With the state already $1.2 billion in the red, one would think the governor would actually cut spending instead of increasing the budget by 2.87 percent.
==========================================================
In the very beginning he said 2.87%. THE VOTERS WILL LET THE POLITICIANS KNOW WHEN THEY ARE TIRED OF HAVING THEIR TAXES RAISED.

Marty, in actuality, the original post by the Delegate said 4% increase, as noted in the Editor's correction. That said, it needs to be a lot closer to Zero % as the budget has grown at 3.5% since 2007.

John, that is an interesting question. I would suggest to the Republicans to stay away from associating themselves with social/economic policies which are divisive by their very nature. If the focus of the Republican party was on fiscal matters, the center might move their way. A 5-10% movement is all they need. The problem for the Republicans is the radical portion of the party which causes moderates to shy away.

The tax system in Maryland is regressive by its very nature, the key for Republicans is to focus on reasonable policies that reflect the fact we are tired of having tax rates increased but some are afraid of what other baggage a Republican majority might bring.

Almost every time either party wins an election, national or local, the prevailing party believes the electorate supported everything the winner wanted, instead, it is almost always choosing the lesser of two evils as perceived by the voters.

As an example, I frequently see "Speak English" signs throughout the county during our local elections. Right now in Florida both of the leading candidates for the Republican nomination are running ads in Spanish. Huh?

Marriage is a religious institution. Civil unions are different, and many people support that. To say that if Republicans changed a basic tenet of their belief system, they'd get votes is fallacious. I've heard countless Dems complain about the system and their legislators, but then vote along party lines because that's what their parents did.

Lalain, I don't need to defend Mark as he does an admirable job by himself, but "marriage" in both state and federal law also confer certain tangible and intangible benefits to married persons. You wish to deny those benefits to gay and lesbian couples.

You also state marriage is a religious institution, thus on its face government should stay away because of the establishment clause in the Constitution.

I disagree with you that people vote a certain way because "daddy and mommy" did. Although many people vote a certain way because of the belief system instilled by their parents in them.

So what you're really saying is that a family headed by a mixed-gender couple is privileged and a same-sex couple who is raising children is not entitled to the same legal protections that the first couple is entitled to?

I forgot to add it was the size of a beach ball! A good giggle!

What we accomplished was a large surplus when Erlich left office. It didn't take O'Malley 6 months to put us in the hole, and hit the rainy day fund. We also would have been in full bloom with slot revenue and table game by now if it wasn't for the left fighting Erlich the entire time. It's a shame to see thousands every day, leave this state to spend their money.

I believe that if the tax on gas is raised, it will do more than raise the price of gas. It will raise the price of ALOMST EVERYTHING. This economy is not strong enough to raise the price of almost everything

Raising the gas tax has a minimal effect on the economy. What it does do is reduce consumption as people will drive less. Drive less and you get less revenue. Silly cycle unless your goal is to reduce driving. In addition, gas tax increase affects those who can least afford it the most. Stupid idea.

Everything that gets delivered to a store comes via gasoline. Where do you think those delivery services pass their tax increases? I own a service oriented company and put 40K miles on each truck per year. Where will I pass the gas increase? Yes, to you.

Spin cycle is on again.