The two candidates for the District 32 state Senate seat were at the Sun newsroom in Pasadena on Oct. 9 to debate. Incumbent Democrat Michael J. Wagner and County Council Chairman C. Edward Middlebrooks, a Republican who is leaving the council to challenge Mr. Wagner, were questioned by three Sun reporters for more than an hour. What follows is an edited transcript of that exchange.
*
Mr. Wagner, should the state reform the welfare system? And do you favor proposals to limit the number of children in a single family that receives public assistance -- the so-called family cap?
Wagner: I voted for both of them. Why? Well, a lot of reasons. There's a lot of abuse in the welfare system. I think people are outraged that people keep having babies while they're collecting welfare and get rewarded by getting more money. You know, it's a big issue with people and we tried to address it last year and unfortunately we only got half of it passed and the governor vetoed that half.
Middlebrooks: I agree with Senator Wagner on this issue. I think we have to limit the number of children on welfare and I think we have to establish a family cap. It gets down to the basics of the budget. We're facing, according to the projections I've heard, up to a $800 million deficit in the next four years, potentially. The fastest growing segment of that budget is entitlements and mandatory programs. And you're going to have to deal with it. Now, in Anne Arundel County we developed the C-DAP program, and we're trying to pick up families before they go on welfare. In other words, we've identified 100 families right now that are potentially going to go on welfare, that lost their jobs. In cooperation with the federal government and the state government what we're doing is it's a business -- organizations such as the Rotary Club, churches -- a partnership. What we've done there is they're the mentors. In other words, they go to those families and they try to teach them employment skills, they try to find them jobs, they try to develop a plan of catching these people. And also more importantly, they deal with it before they actually have crisis in their lives.
Wagner: I'm on record.
*
Mr. Middlebrooks, during the campaign you have promoted the idea of a two-term limit for state senators. Why?
Middlebrooks: I supported the two-term limit for County Council members when I was part of that council. I think eight years is enough for any elected officeholder. The governor goes by it, the county executive goes by it, the president of the United States goes by it. And I think the general segment of the public supports term limits. That bill passed with 70 percent of the votes in Anne Arundel County, roughly. And I think people want some change, they want some new ideas. Senator Wagner's been there 16 years and I think that's long enough. These offices should be to serve the people, not coronations or lifetime jobs for any one person. That's why I believe in term limits. I think it forces you to make decisions that are going to be to the best benefit of your constituents.
Wagner: We have term limits. They're called democratic elections. Everybody can register to vote and everybody votes every four years. And you come back with your report card and you bring it to the people and if your report card's good, they vote you back in. If not, you've got a term limit. And it's true, the president, the governor and the county executive have two-term limits. They're executive positions. You don't want someone to grab control over the United States government or grab control over the Maryland state government or grab control over the Anne Arundel County government. Well, the legislature is different. If we had term limits in Maryland right now in the legislature, that would mean [state Sen.] Jack Cade couldn't be there, [Senate President] Mike Miller couldn't be there, [state Sen.] Larry Levitan couldn't be there. There's just a number of good people. Even in your own editorial, your people talked about the great things that happened in the election with all these new faces. But then, on the other side, you said it's great for Baltimore City because we've got [senior senators] going down there in leadership positions and they're going to be able to bring home the bacon. Now what do we want? Fresh faces, or do we want leadership? I say in the legislature we want leadership.
Middlebrooks: This is one issue clearly the senator and I disagree on. I think 70 percent of Anne Arundel citizens voted for the County Council term limit. I think the feeling among the
public is the same for a state term limit. I believe while it's true, they come up with pork for their areas, there's other things, such as the ever-increasing size of state government, the potential deficit of $800 million. And I think people think eight years is enough. If you can't get it done in eight years, it's time to move on.
*
Mr. Wagner, you lobbied over several years for the creation of light rail and bringing it to Anne Arundel County. Why?
Wagner: Because it was the right thing to do. Every city and state in the country is looking for ways to get cars off the street. We need mass transportation. And I lobbied for it and it was the right thing to do and everybody agrees that it was the right thing to do. I mean, the county executive of Baltimore County, the mayor of Baltimore City, the county executive of Anne Arundel County, the Maryland legislature, the governor, everyone voted for that. Everyone knew it was the right thing to do and it's proven right now that it was the right thing to do. The ridership is above projections. People accept it. There have been some problems and we've addressed the problems. But every city in the country wishes they could have a light rail system like we have. And all the cities are addressing that. And we're going to have to continue to have light rail if we're going to get cars off the street. I mean, you're talking about the environment, you're talking about traffic jams, you're talking about so many problems that light rail addresses. I'm proud that I was in the forefront. Unfortunately, I only get the credit for the bad things. The governor gets the credit for bringing light rail in and I get credit for bringing the criminals in, but so be it.
Middlebrooks: This is a great opportunity for me to clarify my position. I think it's been inaccurate to say I'm against light rail. What I've been against is the route light rail is presently taking down the [B & A] hiker-biker trail. Anne Arundel County spent $10 million to fix that hiker-biker trail. It's used by countless citizens in the Glen Burnie area. I think there's a better alternate route [for light rail]. I think we look down 97. It's a straight shot. It can serve the entire county. You can serve West County. You can serve Annapolis, Severna Park. It would be more efficient. It wouldn't be cutting through our neighborhood back yards. And that's where the senator and I disagree; not so much do we need light rail, I agree with that. My question is, what route is it going to take?
Wagner: My position is very clear on bringing light rail to Glen Burnie. And the alternative routes he talks about, we had them. I mean, I've laid six routes on the table. I laid the hiker-biker trail, which was preserved for light rail, for linear mass transportation, by the [then-county executive Robert] Pascal administration. The reason we bought that was not to put a hiker-biker path there. It was to preserve it just in case we ever brought mass transit in. But I put six proposals on the table. One is the hiker-biker path, one is Old Annapolis Road, one is Georgia Avenue, one is I-97. I put them all there and I told Glen Burnie, pick one and I'll try to get you funding.
*
Mr. Middlebrooks, what's wrong with the proposals that Mr. Wagner just outlined for the path of light rail. Why do you support the I-97 corridor?
Middlebrooks: Let me explain it real quick to you. When you go to Owings Mills, does it run up into the communities? It's running right up the major highways. The reason I think I-97 is it's going to be more efficient. You don't have crossovers, you don't have traffic lights, you're not dealing with pedestrian traffic. When you're running light rail through Glen Burnie, it's going to come back to the hiker-biker trail at some point, or it's going to cut through neighborhood's back yards. I've heard the constituents. They don't want their kids playing outside of light rail. Ferndale used to have a community day right up in front of the fire house. They moved it. The reason they told me they moved it was because it was too close to light rail. They were afraid of somebody getting hurt. Well, if adults are afraid, how can a parent who's going to have a child playing in the backyard feel safe with that train running down the track? I want to be clear. I'm not wedded to going down I-97. That's one alternative. Or maybe the middle of Ritchie Highway is an alternative. This discussion went on early on about whether or not to build the hiker-biker trail. But guess what? We spent $10 million. This is the problem with government. You can't keep wasting money.
Wagner: The people along the hiker-biker path, if you remember or if you look back, didn't want the hiker-biker path there either because it was going to bring in criminals and all kinds of undesirables. Now all of a sudden it's a garden place and they don't want light rail. But light rail is compatible with hiker-biker paths all over the country. It runs through communities. That's the reason you go light rail. Because it's compatible with communities, it's compatible with hiker-biker paths. As far as Ferndale Day goes, I happened to organize Ferndale day 16 years ago and I worked it every year since. The reason we moved it is because we negotiated a deal with George Cromwell to donate 10 acres of property to the community to act as a buffer for some buildings he was putting there and we moved the Ferndale Day over to the property that he gave us. It didn't have a thing to do with light rail. It was there because it was a bigger place and it's going to be a permanent facility and we're making plans now to build our senior citizens' center there and our community building there.
Middlebrooks: My position is I don't want light rail going down the hiker-biker trail. I think there are alternate routes that we can pursue.
*
Mr. Wagner, the senatorial and delegate scholarship programs have been criticized for their potential for abuse. Should they be abolished?
Wagner: No, I don't think so. I think that they serve a real purpose. In the past, yes, there have been some abuses. But I think . . . they've been addressed. I think that most of the senators and delegates have committees made up. I have a committee that's made up of teachers, people from the community, and they award them. I give several to schools directly and say, 'Award these to the most qualified people.' The fear I have is the scholarships go to people that make too much money. But everybody in my district, or the average person in my district, makes $45,000 or $44,000. So what would happen if they had this reform that they're talking about? My district would lose because it would all go to the inner city and places where people have a lower income. It's going to wipe out my district. I just maintain that if somebody makes $40,000, it costs them a little more to live down here and they don't have that much more casual money to put their kids through college any more than someone living in the city. If they give us the same amount of opportunity for our kids to go to school and get state aid, then they can reform it.
Middlebrooks: Let me say I don't disagree that much with the senator on this issue. Clearly, talking to the people around the different communities, I think the overwhelming sentiment is they do like the senatorial scholarship program, because it does in fact help some working-class families in our area, with kids at least being able to purchase books, school supplies, for higher education. But I've got to be honest with you, I am torn at the same time because, look, I recognize the needs of other areas. Baltimore City for one, they house 45 percent of the state poor. Those kinds of things concern me. So I'm not willing to let all the money flow from this program in this area. But I think maybe it's something I would look at.
Wagner: Joe Humphries from Glen Burnie High School runs my scholarship committee. They base it on financial need, scholastic ability and community involvement. They weigh all these things, they throw them in a computer, they hit a button, they spit them out and we start awarding scholarships based on whether they're going to University of Maryland or Johns Hopkins and we try to give them a little more. It's done very fairly and if anybody wants to take a look at it, they're free to come up and see how we do it.
*
Mr. Middlebrooks, do you believe Republican gubernatorial candidate Ellen Sauerbrey can deliver the 24 percent state income tax cut she has promised voters?
Middlebrooks: I think that's a promise that she intends to commit herself to. I think people out there are concerned about taxes. I think that's another difference between Senator Wagner and I. I support Ellen Sauerbrey's tax proposal . . . I think it's at least doable for the first year. Where we go beyond that, I'll take each year as it comes. People believe that if Ellen Sauerbrey and Ed Middlebrooks are elected, taxes will at least maintain, if not go down, because we'll be out there fighting. If [Parris] Glendening and Mike Wagner get elected they believe it's the tax-and-spend crowd with $300 million in promises out there and where's that money coming from? We on the County Council, they said we couldn't deal with the tax cap. That we couldn't live within it. We managed to live within the tax cap and as a matter of fact, we funded education this year, in fiscal year '95, to the highest percentage of the county budget ever. But we did it through downsizing government and getting our costs under control -- something the state has failed to do.
Wagner: That's baloney. We've been addressing budget deficits for the last three years. Every year we go down there and it's another deficit and we've faced it. There's been attempts to raise taxes, the governor's attempted to raise taxes so he didn't have to cut programs, but no taxes have been raised. There's been enabling legislation for the counties to do some things, but there's no taxes raised, except the gasoline tax, that really affects anybody. The government does two things: it has programs and it has to raise funds. We can't be like Middlebrooks and [former Del. John] Leopold and those guys that sit on the back bench and scream and holler 'We're gonna do this and we're gonna do that' and don't have the courage to vote for tax increases. You have to have the courage to do what's right. Every time we've tried to cut a program, somebody's screaming. There is not a program -- whether it's crippled children or developmentally disabled -- we've tried to cut that somebody doesn't scream and holler. Ellen Sauerbrey? If she can do it, hooray for her.
Middlebrooks: I think Senator Wagner's mistaken. They added 1,112 new positions in that budget and they converted 267 contract employees to permanent positions. Senator Wagner's part of that tax hike in 1992 that gave us almost $290 million, increasing the gasoline tax 5 cents and the fuel tax 5 cents. The only tax he didn't vote for was the fees on the retail sales tax. I think he's wrong.
*
Mr. Wagner, do you think the state has gone overboard with environmental regulations to the detriment of the economy and landowners? Or does more need to be done to protect county residents -- who have one of the highest cancer rates in the country -- from pollution?
Wagner: You can never do enough for the environment. Everyone wants to leave this country clean for their kids and their grandkids. But also everybody wants jobs and you gotta work. It's not an either-or situation. You have to compromise, you have to take each issue on an individual basis. Everybody wants the tree that's torn down to build their house to be the last tree that's ever torn down. Everybody wants their trash picked up in front of their house, but they don't want a landfill. I mean, we have to balance the interests here. We go down there [to Annapolis] and we try and do what's proper. I'm going to be right where I've always been: listening to both sides and making the decisions.
Middlebrooks: Look, we have some serious issues facing us. We've got the federal Clean Air Act that has to be implemented. Baltimore is on the severe list for the year 2005. We've got to get the solid waste plan, which we've worked on in the county, that has to be implemented in the next two years. And recycling. I think protecting the environment is critical. I think the environment we leave for our children is critical. The reforestation bill in Anne Arundel County we passed -- I intend to push for those kinds of legislation in the state. The cancer rate? That concerns me. We have an airport over there. I know the airport's doing certain things. One of the things the airport does, that it continues to deny, is open-air burning. They burn, on Sunday nights, jet oil for fire training and I get constant complaints from residents about greasy soot on the cars. Now what they've done is they've stopped doing it during the daylight hours and they moved it to nighttime so you can't see it as well. But we still have it.
Wagner: If they're burning jet fuel over there and it's spewing debris over the residents, no one's told me about it and I'm very much in contact with the airport. As a matter of fact, in a survey I did, the airport four years ago, the concerns about the airport and airport noise was 5.1 percent. In the survey I did last week those concerns were down to 1.5 percent. And I maintain that it's because I've addressed the problems.
*
Mr. Middlebrooks, despite your opposition, the County Council which you chair voted to build a new county detention center on Ordnance Road in Glen Burnie. What do you think you could do in the state Senate that you couldn't on the council?
Middlebrooks: I would oppose any funding from the state to build at the North County jail site. I've maintained from Day One it's a poor site to put it. It's one of the most successful economic development areas, with Price Club, the Sports Authority, going on. Senator Wagner has waffled on this matter from Day One. First he supports it and then he doesn't. Now I read in the paper he supports it. But the real beef I have is that he's nowhere to be found. He never attended one public hearing. I never saw one representative there. I never saw so much as a letter come through to state his position. I'm not going to accept all the garbage projects in North County. I want good, clean projects to come up -- not just prisons. But on this issue and others, he's just nowhere to be found. Other delegates were at the public hearings; the delegation from [District] 31 was at all the public hearings.
Wagner: I've been very plain where I've been on the jail. It's my responsibility as a member of the legislature to vote for funding for county jails. The responsible thing to do is to fight for the funding and let these guys [County Council] decide where they want to put the county jail. They played around, appointed a committee, did all these things and what it comes down to is everybody wants to get criminals off the street, but nobody wants a jail. He's going to keep this trash and rot from coming up to North County and he wants to stick them in the other parts of the county. The problem is, he's not a District 32 state senator, he's an Anne Arundel County state senator, a Maryland state senator. You have to recognize there are problems and you can't keep putting your head under the covers, you've got to address the problems. We need a jail. It's gotta go somewhere. Now I don't know where you put it, but you guys [County Council] have been sitting around for four years and have not done it. We had the funding . . . and you couldn't make a decision. Now all of the sudden you're going to tell me you're going to start making decisions?
Middlebrooks: This is why I refer to Senator Wagner sometimes as the "Stealth Senator." We don't know where he is on this issue. One minute he's in the paper saying he's in favor of it. It's my understanding that the most recent legislation he voted against locating the jail up here when he thought it was politically expedient. The Linthicum Improvement Association opposed it. The Glen Burnie Improvement Association opposed it. Yet, the senator now says he favors it. That's where we differ.
*
Senator Wagner, Baltimore senators openly acknowledged this summer that they use liquor inspectors which they appoint to solicit campaign contributions from bar and tavern owners. Would you support reforming the appointment process for liquor board members and inspectors for Anne Arundel County?
Wagner: I don't know if that works. Some other counties have full-time liquor inspectors, but I don't know if there's a need for that. I don't see that it's a big problem. Is it some kind of wrongdoing? Is it someone not doing their job? I think our liquor board has done a good job. I think they address the problems. But if there was an outcry to change it -- sure. If they had a better system, I'd be willing to listen to it. But I'd like to hear what we're trying to correct.
Middlebrooks: I think it's clearly one of the last bastions of political patronage and we've got to clean up immediately. I'm amazed the senator doesn't see a problem here with liquor inspectors and the chairman of the liquor board admitting they sell tickets to Senator Wagner's fund-raisers. It's my understanding that two of the liquor inspectors that the senator is aware of don't even live in Anne Arundel County. One, I believe, was the chief liquor inspector up until about 1992. These things concern me, especially when the senator is tied up in the restaurant supply business. The very business in which he appoints [inspectors], he's dealing in it. I think it's time to reform it. I think we move the system away from political patronage and put the liquor inspectors on the police department and let the licenses go under the county administrative hearing officer. If you go around the county right now in the 32nd District, you'll see Mr. Wagner's signs at just about every bar and liquor store establishment. Why is that?
Wagner: The signs are there because they're friends of mine. I've been in this business since my father died when I was 20 years old. I've been selling in these establishments for years and years and years, and they're friends of mine. You name the place and I'll tell you who owns it, who runs it, because they're friends of mine, not because they have a liquor license. I have signs all over this district and because someone puts a sign in their yard or in their business for me that's wrong? But they put one up for Ed for all the right reasons?
*
Mr. Middlebrooks, one option suggested by Redskins owner Jack Kent Cooke is to have the state float bonds for the millions of dollars in road improvements that would be needed for a stadium in Laurel. Should the state encourage business by doing so? Why?
Middlebrooks: My position on this is clear. I oppose the location of the stadium in Laurel. There are environmental, there are health reasons, not to mention the infrastructure concerns over there. I oppose spending taxpayer bond dollars to support the stadium. I was the only one on the County Council to sponsor a referendum because I said, "OK, maybe Ed Middlebrooks is not in touch with the people on this issue. Let's put it before a referendum to the taxpayers because they'll have to pay for it." But that referendum [proposal] was defeated 6-1 on what I thought was the American process of letting taxpayers vote on it. Once again, where's Senator Wagner on the issue? He waffles. One minute I read in the paper he's not opposed to the stadium, but he opposes taxpayers' dollars being used on it. I read this week he's staying out of it. He wants to hear what's going to come back from the county [hearing officer]. I think it's a cop-out when you don't take a position. To sit there and say "I don't oppose the stadium, but I oppose taxpayers' bonds being floated," everyone knows quite well that you're not going to build the stadium unless you float taxpayer bonds to build the infrastructure and the other needs out there.
Wagner: I have a record of 16 years of taking tough stands on issues. I don't waffle on anything. This is another situation where it's in the county's ballpark. Ed, every time four people start screaming and hollering, you take their side. You don't have the courage to go against four people who are for something. I try to look at every issue based on its own merit and that's where I am on this issue. Take some leadership. Go down there and tell your county to not give them the license, not give them the permits. Why do you want to keep dragging me into an issue that I'm not into? Right now, it's a business opportunity for a man and if the man meets all your county's regulations then he has just as much right as any other businessman to do what he wants. If he's going to hurt the environment, then he shouldn't be allowed to build.
Middlebrooks: I think you've got a problem when you have a 16-year incumbent -- that's why I favor term limits -- because he's out of touch with the people of the Laurel and Jessup area. When he sits there and says "There's only four people in the group and you come running," I challenge the senator because I think there are a lot more people than four in that area that are concerned about it. I think the senator doesn't understand that when you float state bonds, the senator is going to vote on those and they're taxpayers' dollars if anything goes wrong.
*
Mr. Wagner, do you support the expansion of state lotteries and a current proposal to allow casino gambling in Maryland?
Wagner: Do I favor casino gambling? I put in the bill six or eight years ago that did away with casino gambling in Anne Arundel County like they have in P.G. County. I saw it was a problem, I put in a bill and a senator from Baltimore County put in a bill to do away with casino gambling in Baltimore County. And now it's coming back around and we're going to have to take a look at the issue, to see what the need for the funds are and see what position the governor takes. The new governor is going to have to take positions on how we're going to raise capital to finance the government. Am I for riverboat gambling? No, I'm not. But on the other hand, do we need riverboat gambling to run the government? I don't know. We have to look at it in that light.
Middlebrooks: I don't believe our revenue should keep depending more and more on gambling, lotteries and casinos. I haven't seen any benefit, absent pure tax dollars, that gambling has done for Atlantic City, for example. If you go up there, it still looks like the same slum area but for the casinos. I would oppose casino gambling coming to Maryland, Ocean City in particular, or Baltimore City because I don't want to see that kind of industry. The cost? They don't talk about the crime, the organized crime coming with it. They don't talk about the cost of prostitution coming with it.
Wagner: The lottery is also gambling and it's the third-biggest fund-raiser we have in the state. We couldn't do without it; we couldn't do without the $400 million the lottery raises. You can say what it will bring in and what it won't bring in and that's just scare tactics. You've got to look at these things responsibly and say, "How are we going to fund the government?" The people don't want to pay taxes and the lottery is a form of voluntary taxation.
*
Mr. Middlebrooks, would you support proposals to limit someone from buying more than one gun per month? Would you have supported the ban on certain guns -- so-called assault weapons -- passed by the General Assembly this spring?
Middlebrooks: I am not in favor of gun legislation at this point. The reason is, I don't think we've done enough on crime and I'm not interested in making common citizens criminals by passing laws. I think the effort is misdirected. The only people who are going to have guns are criminals. The use of assault weapons in crimes is in insignificant amounts. If I thought we were doing everything we could to fight crime and deter crime and lock prisoners up and keep them away and off the street and it didn't work, I'd probably say, "OK, as a last resort, we've got to make some changes." But I'm not interested in the first resort of trying to make honest citizens into criminals by just the mere possession of a gun. Meanwhile, we let the criminals out early.
Wagner: We let the criminals out of jail early because we don't have enough jails. I voted for the ban on assault weapons and I voted for the Saturday Night Special bill. I don't think it's a thing that's going to cure the problem, but it's just another way of addressing the situation and making a statement that this is how feel. I certainly don't want to make honest people criminals, but I think the outcry of the public is to vote for the Saturday Night Special bills and the assault weapons bills because they are insulted that people are carrying guns to school and criminals are using assault weapons in petty crimes. So it's reaction to what the people want.
Middlebrooks: No rebuttal.
*
Mr. Wagner, please name your achievements during the 16 years you have served in office.
Wagner: I think the most significant thing is addressing the airport problems. I put in the legislation to stop airport expansion. I put in the legislation for the homeowner buyouts in the noise zone. I put in the legislation for the insulation and storm windows for houses in the noise zone who weren't in the highest density zone to be bought out. I put in the legislation for relocation assistance. I put in the legislation to shrink the noise zone to make them shrink the area over 10 years. I tried to get the airport to be a better neighbor by getting excess property for a soccer field. I was the one who suggested the hiker-biker path around the airport, which is turning out to be a model program, the first in the nation and two other airports -- Dallas being one of them -- calling up and asking about it. I've got a study going now to see about putting a golf course at the airport to use some of the excess property. Those are some of the things that I've done around the airport to try and make the airport a better neighbor. Because of that, the airport is not the problem is used to be. I used to say if there was one thing that was going to get me beat, it was the airport. Now, as I said, dissatisfaction is at 1.5 percent. The light rail is certainly something significant that I put in. I've taken a lot of abuse over it because of some of the problems it has caused, but I think it was the right thing to do.
Middlebrooks: The senator certainly is right. He has certainly stepped forward on the airport and I don't want to disagree with him on that. But there are some things we disagree on, such as the homeowners' assistance program, where they come in and noise proof the house and require you to sign a perpetual easement on it so you can't sue the airport. I think on something like that we still must force the airport to deal with the noise problem. I think a 20-year easement would probably be more than fine; other areas of the county have that. It forces the airport to start dealing with noise control. Stage Three [quieter] aircraft, I think the senator could have some impact there when we sign leases with the aircraft carriers that we could get a percentage and start working toward that goal to get the airport quiet. Let me tell you something, it's not because of the senator that the airport's quiet. What really happened to make the airport quiet was the recession. Business slowed down.
Wagner: I have a long-term commitment to a lot of things. I don't jump in and get my name on a resume like Ed does and then abandon it. I'm involved and when I'm involved in something, I'm committed to it. Like Ferndale Day for 16 years. Like the Ferndale-Linthicum Community Council, which I've been involved in for 16 years. The Sports Hall of Fame that I've been involved in since its inception. The "Take Back Our Streets" program. I've been president -- and not just president for one year as a resume builder -- I've been president of everything I've been president of for two years.
*
Mr. Middlebrooks, please name your achievements during your four years on the County Council.
Middlebrooks: I like to think I've worked closely with the community. I try and make it a goal to go to my community association meetings at least three or four times a year and I try to get around to my district. When I first came on the council, we got a ban on peep shows and X-rated video stores. We were successful and we're still fighting that fight and we haven't quit. The stalking bill on domestic violence, you know I was on the forefront on getting that legislation sponsored and passed on the county council. The pension plan? I tried to get myself out of it. I finally got a bill to get myself out of it because I didn't think it was right for elected officials to have pension plans for temporary, part-time positions. Clearly, I oppose the jail in North County. I sponsored a resolution on tainted food because I understood there were 1,200 people a year suffering from food poisoning and we couldn't find out who the establishments were. The Glen Burnie pavilion -- one of the key things that concerns me -- what are we going to do with the Superblock? I went there. I wanted to put an arts pavilion there. [County Executive Robert R.] Neall came to me and said he'd like to have that property economically developed. I said I'd go along with him so long as if it fell apart for the umpteenth time that in return, we could go ahead and get the arts pavilion going. He's assured me that he is going to do what he can to get that area cleaned up. And if John Gary gets elected, he's promised me he'll get that arts pavilion up by this spring. That area has to be dealt with. Cattail Creek [nature area]. There's my hard question on the council. There's a project that came up in 1990. The county has it [19 acres in Severna Park] appraised for $1.4 million. They bring the appraisal to us in 1992. I force them to have it re-appraised and it comes in at $900,000. That's a $500,000 savings to the county. It's those kinds of things I did in the county in my four years of trying to be visible in the community. I challenge you: Do you ever see Senator Wagner out at any of the meetings? Has he been to the Glen Burnie Improvement Association? I say, no. Has he been to Linthicum? No.
Wagner: I've been to both of them. I go when I'm invited. I don't try and turn them into a political circus like you do. Here's Ed's ad. Here's my ad. Ed's been in elected office for 12 years. Nowhere in there does it talk about anything he's done. He talks about more political promises. He's been sitting here for an hour, giving you a stump speech. There's nothing in here. He says, "We will fight" and "We will support," but it doesn't say anything about he's done anything. Here's my ad. It talks about 16 years of a record. It's 16 years of accomplishments. It's 16 years of addressing problems. I'm not a grandstander. I don't go looking for an audience. When there's a problem, I have a meeting, I bring in the people who are concerned, I address the problem. And I do it as well as anyone in this county. That's where I'm from. I'm running on that record of 16 years. This man has no record, or he'd talk about it.
Middlebrooks: I think I've laid out my record quite clearly. And this is another difference between us: He believes in the good old boy system of doing things in the back room and forming his committees. People are tired of the good old boy system.
*
Mr. Middlebrooks, you served on the state Democratic committee for two terms. And then this past spring you decided to change parties and become a Republican. Can you explain your thinking?
Middlebrooks: I think Democratic Party leaders have lost touch with the middle class. When I came on the council, I pushed for tax cuts, I favored the tax cap, I pushed for term limitations -- things the Republican party stood for. We downsized government in the county. We got our budget under control. And we passed health care reform. The state has failed to do it. Under Senator Wagner and Governor Schaefer's leadership, they've increased the size of state government. They haven't dealt with the budget deficit. They continue to pass it along and increase state programs. Mr. Wagner's been in the legislature for 16 years. I got 70 percent of the Republican primary vote. I thought the Democratic Party had gone too far left for what I believed in and what the constituents in the 32nd District believed in. There are a lot of conservative Democrats and I thought it was time to change parties. I'm proud I made that change.
Wagner: I'm recognized -- and my voting record proves it -- as a conservative in the Maryland legislature. This tax-and-spend liberal cliche is just a bunch of bull. You talk about the Republican Party has a principle of term limitations -- where is it on their pledge as part of their national platform? They don't have a pledge for term limitations. But the hypocritical stuff that he says [in his ad]. He says "We support victims' rights," "We support tougher mandatory sentences," "We support tougher domestic violence legislation," "We support no parole for violent criminals." You know who his No. 1 campaign contributor is? The trial lawyers association. Now, isn't that nice? The trial lawyers gave him $500, and they're probably going to give him a lot more. I stand up for these things he's talking about and the trial lawyers don't.
Middlebrooks: Well, it's hard to tell who the senator's big contributors since he's sitting on a $12,000 slush fund which you can't make an accounting of because he lump sums it as cash contributions. I think the senator is grasping at stars. He's running with Parris Glendening and that's who he believes in. In 1992, he voted for a bill to let parolees out of jail early. Just in 1992, he voted for a bill to reduce the time criminals have to serve in jail from 30 days almost down to 10 days. He's tough on crime?
*
Mr. Wagner, there is a perception that Maryland is hostile to business. Do you agree that Maryland is hostile to business and if so, what can be done to change it?
Wagner: Last year I introduced a bill called the "Small-Business Impact Bill" to inform legislators what the impact was on businesses, especially small businesses, of bills we were passing. Unfortunately, the governor vetoed it. So many guys who have never had to meet a payroll, guys who run around and make promises, go down there [to Annapolis] and talk about how jobs are the most important thing, but then they go down there and kill the businessman. So I introduced that bill. But I'm very happy with the business climate in Maryland. I've been able to compete in it and succeed. I think you can succeed if you work hard. Government doesn't have to put people in business and it doesn't have to keep people in business, but they certainly have to encourage them and not hurt them.
Middlebrooks: In 1992, Senator Wagner voted for one of the biggest tax increases ever. He voted for the gasoline tax increase -- that doesn't help businesses when they come in. He voted to increase the income tax of people making over $150,000 and he raised it to 6 percent. When corporate executives are looking at Maryland, they don't want to locate here because they've got to pay higher taxes. Senator Wagner knows that maybe one of the reasons Eastman Kodak didn't relocate here was because of Maryland's corporate tax structure. I think [Republican gubernatorial candidate] Ellen Sauerbrey is right: We've got to get taxes under control, we've got to do some cuts in spending. The gasoline tax increase -- where did it go? I know where it went -- 3 1/2 cents went to the Washington Transit Authority so they could pay their bus drivers the highest wage in the country, nearly. That's not right. And I think that's the kind of thing citizens are tired about.
Wagner: Everyone who knows anything about government knows Washington is cutting back on the money, the aid, it is giving the states. We had to raise the gasoline tax to keep pace with our [highway] projects. The federal government has cut all the money we used to get eight or 10 years ago and we have to fund our own programs. That's why we needed the gasoline tax. You can't run around like Leopold and the rest of these Republicans and say "I want a new road," "I want this bridge repaired," but then not vote for the supporting measures.
*
Mr. Middlebrooks, despite two decades of urban renewal efforts that include a barely used parking garage, downtown Glen Burnie has yet to re-emerge as a business district with an identifiable niche. Why? What if anything else should be done to encourage it?
Middlebrooks: I made it clear when I ran in 1990 that I wanted an arts pavilion put on that property. I wanted the property cleaned up; I don't like the way it looks. I think it's not appealing to the eye. It doesn't help the Glen Burnie business community at all. I have some other ideas in the future about what we can do with that. Senator Wagner's been in office 16 years. That project's has been laying there for 20 years and nobody's done anything. At least I tried to step up to bat and say "Let's start getting it cleaned up." And I have a commitment from this county executive right now, although he has a short term, to clean that area up. We get crowds of people to come to downtown Glen Burnie to listen to the summer concert series. I've done what I can at this point. The senator and the state, where have they been for 20 years?
Wagner: Where have we been? There's two things down there: there's a multipurpose center, and the state built that, and there's the Arundel Center [North], we had a part of that funding. So anything that's there, the state had a piece of. Where was I? I've met with the urban renewal committee. I've met with the improvement association. I've met with everybody. No one can agree on what they want to do. And every time they come up with a program, there's always opposition. This last program went down because they could not make a profit. Businessmen who come in there are gonna want to look at a profit, they're not going to do it for the good of the county. Westinghouse was in there. It didn't work. You put light rail into Glen Burnie and then it becomes something that's viable for businesses. As it stands now, why would anyone want to locate in there? The residents of Glen Burnie don't want housing. And the businesses won't go in because it's not economically practical.
Middlebrooks: Once again, this is where Senator Wagner and I disagree. He's running with ticket mates who support the county contributing $2 million of taxpayers' money to do the project. I've been clear, I don't want taxpayers' money to go in and do the project and support private business to the tune of $2 million. You can't reduce the size of government if you continue to spend the money.
CANDIDATES
MICHAEL J. WAGNER (D)
Age: 53.
Home: Ferndale.
Education: high school, two-year associate of arts college degree.
Work: president, H & M Wagner & Sons (restaurant supply); president, Executive Catering; owner of Michael's Eighth Avenue banquet facility).
Volunteer: Anne Arundel County Sports Hall of Fame, Take Back Our Streets, Glen Burnie Chamber of Commerce, Masons, Elks, YMCA.
4( Political: state senator since 1982.
C. EDWARD MIDDLEBROOKS (R)
Age: 39.
Home: Old Mill
Education: high school, law degree.
Work: attorney.
Volunteer: Glen Burnie Jaycees, Glen Burnie United Methodist Church.
Political: county councilman since 1990. Democratic Central Committee member, 1982-1990.