Legislators voted on a slew of bills yesterday on the last day of the legislative session, also known as Sine Die. The state budget, which includes cuts to the University System of Maryland, ultimately passed.
ANNAPOLIS – As lawmakers scrambled to vote on several bills yesterday before the legislative session ended at midnight, students traveled to Annapolis to make their voices heard one last time on contentious pieces of legislation.
Yesterday marked the last day of the legislative session, also known as Sine Die – a day when legislators have until midnight to either vote on or kill legislation that has been introduced since January, or stall it for at least another year.
For many, yesterday’s votes signified victories in long-fought battles or foreshadowed initiatives they will once again prepare to tackle next year.
Operating and capital budget
Although legislators spent hours arguing over the final version of the state’s budget for the next fiscal year, legislators passed a budget bill that includes about $5 million worth of cuts to the University System of Maryland.
Lawmakers struggled to settle discrepancies between House and Senate versions of the bill even after it went through a conference committee yesterday. Although legislators entertained the idea of extending their time frame to vote on the budget by up to five days, they ultimately rushed to vote on a version of the bill in the waning hours of the night.
While the initial Senate version of the bill proposed $5.3 million worth of cuts to the system, the House version proposed nearly $20 million.
Lt. Gov. Anthony G. Brown said the governor’s proposed budget, which stipulates students would face a modest 3 percent tuition increase compared to the proposed 5 percent, represents the administration’s commitment to higher education.
“We have generally in each of the six years of the [Gov. Martin] O’Malley-Brown administration put fairly significant investments in all of our state university’s capital projects,” Brown said.
Several lawmakers said they felt the bill that went before the floor spent too much money and raised money for the state by burdening taxpayers with several revenue-raising measures.
“In the worst economy in 75 years, we’re getting ready to wallop our citizens,” said House Minority Leader Anthony O’Donnell (R-Calvert and St. Mary’s). “We’re spending money and making decisions that our children are going to have to pay for, that our grandchildren are going to pay for.”
Offshore wind energy
A bill that would create more sustainable forms of energy using off-shore wind farms near Ocean City was tabled, and the bill’s failure to pass prompted several student activists to protest the General Assembly’s decision.
HB441: Maryland Offshore Wind Energy Act of 2012 would provide incentives for developers to create more green forms of energy by using wind farms and has been O’Malley’s signature environmental issue since last year.
Even before the bill had officially been killed, student activists protested – and were charged with criminal trespassing – when it appeared the bill was unlikely to pass.
The Maryland Student Climate Coalition held “Maryland Wind Works” signs and sat on the steps of the statehouse as a “last stand,” said activist Megan Jenny. Student activists netted 4,000 petition signatures and staged demonstrations in Annapolis, Jenny added.
“Passing this bill is about the future. We cannot wait,” said Sam Rivers, who headed student activist campaigns for this university’s chapter of MaryPIRG. “Climate change is a pressing problem and it needs to be addressed now.”
Opponents have expressed concern over the legislation’s $1.5 billion price tag and the tax state residents would incur on their electric bills to subsidize the legislation.
Brown said the project is a big undertaking and may be an issue that plays out over a number of years before the governor’s vision of 200-megawatt wind turbines offshore come to fruition.
“We know that big initiatives like offshore wind, sometimes they take a number of years,” he said. “If we’re not successful this year we’re not going to throw in the towel.”
Gas tax
Amid budgetary uncertainty and an unwillingness by some lawmakers to push for more revenue-raising measures, a bill that would increase the tax on gas failed to make it to a vote yesterday, effectively stalling the legislation for at least another year.
The measure, proposed by O’Malley in February, would have phased in a 2 percent increase in the state’s existing 23.5-cent-per-gallon tax on gasoline every year for three years until it reached the current 6 percent sales tax rate. The revenue would go toward funding the Transportation Trust Fund, which grapples with a large budget deficit every year.
Brown said the measure is necessary to help patch budgetary holes in a cash reserve used to finance infrastructure projects and provide money for state transportation purposes.
“The need hasn’t diminished; there’s still an $800 million a year deficit in the Transportation Trust Fund,” he said.
Sen. Roger Manno (D-Montgomery) said many legislators expressed concerns over raising taxes in the state’s budget, especially as many residents already struggle to make ends meet.
Brown added that both the House and Senate were skeptical of the measure.
“We were willing to look at all alternatives, none of which were acceptable to the General Assembly,” he said. “What has emerged is a lack of interest in the proposal.”
Many students voiced opposition to the measure, and the SGA almost unanimously passed a resolution to oppose the tax last month.
“That we need more transportation funding is not controversial. It’s a question of whether or not that should come from an additional gas tax or from better management of our existing funding,” SGA Director of Governmental Affairs Zach Cohen said. “I think this was not the year to pass a gasoline tax, especially with gas prices as high as they are right now.”
Medical marijuana
While the state will have to wait to join the likes of 16 other states, as well as Washington, in authorizing the use of medical marijuana, the House passed a bill that would provide more protection to caregivers authorizing the use of the drug under specific circumstances.
The fate of the bill now lies in O’Malley’s hands, who will decide whether to stall the legislation for another year or send it to a special session, meaning lawmakers would vote on the bill in the coming weeks.
Del. Cheryl Glenn (D-Baltimore City) initially introduced the bill as a measure that would enable doctors to prescribe medical marijuana to patients with severe pain and end-of-life ailments. Legislators amended the bill, however, so it now provides caregivers who administer marijuana to such patients with a defense in court to mitigate charges associated with possession of the drug. The House passed the bill 86-41 just minutes before midnight.
Last legislative session, the state successfully passed a bill that lessened such charges by the user of the drug. Sen. Jamie Raskin (D-Montgomery) said this year’s bill expands those protections to the caregiver.
“This year we are extending that affirmative defense in the event of prosecution to a caregiver who would also be able to escape a prosecution on the basis that they were a caregiver for a seriously ill person,” Raskin said.
Lawmakers originally hoped to craft legislation that would set up a program to distribute the drug, but the effort was pulled after O’Malley threatened to veto it, Raskin said. O’Malley said he feared it would lead to the prosecution of government employees, but Raskin was skeptical of O’Malley’s reasoning.
“We feel this an extremely unlikely threat,” he said. “There are more than a dozen states that have medical marijuana programs and no state government employees have ever been prosecuted.”
Table games
After lawmakers failed to vote on a bill that would enable Prince George’s County to open a venue for table games, O’Malley will have the final say on whether the bill is voted on this year or stalled until next legislative session.
The measure, which was introduced by Sen. Douglas J.J. Peters (D-Prince George’s), would allow the five licensed gambling sites in the state to add games such as craps and black jack to expand their gambling options. Even though part of the bill stipulates it will go to referendum so county residents have the final say, the issue has polarized state and county legislators.
Peters said while he does not support gambling, voters should have a say as to whether their counties should allow such facilities.
“The people need to say whether they want it or not; sometimes our personal feelings need to be set aside for the voice of the people,” he said. “I’ve always supported referendums regardless of the subject.”
The venue is estimated to generate $48 million through table games and another $21 million in local hotel retail taxes, Peters said. He added that the county executive has pegged the National Harbor as a prime location for a venue that would serve as a “high-end economic development project.”
Opposition to the bill comes from the personal values of some lawmakers, Peters said, as well as officials from other gaming locations who feel the added site would erode their “potential base of revenue.” But because voters have the final say, the bill will not go over the heads of county officials or residents.
“The legislation is silent on the zoning authority of the county council, so the county council can still zone out slots even if the statewide referendum’s passed,” he said.
bach@umdbk.com
