If the EPA regulated the business environment,
the State of Maryland would be a Superfund site.
Books Of Regulatory Gibberish in the Free State are found in COMAR (Code of Maryland Administrative Regulations) -- a daunting 35 volume set of governmental regulations. COMAR, with more than 22,000 pages, is breathtaking in its scope and detail. Consider this boast from the Office of the Secretary of State:
| "State regulations have now become so diverse as to touch the lives of virtually every Maryland citizen. Whether it be employee drug testing, home improvement permits, boating speed limitations, food stamp eligibility, or hunting and fishing restrictions, it's all found in COMAR." |
Think of the implications for business! Under COMAR the business environment is treacherous. Some Maryland regulations exceed even federal requirements: Maryland regulates substances not found on the federal government's hazardous waste list and enforces standards more onerous than those established by the federal Clean Air Act. Although these and other regulations are unduly burdensome, compliance is mandatory. Resistance is futile.
The time and costs expended by your company in achieving and maintaining compliance with the Free State's innumerable regulations will result in marginal, if any, public benefit, yet waste your resources, and place your company at a competitive disadvantage. Moreover, Maryland's permitting process is expensive, time-consuming, and contentious. Everyday businesses negotiate a gauntlet of redundant, overlapping, and contradictory permit requirements, often with little success. The most recent publicized example is that of Fox Oil and Gas, Inc.
Over the last eight years Fox has leased 32,000 acres of mineral rights and invested $3 million searching for gas reserves in Maryland. In all that time, Fox has succeeded in securing just one permit to drill a working well. Similar permits are issued in Pennsylvania in 30 to 60 days at a cost of around $2000. In Maryland, the process can take years at costs of $20,000 to $45,000. Maryland's bureaucratic bedrock is impenetrable.
Fox's latest failed venture in Maryland centers on a 260-acre natural gas field located in large part beneath state land. Gas drilling on public land requires compliance with special regulations mandated by the state legislature in 1988. But Fox can't possibly comply, because for 13 years Maryland regulators have refused to issue the required regulations. The result is Maryland's latest regulatory outrage: Since Fox cannot comply, its permit application has been denied.
| "I've never worked in an environment like this in my life. It's a totally different world." Cathy Kirsch, Land Agent for Fox Oil and Gas, Inc., whose drills can't penetrate Maryland's bureaucratic bedrock, in the February 16, 2001 edition of The Baltimore Sun. | "I've heard for years that Maryland is anti-business. This is a prime example." Maryland Senator J. Robert Hooper, when learning that for more than eight years Fox's $3 million investment in a natural gas drilling project has been stymied by Maryland regulators, in the February 16, 2001 edition of The Baltimore Sun. |
| "First, we will create a Governor's Office on Smart Growth. [P]eople will come to a single office and learn . . . if what they propose is indeed Smart Growth." Governor Parris N. Glendening, introducing the chilling, next level of regulation in the State of Maryland, in his 2001State of the State Address. |
The future of regulation in the Free State is best described in two words: SMART GROWTH. Maryland was the first state to embrace this Utopian dream. Smart Growth, in effect, statewide "environmental planning and zoning," became the law in Maryland in 1997. The more you learn about Smart Growth, the more you will appreciate the future of regulation in the Free State.
| "We certainly don't need an entire new state bureaucracy intervening, disrupting growth policies." Maryland Senator Alex X. Mooney, reacting to the governor's expansion of the Smart Growth program, in the January 17, 2001 edition of The Herald Mail. | ". . . those same regulations can not only limit growth, but also have an effect on any future development." John Kirby, Deputy Director, Allegany County Economic Development, in the January 6, 2001 edition of The Daily Record. |
Recently, the Maryland legislature considered House Bill 75 that would have banned the sale, and regulated the disposal, of mercury-added novelties and products in the Free State, consisting of:
|
MERCURY-ADDED NOVELTIES:
|
MERCURY-ADDED PRODUCTS:
|
House Bill 75 failed . . . this time.
| "Pollution always migrates to the area of least regulation. If you're regulating one source . . . you'd better regulate all of it." Dane Bauer, Deputy Director, Water Management Administration, Department of the Environment, in a January 17, 2000 report from Associated Press. |
