor’s, I think, flawed agenda. So I was happy to step up and push back on what I think are many misrepresentations of what we’ve done over the last eight years.”

Madaleno has been especially vocal about critiquing Hogan’s education spending priorities. When Hogan announced earlier this fall that he was cutting certain fees for state services, Madaleno was quick to try to point out what he saw as the consequences – and take issue with some of the governor’s accounting.

Share